MEV Relay Networks (e.g., Flashbots, bloXroute, Agnostic) excel at providing censorship resistance and credible neutrality by operating as a competitive marketplace. They enforce rules like min-bid and block-uncles to protect validators from harmful MEV extraction. For example, the dominant Flashbots relay has processed over 90% of Ethereum's post-merge MEV blocks, demonstrating massive network effects and stability. This centralized-but-competitive layer offers validators a simple, low-risk interface to access optimized blocks.
LABS
Comparisons
MEV Relay Networks vs Direct Validator-Builder Connections
A technical comparison of Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) communication channels, analyzing the trade-offs between using a trusted relay network and establishing private peer-to-peer connections for MEV extraction.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The PBS Communication Layer
A technical breakdown of the two primary communication channels for Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS): centralized relay networks versus direct validator-builder connections.
Direct Validator-Builder Connections take a different approach by enabling a peer-to-peer, trust-minimized communication channel. This strategy, often implemented via custom gRPC APIs or the emerging PBS over P2P standard, eliminates the relay as a potential point of failure or censorship. The trade-off is operational complexity: validators must now manage builder reputations, slashing risks, and network connectivity directly, which can lead to higher latency and missed opportunities without sophisticated infrastructure.
The key trade-off: If your priority is operational simplicity, high block revenue, and robust censorship resistance, choose a major MEV relay network. If you prioritize maximum decentralization, protocol-level alignment, and eliminating third-party dependencies, invest in establishing direct builder connections. For most validators today, the revenue and reliability of relays like Flashbots are compelling, but large staking pools and sovereign chains are increasingly exploring direct PBS to future-proof their infrastructure.
tldr-summary
MEV Relay Networks vs Direct Validator-Builder Connections
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for Ethereum block production strategies.
01
MEV Relay Networks (e.g., Flashbots, bloXroute)
Specialization & Censorship Resistance: Relays act as neutral, competitive marketplaces for block space, separating block building from validation. This matters for protocols requiring credible neutrality and for validators seeking to avoid OFAC compliance complexity. Relays like Flashbots SUAVE aim to decentralize MEV further.
- Key Metric: >90% of Ethereum blocks are built via relays.
- Best for: Validators prioritizing regulatory insulation and access to optimized, competitive block bids.
02
MEV Relay Networks
Optimized Revenue & Simplicity: Validators connect to multiple relays (e.g., Titan, Agnostic) to automatically receive the most profitable, pre-built block. This eliminates the need for complex, in-house builder infrastructure.
- Key Metric: Top relays can increase validator APR by 10-20%+ through MEV-Boost.
- Best for: Solo stakers and staking pools without the engineering resources to run a competitive builder.
03
Direct Validator-Builder Connections
Maximum Extractable Value & Latency Control: Bypassing relays eliminates middleware, giving the validator full control over block content and order flow. This matters for high-frequency trading DApps or validators with proprietary order flow (e.g., centralized exchanges).
- Key Trade-off: Requires running or partnering with a sophisticated builder (e.g., built with mev-rs, mev-geth).
- Best for: Entities with exclusive order flow seeking to capture 100% of MEV and minimize latency.
04
Direct Validator-Builder Connections
Architectural Sovereignty & Customization: Direct control over the block production stack allows for custom transaction inclusion policies, bespoke fee markets, and experimentation with new PBS (Proposer-Builder Separation) models.
- Key Example: A validator can implement eigenlayer-style restaking slashing conditions directly into block validation logic.
- Best for: Protocol architects and large institutions building novel staking infrastructure or L2 sequencers.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
MEV Relay Networks vs Direct Validator-Builder Connections
Direct comparison of key architectural and economic metrics for MEV extraction pathways.
| Metric | MEV Relay Networks (e.g., Flashbots, bloXroute) | Direct P2P Connections |
|---|---|---|
Censorship Resistance | ||
Avg. Builder Payment to Validator |
| 100% of MEV |
Network Latency (Block Propagation) | < 100 ms | < 50 ms |
Required Validator Infrastructure | Standard | High (Custom Builder) |
Primary Use Case | Permissionless, competitive MEV market | Integrated protocols & private orderflow |
Major Implementations | Flashbots SUAVE, bloXroute, Agnostic | Jito-Solana, EigenLayer, Rollup Sequencers |
pros-cons-a
Direct Validator-Builder Connections vs. Relay Networks
MEV Relay Networks: Pros and Cons
Key architectural trade-offs for maximizing validator revenue and maintaining network health. Choose based on your operational scale and risk tolerance.
02
Relay Networks: Operational Simplicity
Outsourced builder competition: Validators connect to a single relay endpoint (e.g., Ultra Sound, Aestus) which auctions the block space to a competitive builder market. This matters for solo stakers or small pools who lack the resources to run complex MEV-boost software and manage multiple builder relationships directly.
90%+
Ethereum Blocks via Relays
03
Direct Connections: Maximum Extractable Value
Eliminate relay fees: Bypassing networks like Titan or agnostic Gnosis allows validators to capture 100% of builder bids and priority fees. This matters for large staking pools (>10K ETH) where even a 1-2% relay fee represents significant annual revenue leakage.
~2%
Typical Relay Fee
04
Direct Connections: Latency & Reliability
Reduced propagation hops: A direct P2P connection to a trusted builder (e.g., beaverbuild, rsync) minimizes latency, reducing orphaned block risk. This matters for high-performance validators in competitive slots where sub-second advantages translate to higher rewards and consistent uptime.
< 100ms
P2P Latency Target
05
Relay Networks: Builder Diversity & Safety
Pre-bid validation: Major relays enforce payload validation (e.g., MEV-Boost format checks) and maintain builder reputations, filtering out invalid or malicious blocks. This matters for risk-averse institutions who prioritize chain stability and slashing protection over marginal extra revenue.
06
Direct Connections: Customization & Control
Tailored transaction selection: Validators can enforce proprietary ordering rules, whitelist specific searchers (e.g., Jito Labs on Solana), or integrate with private order flows. This matters for specialized protocols or L2 sequencers that require granular control over block construction for optimal user experience.
pros-cons-b
MEV Relay Networks vs Direct Connections
Direct Validator-Builder Connections: Pros and Cons
Key architectural trade-offs for block production, focusing on censorship resistance, revenue, and operational complexity.
01
MEV Relay Networks: Censorship Resistance
Proven neutrality through competition: Validators connect to multiple relays (e.g., Flashbots, bloXroute, Agnostic) which enforce OFAC compliance differently. This multi-relay model prevents a single entity from controlling transaction flow.
This matters for protocols requiring credible neutrality, like stablecoins (USDC, DAI) or public goods funding, to avoid regulatory single points of failure.
02
MEV Relay Networks: Builder Revenue
Optimized for extractable value: Relays run sophisticated auctions (e.g., MEV-Boost) where specialized builders (e.g., beaverbuild, Rsync) compete to create the most profitable blocks, maximizing validator rewards.
This matters for validators (e.g., Lido, Coinbase) prioritizing staking APR, as relayed blocks often provide 10-20% higher rewards than vanilla execution.
03
Direct Connections: Latency & Control
Sub-second block production: Eliminating the relay hop reduces latency by ~100-500ms, crucial for high-frequency DEX arbitrage (e.g., Uniswap, Aave) and NFT minting.
This matters for elite validators and builders (e.g., running MEV-Boost in "local" mode) who prioritize speed and direct control over their block construction pipeline.
04
Direct Connections: Simplicity & Cost
Reduced infrastructure dependency: Bypassing relays removes a critical failure point and associated trust assumptions. There are no relay API outages or governance risks to manage.
This matters for sovereign chains, app-specific rollups (e.g., using Espresso, Astria), and validators seeking to minimize external service dependencies and potential points of censorship.
05
MEV Relay Networks: Operational Overhead
Con: Introduces relay risk: Validators must monitor relay performance, uptime (>99.5% SLA), and reputation. A relay going offline (e.g., Titan builder incident) can cause missed slots.
This matters for solo stakers and smaller node operators who lack the engineering resources to manage multiple relay failovers and performance dashboards.
06
Direct Connections: Revenue & Complexity
Con: Requires in-house MEV expertise: Building profitable blocks demands sophisticated searcher integration, transaction simulation (e.g., using Flashbots SUAVE, Blocknative), and gas optimization that relays provide as a service.
This matters for all but the most advanced validator operations, as poor block building can forfeit 10-30% of potential MEV revenue.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose Which: A Decision Framework
MEV Relay Networks for Protocol Architects
Verdict: The default choice for censorship resistance and ecosystem alignment. Strengths: Relays like Flashbots Protect, BloXroute, and Eden Network provide a standardized, audited interface for block building. This abstracts away the complexity of direct validator relationships and provides MEV-Boost compatibility out-of-the-box. Key for protocols like Uniswap or Aave that must guarantee fair, non-censored transaction inclusion to maintain credibility. The network effect of major relays ensures your transactions are seen by the majority of block builders. Weaknesses: Introduces a dependency on relay uptime and introduces a small latency penalty. You are subject to the relay's filtering rules, which may change.
Direct Validator-Builder Connections for Protocol Architects
Verdict: A strategic tool for ultra-high-frequency or specialized applications. Strengths: Direct integration with a validator or builder (e.g., Titan Builder, builder0x69) via a private mempool or RPC endpoint offers the lowest possible latency and maximum control over transaction ordering. This is critical for on-chain gaming with sub-second interactions or bespoke DeFi liquidation engines where milliseconds matter. It allows for custom fee logic and side agreements. Weaknesses: Requires significant engineering overhead to establish and maintain these private channels. Concentrates risk on a single point of failure (your chosen validator). Can be perceived as less transparent.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
A strategic breakdown of when to leverage a managed relay network versus establishing direct validator-builder connections for MEV extraction and block production.
MEV Relay Networks (like Flashbots Protect, bloXroute, and Agnostic) excel at providing censorship resistance, validator diversity, and operational simplicity. By aggregating blocks from a competitive builder marketplace, they ensure proposers receive the most profitable blocks while adhering to ethical standards like crlists. For example, Flashbots' dominance, processing over 90% of Ethereum's post-Merge MEV, demonstrates the network effects and reliability of this model. It abstracts away the complexity of builder management and provides robust uptime and redundancy.
Direct Validator-Builder Connections take a different approach by establishing private, bilateral PBS (Proposer-Builder Separation) channels. This strategy results in a significant trade-off: it offers the potential for higher profit margins by cutting out the relay's fee and enabling custom negotiation, but at the cost of increased operational overhead. You must vet, monitor, and maintain relationships with builders directly, which introduces centralization risk and requires sophisticated infrastructure to avoid missed slots or inferior blocks.
The key trade-off is between managed optimization and bespoke maximization. If your priority is reliability, compliance, and a hands-off operation for a large, diverse validator set, choose a major relay network. If you prioritize absolute profit maximization for a sophisticated, centralized operation willing to manage builder relationships and infrastructure, explore direct connections. For most institutional validators, starting with a primary relay like Flashbots and a secondary like bloXroute for redundancy is the prudent default, reserving direct channels for specialized, high-value use cases.
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall