Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
tokenomics-design-mechanics-and-incentives
Blog

The Future of Staking: Unbundling Security from Liquidity

Liquid staking derivatives (LSDs) have fractured the monolithic act of staking. This analysis dissects the new risk vectors, capital efficiency frontiers, and the looming centralization dilemma created by separating validator security from token liquidity.

introduction
THE UNBUNDLING

Introduction

The monolithic staking stack is fracturing, separating the core function of consensus security from the secondary market for liquidity.

Staking is a monolithic stack that bundles validator operation, capital lock-up, and liquidity provision. This design creates systemic inefficiencies, locking billions in capital that could be deployed elsewhere in DeFi.

The future is unbundled. Protocols like EigenLayer abstract validator security into a reusable economic layer, while liquid staking tokens (LSTs) like Lido's stETH and Rocket Pool's rETH commoditize liquidity. This separation optimizes capital efficiency.

Security and liquidity have different risk profiles. Validator slashing is a binary, low-probability risk, while LST de-pegging is a continuous market risk. Treating them as one asset misprices both.

Evidence: The LST market exceeds $50B TVL, but less than 15% of that value actively secures the network. The rest is idle collateral in lending protocols like Aave, demonstrating the latent demand for pure liquidity.

THE FUTURE OF STAKING: UNBUNDLING SECURITY FROM LIQUIDITY

The LSD Landscape: Market Share & Concentration

Comparison of dominant LSD models, highlighting the trade-offs between integrated liquidity provision and the emerging unbundled architecture.

Core Metric / FeatureIntegrated Model (e.g., Lido, Rocket Pool)Unbundled Model (e.g., EigenLayer, Babylon)Hybrid / Future Model

Primary Function

Liquidity + Security Bundled

Pure Security (Restaking)

Modular Security Marketplace

Market Share (TVL)

80%

< 5% (growing)

Niche

Liquidity Token Issued

stETH, rETH

None (eigenLayer points)

Conditional (e.g., LST-backed)

Capital Efficiency

Medium (stake once, use LST in DeFi)

High (stake once, secure multiple AVSs)

Variable (depends on slashing design)

Validator Control

Professional Node Operators (Decentralized Set)

Native Stakers (Solo or via LSTs)

Auction-based / Delegated

Slashing Risk Scope

Single Protocol (e.g., Lido)

Multi-Protocol (Across AVSs like EigenDA, Omni)

Tailored per Service

Yield Source

Consensus + MEV + DeFi Yield on LST

Fees from Actively Validated Services (AVSs)

Consensus + AVS Fees + Premiums

Key Innovation

Liquidity for locked capital

Repurposing staked capital for cryptoeconomic security

Risk-isolated, composable security primitives

deep-dive
THE UNBUNDLING

The Security-Liquidity Paradox

The future of staking separates the act of securing the network from the financial utility of the staked asset.

Staking currently bundles security and liquidity. A validator's 32 ETH is locked, creating capital inefficiency and systemic risk from rehypothecation.

Liquid staking tokens (LSTs) like Lido's stETH are a partial solution. They provide liquidity but centralize validation power, creating a new security risk.

The endgame is a complete unbundling. Protocols like EigenLayer and Babylon enable restaking and bitcoin staking, separating cryptoeconomic security from the underlying asset's utility.

This creates a security marketplace. Validators sell slashing guarantees to multiple networks, while users retain asset liquidity on DEXs like Uniswap or lending on Aave.

risk-analysis
THE FUTURE OF STAKING

The New Risk Stack

The monolithic validator is being deconstructed, separating the capital risk of slashing from the operational risk of uptime.

01

The Problem: Monolithic Risk

Traditional staking bundles capital lockup, slashing risk, and node operation into a single, indivisible liability. This creates systemic fragility and capital inefficiency.

  • Capital Inefficiency: $100B+ in ETH is locked and illiquid, unable to be used in DeFi.
  • Operational Centralization: Node operation is concentrated among a few large providers, creating a ~60% Lido/Coinbase/CB dominance.
  • Unbundleable Risk: A single slashing event can wipe out both the delegator's stake and the operator's business.
~60%
Centralized
$100B+
Locked Capital
02

The Solution: Restaking & AVSs

EigenLayer introduces a marketplace for cryptoeconomic security. Staked ETH can be "restaked" to secure new services (Actively Validated Services or AVSs), unbundling security provision from a specific blockchain.

  • Security as a Commodity: ETH's $400B+ security budget becomes a reusable resource for rollups, oracles, and bridges.
  • Risk Segmentation: Operators can choose which AVSs to secure, creating a risk/reward spectrum.
  • Capital Multiplier: The same ETH stake can secure multiple services simultaneously, though this introduces new systemic correlation risks.
$15B+
TVL
100+
AVSs
03

The Solution: Liquid Staking Tokens (LSTs) as Collateral

LSTs like stETH and rETH transform locked stake into a fungible, yield-bearing DeFi primitive. This is the first, critical unbundling of liquidity from security.

  • DeFi Composability: LSTs power money markets (Aave, Compound), DEX liquidity (Curve's stETH pool), and serve as collateral for stablecoins.
  • Yield Stacking: Enables strategies like "loop and restake" to amplify returns, though this increases leverage risk.
  • Valuation Risk: LSTs trade at a discount to NAV during stress (e.g., Shanghai upgrade uncertainty), creating a new arbitrage and hedging market.
$40B+
LST Market
5-7%
Base Yield
04

The Frontier: No-Slash Staking Pools

Protocols like Obol and SSV Network are pioneering Distributed Validator Technology (DVT), distributing a single validator's key across multiple nodes. This decouples slashing risk from individual operator failure.

  • Fault Tolerance: A validator remains active unless a threshold (e.g., 2/3) of nodes fail or misbehave, drastically reducing slashing probability.
  • Operator Commoditization: Allows for a permissionless network of smaller, geographically distributed node operators, reducing centralization.
  • Insurance Primitive: The near-elimination of slashing risk enables the creation of pure "staking insurance" products, a final unbundling.
>99.9%
Uptime
~0%
Slash Risk
future-outlook
THE UNBUNDLING

Synthetic Security and the Endgame

The future of staking separates the act of providing security from the act of providing liquidity, creating a more efficient and specialized validator market.

Synthetic security redefines validation. Protocols like EigenLayer and Babylon enable validators from established chains (e.g., Ethereum, Bitcoin) to rent their cryptoeconomic security to new networks. This creates a capital-efficient marketplace where security is a commodity, not a bespoke asset.

Liquid staking is the first unbundling. Services like Lido and Rocket Pool decouple staked ETH from its validation rights, creating a liquid derivative (stETH, rETH). The next step is decoupling the validation work itself from the underlying capital, enabling specialized operators to compete on performance, not just stake size.

The endgame is a modular security stack. A new chain will compose its consensus from restaked ETH, a data availability layer like Celestia or EigenDA, and a decentralized sequencer set. This turns monolithic security into a competitive, pluggable service, drastically reducing launch costs and bootstrapping time.

takeaways
THE UNBUNDLING THESIS

TL;DR for Protocol Architects

The monolithic staking stack is being decomposed, separating the security of validation from the liquidity of staked assets. This unlocks new capital efficiency and risk markets.

01

The Problem: The Capital Lockup Tax

Traditional staking imposes a ~30-day unbonding period, creating a massive liquidity penalty. This locks up $100B+ in non-productive capital and creates systemic risk during market stress.

  • Opportunity Cost: Capital cannot be deployed in DeFi or used as collateral.
  • Exit Queue Risk: Mass exits create network instability and depeg risk for liquid staking tokens (LSTs).
30d
Lockup
$100B+
Capital Trapped
02

The Solution: EigenLayer & Restaking

EigenLayer unbundles cryptoeconomic security from a single chain, allowing ETH stakers to re-stake their stake to secure new services (AVSs). This creates a permissionless security marketplace.

  • Capital Multiplier: One staked ETH can secure Ethereum L1 and multiple other protocols.
  • Yield Stacking: Stakers earn additional rewards from AVS fees on top of base staking yield.
15B+ TVL
Restaked
50+
AVSs Secured
03

The Solution: Liquid Restaking Tokens (LRTs)

Protocols like Ether.fi, Kelp DAO, and Renzo issue Liquid Restaking Tokens (LRTs), which bundle restaked ETH and its accrued AVS rewards into a single, liquid asset. This is the final unbundling of liquidity from security.

  • Instant Liquidity: Users can exit positions without unbonding periods.
  • DeFi Composability: LRTs become a new primitive for money markets, DEX pools, and collateral.
10B+ TVL
LRT Market
~5-10%
Estimated APR
04

The New Risk Frontier: Slashing Markets

Unbundling creates new, tradable risk vectors. Protocols like EigenLayer introduce slashing for AVS failures, while projects like Symbiotic and Inception explore risk markets. This necessitates active risk management.

  • Risk Segmentation: Stakers can choose exposure to different slashing conditions and yields.
  • Insurance Primitive: A new market emerges for slashing protection and AVS risk underwriting.
New Asset Class
Risk
TBD
Slashing Events
05

The Architectural Shift: From Monolith to Modular

The end-state is a modular security stack. Ethereum L1 provides base-layer consensus. Restaking pools provide scalable cryptoeconomic security. LRTs provide the liquid asset layer. AVSs are the consumers.

  • Specialization: Each layer optimizes for a single function (security, liquidity, execution).
  • Composability: Layers can be mixed and matched, similar to the rollup-centric roadmap.
Modular Stack
Architecture
Interoperable
Layers
06

The Endgame: Staking as a Yield-Bearing Risk Asset

Staked ETH evolves from a simple yield instrument into a complex, yield-bearing risk asset. Its value is a function of base staking yield + restaking premium - slashing risk. This creates a true capital market for cryptoeconomic security.

  • Risk-Adjusted Returns: Portfolio management tools become essential for stakers.
  • Institutional Gateway: Familiar risk/return profiles attract traditional capital.
Risk/Return
Asset Profile
Trillion $
Addressable Market
ENQUIRY

Get In Touch
today.

Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.

NDA Protected
24h Response
Directly to Engineering Team
10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall
NDA Protected Directly to Engineering Team
The Future of Staking: Unbundling Security from Liquidity | ChainScore Blog