Mantle DA (powered by EigenDA) excels at providing a low-cost, high-throughput DA solution deeply integrated with the Ethereum ecosystem. By leveraging EigenLayer's restaking for security and operating as a native Ethereum L2, it offers seamless compatibility with tools like Etherscan and wallets. Its key metric is cost: it aims for ~$0.10 per MB of data, significantly undercutting Ethereum calldata. This integrated stack is ideal for teams prioritizing Ethereum alignment and wanting a turnkey solution.
LABS
Comparisons
Mantle DA (EigenDA) vs Celestia: Integrated Stack vs Modular Choice
A technical analysis for CTOs and protocol architects comparing Mantle Network's integrated EigenDA solution with the standalone modular DA layer Celestia. This comparison evaluates architecture, cost, security, and developer experience to inform infrastructure decisions for high-throughput rollups.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Data Availability Dilemma for Rollups
Choosing a data availability layer is a foundational decision that dictates your rollup's cost, security, and ecosystem alignment.
Celestia takes a different approach by pioneering a modular, sovereign data availability network. This results in the trade-off of operating outside Ethereum's direct security model but grants rollups maximum flexibility and independence. Rollups using Celestia, like Arbitrum Orbit chains or Caldera deployments, can define their own execution and settlement layers. The network's throughput is a key strength, with a theoretical capacity of ~40 MB per block, designed to scale data availability as a commodity.
The key trade-off: If your priority is minimizing cost while maximizing Ethereum security and developer tooling familiarity, choose Mantle DA. If you prioritize architectural sovereignty, the ability to choose your own settlement layer, and scaling DA as a raw resource, choose Celestia. The decision hinges on whether you value deep integration or modular flexibility for your rollup's future.
tldr-summary
Mantle DA (EigenDA) vs Celestia
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance. Mantle offers a tightly integrated, cost-effective stack, while Celestia provides maximal modular flexibility and ecosystem choice.
01
Mantle DA: Integrated Cost Efficiency
Native integration with Mantle L2: Data availability is a native, subsidized component of the Mantle stack, not a separate service. This translates to ~$0.10 per MB of data posted, significantly cheaper than using Celestia as a standalone service. This matters for high-throughput, cost-sensitive dApps like gaming or social protocols where transaction fees are a primary user concern.
02
Mantle DA: Simplified Stack & Security
Unified security and roadmap: Relies on Ethereum (via EigenLayer) for cryptoeconomic security and is governed by the Mantle DAO. Developers get a single, opinionated stack (Mantle L2 + EigenDA + Hyperlane for interoperability) with aligned incentives. This matters for teams prioritizing development speed and operational simplicity over configuring a bespoke modular stack.
03
Celestia: Modular Sovereignty
Maximal flexibility and choice: Celestia is a pure, general-purpose data availability layer. It allows rollups to choose their own execution environment (EVM, SVM, Move), settlement layer (Ethereum, Celestia, Arbitrum Orbit), and bridging solution. This matters for protocols building novel VMs or requiring specific, non-EVM execution environments (e.g., using Fuel VM or a custom zk-rollup).
04
Celestia: Ecosystem & Interoperability
Vibrant, multi-chain ecosystem: As the first mover, Celestia has a large installed base with 50+ integrated rollups and appchains (e.g., Arbitrum Orbit, Polygon CDK, OP Stack). This creates a rich environment for cross-chain tooling (like Hyperlane or LayerZero) and shared liquidity. This matters for projects that value ecosystem composability and want to deploy across multiple L2s/L3s.
INTEGRATED STACK VS MODULAR CHOICE
Mantle DA (EigenDA) vs Celestia: Feature Comparison
Direct comparison of data availability solutions for rollup builders.
| Metric / Feature | Mantle DA (EigenDA) | Celestia |
|---|---|---|
Architecture Model | Integrated (Restaking) | Modular (Sovereign) |
Throughput (Blob Capacity) | ~100 MB/s | ~40 MB/s |
Cost per 100 KB Blob | < $0.001 | $0.003 - $0.01 |
Data Availability Sampling (DAS) | ||
Native Restaking Security | ||
Sovereign Rollup Support | ||
Mainnet Status | Live (via EigenDA) | Live |
Native Token for Fees | ETH | TIA |
MANTLE DA (EIGENDA) VS CELESTIA
Cost Analysis: Fees and Economic Model
Direct comparison of data availability costs and economic models for integrated L2 stack vs modular choice.
| Metric | Mantle DA (EigenDA) | Celestia |
|---|---|---|
Cost per MB (Est.) | $0.40 | $0.01 - $0.03 |
Economic Model | Integrated L2 Revenue Share | Modular Pay-per-Use |
Native Token for Fees | ||
Fee Stability Mechanism | Mantle Treasury Subsidy | Dynamic Market Pricing |
Data Blob Capacity per Block | ~600 KB | ~8 MB |
Primary Use Case | Mantle L2 & Ethereum L2s | Any Modular Chain (Rollups) |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Mantle DA (EigenDA) vs Celestia: Integrated Stack vs Modular Choice
Key strengths and trade-offs for CTOs choosing a data availability layer. Mantle offers a turnkey L2, while Celestia provides a modular foundation.
01
Mantle DA (EigenDA) Pro: Integrated L2 Performance
Native L2 integration: Data availability is baked into the Mantle L2 stack, offering sub-$0.01 transaction fees and ~2-second finality. This matters for teams wanting a turnkey, high-performance rollup without managing separate DA procurement.
02
Mantle DA (EigenDA) Pro: Ecosystem & Capital Alignment
Deep treasury backing: Supported by a $4B+ Mantle Treasury and native $MNT token. This matters for projects seeking long-term economic alignment and grants, as seen with the Mantle EcoFund and integrations like Pendle and Lido.
03
Mantle DA (EigenDA) Con: Vendor Lock-in & Limited Flexibility
Proprietary stack dependency: You are locked into the Mantle L2's execution client, sequencer, and governance. This matters for teams needing maximal sovereignty or who want to mix-and-match components like different rollup frameworks (e.g., Arbitrum Nitro, OP Stack).
04
Mantle DA (EigenDA) Con: Unproven at Scale vs. Dedicated DA
Newer, integrated DA layer: EigenDA is newer and less battle-tested than dedicated DA networks. While cost-effective, its scaling limits under extreme load are less proven. This matters for mission-critical dApps requiring the most resilient DA security model.
05
Celestia Pro: Modular Sovereignty & Choice
Framework agnostic: Use any execution layer (Optimism OP Stack, Arbitrum Orbit, Polygon CDK, Rollkit) with Celestia for DA. This matters for sovereign rollup builders and teams who need to customize their entire tech stack.
06
Celestia Pro: Proven Scale & Network Effects
First-mover advantage: Powers major L2s like Arbitrum Orbit and Manta Pacific, with 16MB+ block space. This matters for projects prioritizing proven scalability and a large, established ecosystem of tooling (e.g., Rollkit, Dymension) and integrations.
07
Celestia Con: Added Complexity & Coordination
Multi-component management: Requires assembling and securing your own rollup stack (sequencer, prover, bridge). This matters for teams with limited DevOps resources who prefer a single vendor for L2 operations and support.
08
Celestia Con: Pure Cost Play, No Native Ecosystem
DA-only utility: Provides cheap data blobs but no native L2 user base or treasury for grants. This matters for projects that need built-in liquidity and users, rather than just infrastructure cost savings.
pros-cons-b
PROS AND CONS
Mantle DA (EigenDA) vs Celestia: Integrated Stack vs Modular Choice
Key architectural trade-offs and performance metrics for CTOs choosing a data availability layer.
01
Mantle DA (EigenDA) Pro: Integrated Performance
Optimized for the Mantle L2 stack: Built as a core component of Mantle's modular chain (Mantle Network, Hyperlane for interoperability). Offers 48 MB/s blob throughput and sub-cent data posting fees, directly benefiting Mantle-based dApps like Merchant Moe and INIT Capital. This matters for teams wanting a vertically integrated, high-performance environment without cross-chain coordination overhead.
48 MB/s
Blob Throughput
< $0.01
Avg. Blob Cost
02
Mantle DA (EigenDA) Con: Ecosystem Lock-in
Primary focus is the Mantle ecosystem. While built on EigenLayer's restaking security, its economic and technical optimizations are geared towards Mantle Network. This creates a vendor lock-in risk for protocols that may later want to migrate to another L2 or sovereign rollup. It's a less neutral platform compared to Celestia, making it a weaker fit for multi-chain architects or teams building independent rollups.
1
Primary L2 Client
03
Celestia Pro: Modular Sovereignty
Neutral, pluggable data availability layer. Enables teams to launch sovereign rollups (e.g., Dymension, Saga) or optimistic rollups (Arbitrum Orbit, OP Stack) with full control over execution and settlement. Decouples security from execution, proven by its use across diverse ecosystems. This matters for protocols requiring maximum flexibility, custom governance, and avoidance of L2 platform risk.
40+
Active Rollups
04
Celestia Con: Integration Complexity
Requires assembling your own modular stack. Teams must independently choose and integrate a settlement layer (e.g., Arbitrum, Polygon CDK), execution environment, and bridging solutions (e.g., Hyperlane, Axelar). This introduces higher initial development overhead, multi-party coordination, and potential fragmentation points compared to an integrated stack like Mantle's. It's a trade-off for sovereignty versus development speed.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
Mantle DA (EigenDA) for DeFi
Verdict: The integrated, cost-effective choice for high-throughput Ethereum DeFi. Strengths: Deep integration with the Mantle L2 stack (Mantle L2, $MNT token) provides a seamless, low-cost environment. Data availability costs are subsidized by the Mantle Treasury, leading to ultra-low transaction fees for end-users. This is ideal for high-frequency DeFi operations like perp DEXs (e.g., Aevo model) or yield aggregators. The Ethereum security model via EigenLayer restaking provides strong settlement guarantees. Considerations: You are committing to the Mantle ecosystem. Customization of the DA layer is limited compared to a modular approach.
Celestia for DeFi
Verdict: The modular, sovereign choice for novel DeFi app-chains. Strengths: Enables you to launch a dedicated rollup (using OP Stack, Arbitrum Orbit, or Polygon CDK) with sovereign data availability. This is optimal for DeFi protocols that need their own chain with customized fee markets, governance, and execution logic (e.g., a specialized lending chain). You control the full stack and can benefit from Celestia's low-cost, high-throughput DA. Considerations: Higher initial complexity. You are responsible for sequencing, proving, and bridging infrastructure. DA costs are paid directly in $TIA.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
Choosing between Mantle DA and Celestia is a strategic decision between an integrated, performance-optimized stack and a modular, ecosystem-agnostic foundation.
Mantle DA (EigenDA) excels at providing a high-throughput, low-cost data availability layer that is natively integrated with the Mantle L2 stack. This deep integration allows for optimized performance and seamless interoperability with Mantle's native token, governance, and sequencer. For example, Mantle L2 leverages this integration to offer sub-cent transaction fees and has secured over $1.5B in TVL, demonstrating the strength of its cohesive ecosystem. Its partnership with EigenLayer also provides a unique security model backed by restaked ETH.
Celestia takes a fundamentally different approach by pioneering a modular, plug-and-play DA layer that is blockchain-agnostic. This results in maximum flexibility and sovereignty for rollup developers, allowing them to use any execution layer (like Arbitrum Orbit, OP Stack, or Polygon CDK) and settlement layer while still leveraging Celestia for data. The trade-off is a less opinionated, more generalized service that requires more initial integration work but offers unparalleled freedom and has become the de facto standard for new modular chains, with a thriving ecosystem including projects like dYmension and Saga.
The key trade-off: If your priority is launching quickly on a high-performance, Ethereum-aligned L2 with a turnkey, optimized stack and deep liquidity, choose Mantle DA. If you prioritize maximum sovereignty, the flexibility to choose your own execution and settlement layers, and building within the broadest modular ecosystem, choose Celestia. For CTOs building a bespoke chain with specific VM needs, Celestia is the strategic choice. For VPs aiming to deploy a scalable dApp on a proven L2 with minimal overhead, Mantle's integrated stack is decisive.
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