MEV is infrastructure, not just extraction. The search and execution of Maximal Extractable Value has evolved from opportunistic arbitrage into a formalized transaction supply chain. This chain, built by Flashbots, BloXroute, and Jito Labs, now intermediates all high-value transactions, making it the de facto operating system for block production.
MEV Infrastructure Sets Ethereum’s Power Structure
The Merge shifted power from miners to validators, but MEV infrastructure—builders, relays, and PBS—is creating a new, more centralized power layer. This is the real governance of Ethereum.
Introduction
MEV infrastructure has become the foundational power grid that dictates transaction flow, economic incentives, and protocol security on Ethereum.
Builders, not validators, hold the power. The Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) model, enforced by mev-boost, shifted block-building authority to specialized builder entities. Validators now outsource this complex task, ceding control over transaction ordering and fee markets to a concentrated builder market.
This creates a new political economy. The builder cartel and its searcher suppliers now control the censorship resistance and liveness guarantees of the network. The infrastructure layer, not the consensus layer, determines which transactions succeed and which fail, setting Ethereum's ultimate power structure.
The Core Thesis: Infrastructure is Authority
MEV infrastructure determines who controls value flow and protocol governance on Ethereum.
MEV defines sovereignty. The infrastructure for extracting, redistributing, and mitigating Maximal Extractable Value sets the rules of the game. This is not a side effect; it is the primary mechanism for establishing economic and political authority on-chain.
Builders and searchers are the new validators. The proposer-builder separation (PBS) framework, enforced by Flashbots' MEV-Boost, created a new power class. Entities like bloXroute and Titan control block production, making them the ultimate arbiters of transaction ordering and censorship.
Infrastructure dictates governance capture. The entities that build the dominant MEV supply chain—from relays like Agnostic to order flow auctions like CoW Swap—inevitably influence protocol upgrades. Their operational needs shape EIPs, as seen with PBS's path to protocol enshrinement.
Evidence: Over 90% of Ethereum blocks are built via MEV-Boost. The builder market share is a direct proxy for network control, with the top three builders consistently producing over 50% of blocks.
The New Power Brokers: A Triopoly
The control of Maximal Extractable Value has consolidated into a three-layer stack, dictating transaction flow, censorship resistance, and economic power on Ethereum.
The Problem: Opaque, Adversarial MEV
The original MEV landscape was a dark forest where searchers and miners competed in zero-sum games, leading to frontrunning, network congestion, and value extraction from end users.\n- Billions in value extracted annually from DEX traders\n- Poor UX with unpredictable slippage and failed transactions\n- Centralizing pressure favoring the largest, fastest players
The Solution: Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS)
Ethereum's PBS architecture formalizes the MEV supply chain, creating distinct roles for Builders (who construct blocks) and Proposers (who choose them). This enables competitive, efficient block building.\n- Specialized Builders like Flashbots SUAVE and bloXroute compete on execution quality\n- Proposer revenue from MEV auctions now a primary validator reward\n- ~90% of blocks are now built by specialized builders post-Merge
The Builder Layer: Flashbots & SUAVE
Flashbots dominates the builder market, controlling ~80% of MEV blocks. Their upcoming SUAVE chain aims to become a decentralized, cross-chain mempool and block builder, centralizing the intelligence layer.\n- Market Dominance: Creates a single point of failure/censorship\n- Vertical Integration: Controls flow from intent to execution\n- Strategic Goal: Become the universal liquidity coordinator for all chains
The Searcher Layer: Sophisticated Bots
Searchers are algorithmic traders who discover and bundle profitable opportunities. They are the primary customers of builders, paying for block space. This layer is highly competitive and capital-intensive.\n- Arbitrage & Liquidations are the dominant strategies\n- Relies on private mempools (e.g., Flashbots Protect, bloXroute) for stealth\n- Profit margins are compressing as competition intensifies
The User Layer: MEV Protection as a Service
End-users access protection via aggregators like CoW Swap, UniswapX, and 1inch that use auction mechanisms (e.g., CowSwap's batch auctions) or private RPCs (e.g., Flashbots Protect) to shield transactions.\n- Intent-Based Architectures shift risk to solvers\n- Guaranteed Prices protect against frontrunning\n- Critical Dependency: Users must opt-in; protection is not default
The Risk: A Censorship Triopoly
Power is concentrated at three chokepoints: the dominant builder (Flashbots), the largest proponent pools (e.g., Lido, Coinbase), and the OFAC-compliant relay (e.g., Ultra Sound, Aestus). This creates systemic censorship risk.\n- OFAC Compliance: Relays can filter transactions\n- Proposer Choice: Pools can choose compliant relays\n- Builder Monopoly: A single builder can enforce rules chain-wide
Market Share & Centralization Metrics
Comparative analysis of the dominant players in Ethereum's MEV supply chain, highlighting their market share, operational models, and centralization vectors.
| Metric / Feature | Flashbots (SUAVE) | BloXroute | Titan Builder | rsync |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Relay Market Share (30d avg) |
| ~ 9% | ~ 5% | ~ 3% |
Builder Market Share (30d avg) | ~ 40% | ~ 15% | ~ 30% | ~ 10% |
Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) Compliance | ||||
Censorship Resistance (OFAC Compliance) | ||||
Open Source Core Infrastructure | ||||
Avg. Block Value Extracted (30d) | $1.2M | $250K | $900K | $150K |
Primary Revenue Model | Order Flow Auctions | Relay Fees | Builder Fees | Relay & Builder Fees |
Dominant Validator Client Integration |
| ~ 20% | ~ 15% | ~ 10% |
How the Power Structure Manifests
MEV infrastructure dictates who extracts value from the network, establishing a new, non-consensus-based hierarchy of power.
MEV supply chain centralizes power. The specialized infrastructure for block building and relay operation creates a vertical integration of value capture. Proposers (validators) outsource to builders like Flashbots, bloXroute, and Titan, who aggregate bundles from searchers. This creates a proposer-builder separation (PBS) economy where a few entities control transaction ordering and fee extraction.
The builder market is the new battleground. The real competition is not between validators but between sophisticated block builders for exclusive order flow. This shifts power from decentralized stakers to centralized, capital-intensive builder operations that optimize for cross-domain MEV across Arbitrum, Optimism, and Base.
Private mempools redefine access. The rise of Flashbots Protect, bloXroute's BackRunMe, and CowSwap's CoW Protocol moves transactions off the public mempool. This creates a two-tiered system where users who can pay for privacy/protection receive better execution, while others are left in the toxic public pool.
Evidence: Over 90% of Ethereum blocks are now built by a consortium of three major builders, and MEV-Boost relays facilitate this entire market, proving the infrastructure's role in consolidating power.
The Rebuttal: Is This Inevitable?
The centralization of MEV infrastructure is not a bug but a structural feature of Ethereum's current design, cementing a new power hierarchy.
MEV supply chain centralization is a thermodynamic outcome. The search-extraction-settlement pipeline requires capital, data access, and low-latency infrastructure, creating economies of scale that favor large, specialized firms like Flashbots and bloXroute.
Protocols cannot opt out. Even L2s like Arbitrum and Optimism inherit the MEV dynamics of Ethereum L1. Their sequencers are the new centralized choke points, deciding transaction order before batches are posted, creating a meta-game for control.
The counter-force is weak. While SUAVE and CowSwap aim to democratize extraction, they face a coordination problem. Builders and searchers optimize for profit, not decentralization, making the current oligopoly the path of least resistance.
Evidence: Flashbots' MEV-Boost controls ~90% of Ethereum's block space post-Merge. This isn't a temporary dominance; it's a structural capture of the most critical layer of the transaction stack.
The Bear Case: Systemic Risks of MEV Power
The builders, relays, and searchers that capture MEV are not neutral utilities; they define Ethereum's political and economic hierarchy.
The Builder Cartel Problem
Top-3 builders control >80% of blocks, creating a centralized choke point for censorship and transaction ordering. This centralizes the power to enforce OFAC compliance or extract maximal value, undermining Ethereum's credibly neutral base layer.
- Relays as Gatekeepers: Entities like Flashbots Protect, bloXroute, and Manifold act as mandatory, trusted intermediaries.
- Vertical Integration: Searcher-Builders like Jito Labs and Titan consolidate the entire MEV supply chain.
Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) is Incomplete
Enshrined PBS is years away. The current market-driven PBS via mev-boost outsources critical security functions to a volatile, profit-driven marketplace. Builders can outbid validators for block space, creating systemic risk where the highest bidder controls state transitions.
- Time-Bandit Attacks: Builders may reorg chains to capture delayed MEV, threatening consensus stability.
- Staking Centralization: Large pools like Lido and Coinbase have disproportionate influence over which builders win.
The Searcher Arms Race
MEV extraction is a winner-take-most game dominated by sophisticated, capital-heavy players. This creates barriers to entry, stifles innovation, and forces applications to design around predatory strategies, not user experience.
- Asicification of MEV: Specialized hardware and proprietary data (e.g., Flashbots' MEV-Share) create insurmountable advantages.
- Application Capture: DEXs like Uniswap must integrate with UniswapX or CowSwap to mitigate harmful MEV, ceding control to new intermediaries.
L2s Import the MEV Crisis
Optimistic and ZK Rollups inherit Ethereum's MEV dynamics, often with worse centralization. Their sequencers are single points of failure with unchecked power to order, censor, and extract. Cross-chain MEV via bridges like LayerZero and Across creates new, opaque risk vectors.
- Sequencer as Sovereign: Arbitrum, Optimism, and Base sequencers are currently centralized and profit from their position.
- Verifier Dilemma: Proving systems secure state, not fair ordering, leaving MEV governance unresolved.
Regulatory Capture Vector
Centralized MEV infrastructure presents a low-cost, high-impact target for regulators. Pressure on a few corporate entities (e.g., Coinbase validating, Flashbots relaying) could enforce widespread transaction blacklisting, achieving de facto censorship without modifying Ethereum's code.
- OFAC Compliance: Relays already filter transactions, creating a shadow compliance layer.
- Liability Shift: Builders/Relays, not validators, become liable for block contents.
Economic Distortion & Rent Extraction
MEV infrastructure taxes every transaction, diverting value from users and app developers to a non-productive extractive layer. This creates perverse incentives where infrastructure profits from network congestion and complexity, opposing scalability and efficiency improvements.
- Deadweight Loss: Priority gas auctions waste >$100M annually in failed arbitrage bids.
- Protocol Cannibalization: MEV revenue can exceed staking rewards, distorting validator incentives towards extraction over security.
The Verge and Beyond: A Fork in the Road
Ethereum's post-Verge roadmap will cement MEV infrastructure as the network's ultimate power broker.
MEV is the new consensus. The proposer-builder separation (PBS) enshrined in the Verge upgrade formalizes a two-tiered power structure. Builders compete in a private auction for block-building rights, while validators merely propose the winning block. This cements Flashbots' SUAVE and specialized builders as the network's central planners.
Decentralization shifts to the builder layer. Validator decentralization becomes a secondary concern. Real competition and censorship resistance now depend on the builder market structure. A landscape dominated by a few entities like Jito Labs on Solana or centralized relays creates systemic risk.
The fork is between private and public. The core architectural debate is whether block building remains a private, off-chain auction or migrates to a public mempool with protocols like CowSwap and UniswapX. Private auctions maximize extractable value; public mempools democratize access but reduce efficiency.
Evidence: Post-merge, over 90% of Ethereum blocks are built by a handful of entities using MEV-Boost. This concentration is the prelude to the enshrined PBS future, where control is institutionalized, not accidental.
TL;DR for Protocol Architects
MEV infrastructure is the new power grid of Ethereum, dictating transaction ordering, finality, and who profits from the network's economic activity.
The Problem: Builder-Dominance Creates Centralized Censorship Vectors
A handful of builders like Flashbots and bloXroute control >80% of block production. This centralizes the power to censor transactions (e.g., OFAC compliance) and extract maximal value from users.
- Risk: Protocol logic can be gamed by a few entities.
- Impact: User transactions can be delayed or excluded.
The Solution: SUAVE is a Decentralized Execution Layer for MEV
SUAVE (Single Unifying Auction for Value Expression) aims to decentralize the MEV supply chain by creating a separate chain for preference expression and block building.
- Key Benefit: Separates block building from proposing, breaking builder monopolies.
- Key Benefit: Enables cross-domain MEV and private mempools via encrypted intents.
The Reality: PBS (Proposer-Builder Separation) is Incomplete
While PBS (via mev-boost) separated block building from validation, it created a new oligopoly of builders. Builders now compete on bid size and relay trust, not decentralization.
- Result: Validators outsource censorship decisions.
- Metric: Top 3 relays facilitate ~90% of mev-boost blocks.
The Opportunity: Intents & Orderflow Auctions Redistribute Value
Protocols like UniswapX and CowSwap use intents to route user orders off-chain to solvers. This captures MEV at the application layer and returns it to users.
- Mechanism: Solvers compete in periodic batch auctions.
- Outcome: User gets better price, protocol captures fee, MEV is socialized.
The Threat: Cross-Chain MEV Amplifies Systemic Risk
Bridges like LayerZero and Axelar are massive, asynchronous MEV targets. Arbitrageurs extract value across chains, but so can attackers exploiting latency in state finality.
- Vector: Time-bandit attacks on optimistic bridges.
- Consequence: Bridge security models are now MEV games.
The Mandate: Architect for Encrypted Mempools & Fair Ordering
The next design imperative is integrating with privacy layers like Shutter Network or fair ordering sequencers. This preempts frontrunning and ensures protocol logic executes as intended.
- Tool: Threshold Encryption for transaction privacy.
- Goal: Transform MEV from a predatory tax into a competitive service fee.
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.