Linea: Everything You Must Know Before Its TGE

“Linea is the Ethereum L2 built to serve one purpose: to strengthen Ethereum.” 

After Ethereum’s strong price growth over the past 2 months and as it approaches a new peak, Linea is the project most eagerly awaited by the community thanks to the upcoming TGE information.

This article will provide information and in-depth analysis related to Linea that you may need to know before the TGE takes place.

 (Joseph Lubin, Ethereum co-founder), backed by $725M funding, leveraging products like 

 for faster, more secure transactions, improving Ethereum’s scalability.

, which is a toolkit that helps projects easily deploy new Layer 2s (L2s).- Over 

 peaked at $1.2B; recovering pre-TGE with strong 

Linea is a L2 born from the strategic vision of ConsenSys, one of the leading companies in the Ethereum ecosystem. The main founder of ConsenSys is Joseph Lubin, who co-founded Ethereum alongside Vitalik Buterin and other pioneers in 2014. With extensive experience from Wall Street (formerly worked at Goldman Sachs) and a key role in building Ethereum, Lubin has led ConsenSys to become the “cradle” of essential products in the Ethereum ecosystem, such as Infura and MetaMask, which now have over 30 million monthly users.

Linea was first introduced in 2023, when ConsenSys launched its testnet under the name ConsenSys zkEVM. By July 2023, the project officially launched its mainnet under the name Linea, symbolizing the continuous “flow” of data and value on Ethereum. ConsenSys, the parent company of Linea, has raised $725 million from major investors such as Microsoft, SoftBank, Dragonfly Capital, and Coinbase Ventures. The team behind Linea includes experts from Ethereum’s open-source community, with an Ecosystem Council consisting of ConsenSys, ENS, Status, EigenLabs, and SharpLink, which is the largest ETH-holding company in the world.

The core technology of Linea is zkEVM, which is a version of the EVM that uses zero-knowledge proofs (ZK proofs) to verify transactions off-chain before submitting them to Ethereum’s base layer.

On Ethereum’s development journey, to stay competitive against the rise of other Layer 1s (L1s) like Solana, Ethereum must solve the scalability problem. Rollups are considered the most optimal solution and the foundation for the current L2 systems. Rollups are divided into two types:

Optimistic rollups are compatible with the EVM, allowing developers to build dApps easily. In contrast, ZK rollups offer superior advantages over optimistic rollups in terms of security and speed but lack full EVM compatibility, making dApp deployment more difficult. Therefore, to solve the problem of ZK rollups not being EVM-compatible, zkEVM was created to allow developers to deploy dApps directly in the EVM environment without needing to change code or rewrite smart contracts.

Rollups work by aggregating multiple L2 transactions into a batch, then submitting that batch to L1 for verification. The key difference is that Optimistic rollups submit fraud proofs to L1, while ZK rollups submit validity proofs (or ZK proofs).

Fraud Proof: Assumes all transactions are valid unless proven otherwise. This process takes 7 days before the transaction is verified and recorded on L1. This is also why withdrawals from L2 to L1 take 7 days.

ZK Proof: Each batch submitted to L1 comes with a cryptographic proof that immediately verifies the validity, offering higher speed and security. Therefore, withdrawals from L2 to L1 with ZK rollups only take a few hours.

According to Vitalik, zkEVM is divided into four main types, each with a different level of compatibility with the EVM.

Type 1 (fully Ethereum-equivalent): Perfect compatibility with Ethereum, but lower scalability.

Type 2 (fully EVM-equivalent): Perfect equivalence at the VM level, improved but relatively lower scalability.

Type 2.5 (EVM-equivalent, except for gas costs): Equivalence at the VM level + better scalability, but not compatible with all dApps & tools (although most).

Type 3 (almost EVM-equivalent): Easier to build + better scalability, but not compatible with all dApps & tools (although most).

Type 4 (high-level-language equivalent): Easiest to build + highest scalability, but less compatibility with dApps & tools.

Linea is a Type 2 zkEVM, meaning it is fully EVM-equivalent but not quite Ethereum-equivalent. That is, it looks exactly like Ethereum “from within”, but has some differences on the outside, particularly in data structures. A Type 2 ZK-EVM is capable of running all existing applications on Ethereum without any code modification. However, it needs to make a few minor infrastructure changes to simplify development and speed up proof generation. Type 2 strikes a better balance between compatibility and performance than Type 3 and Type 4, and it has the potential to evolve toward Type 1.

Linea has undergone a significant upgrade, reducing gas fees with the transition from Alpha V1 to Alpha V2. In V1, transactions on Linea were aggregated into a single batch and submitted to L1 via a ZK proof. Starting from V2, Linea has updated the system to allow multiple batches to be combined into a single aggregator proof, reducing the fixed cost from 1 batch/proof to 30 batches/proof. After this update, gas fees on Linea dropped by 66%, making it the 7th cheapest L2 in terms of transaction fees, thereby significantly improving user experience.

Unlike many L2s following the token-first model, Linea remains loyal to Ethereum. Linea’s Core Features focus on three key pillars:

The Dual-burn mechanism works by using the $ETH collected from user transaction fees to increase the value of the token, where 20% of the fees are burned in $ETH, and 80% are used to buy & burn $LINEA.

At present, daily transaction fees on Linea are around $12k, but recently started to trend upward, reaching approximately $70k on August 13. To create real impact on the price of both $ETH and the future $LINEA token, the key challenge for Linea is to attract and retain users, proving that its model is effective.

On most other L2s, $ETH is only used to pay for transaction fees. However, on Linea, users can also earn native yield by staking within the network. Linea has partnered with Lido, a decentralized staking solution that allows bridged $ETH to be automatically staked on their platform. The yield generated is then redirected back to L2 to support liquidity (DEXs, lending, perps) and fund incentive programs.

Yield from staking not only retains long-term capital on Linea and reduces liquidity providers exiting the protocol after incentives end, but also acts as a direct driver for TVL, trading volume, and transaction fees. When these metrics remain high, the dual-burn mechanism can operate at full effectiveness, putting downward pressure on supply and increasing long-term token value.

These mechanisms can help attract the $ETH holder community and create the potential for a liquidity flywheel within the Linea ecosystem, as seen with Blast. With a similar native yield mechanism, Blast once reached over $2.22B in TVL before rapidly declining due to the absence of major DeFi protocols like Aave and a lack of standout dApps to retain users post-airdrop. However, Aave is already live on Linea, and with notable names like @eigen_labs and @Consensys behind it, Linea may avoid repeating Blast’s mistakes.

Not only does Linea build its own zkEVM L2, but it also introduces Linea Stack, a toolkit that helps projects easily deploy new L2s, similar to OP Stack or Polygon SDK. Notably, Status is the first L2 project built using Linea Stack. This strategy allows Linea to:

Create network effects from multiple chains using the same technology, ensuring that individual blockchains can interoperate and function as a unified system, support each other technically, and attract users, similar to the relationship among projects in Optimism’s Superchain.

Target revenue from infrastructure, not just gas fees.

DeFi on Linea is taking shape. The liquidity backbone centers around DEXs and lending protocols, featuring familiar names like Aave, PancakeSwap, and SushiSwap, along with supporting components such as Stargate (bridge) and Satori (perps). In addition, Linea has over 400 partners across DeFi, infrastructure, NFTs, and AI, covering all the essential pieces for Linea to stay aligned with future narratives.

Linea’s TVL peaked at $1.2 billion following the launch of the Linea Surge program in May 2024, which was a points-based incentive campaign designed to attract TVL and activate the DeFi ecosystem, running until November 2024. The campaign created a strong acquisition effect, driving around 800k daily active addresses (DAA) and rapidly boosting both TVL and user numbers. However, both TVL and DAA dropped significantly after the program ended, highlighting the unsustainable retention, a common problem with large-scale incentive campaigns where the primary user motivation is short-term rewards rather than long-term ecosystem value.

Currently, Linea’s TVL is recovering, partly due to the rising price of $ETH and the pre-TGE momentum, which has drawn increased attention to the ecosystem. In the pre-TGE phase, Linea’s TVL grew by approximately 60%, even without any incentive program. Etherex, a DEX on Linea, surpassed $120M in TVL just two weeks after launch, indicating that capital is starting to flow back into the Linea ecosystem.

Instead of allocating tokens to VCs, Linea’s tokenomics aims to put the ecosystem first, directing the majority of funds toward users, builders, Ethereum public goods, and R&D.

10% Airdropped to early contributors and users (fully unlocked)

1% Strategic builder airdrop (discretionary)

4% Liquidity providers from the Linea Surge (unlocked)

60% Ecosystem Fund (long-term growth, grants, infra)

15% Consensys Treasury (5-year lockup, non-transferable)

Fund management is handled by The Linea Consortium, a group of credible Ethereum organizations that have made significant contributions to strengthening Ethereum, including @eigen_labs, @ensdomains, @SharpLinkGaming, @ethstatus, and @Consensys.

However, $LINEA currently does not have a specific utility: it is not used for gas and currently has no governance rights. While other Ethereum L2s use token utility primarily for voting governance, in the case of $LINEA, the project has announced: “There is no tokenholder governance in the LINEA system”. This is a deliberate and strategic action for the token to not be used for governance. Instead, strategic decisions regarding token emissions, grants, incentives, and fund allocations are overseen by the Linea Consortium. The main source of revenue comes from ETH transaction fees, so token holders only benefit indirectly through the mechanism that burns 80% of those fees. Additionally, since ConsenSys (the parent company of LINEA) is a traditional company, this may be a way for the project to limit legal risks from the SEC by not assigning any use case to the token until there is a clear regulatory framework.

The token is set to be released at the 10th of September, 2025.

Financially, Linea did not raise funds directly, but its parent company, ConsenSys, has raised $725M - a large enough amount to support long-term development of the project. In addition, ConsenSys holds core Ethereum products like MetaMask and Infura, which can easily support builders and applications within the Linea ecosystem. Moreover, by launching after other L2s like Arbitrum, ZkSync, and Blast, Linea has the opportunity to learn from and leverage their strengths, while avoiding the weaknesses that led to failures.

According to the roadmap, Linea aims to achieve its primary goal of becoming a Type 1 zkEVM by Q1 2026. Following that, by Q2 2026, performance is expected to reach 0.5 gGas/s (approximately 5,000 TPS), which would fulfill the objective to scale Ethereum, deliver a great user experience, and enable real-time proofs on Ethereum. However, that goal is still a long way off. In the near term, the most important updates from Linea will be the implementation of the dual-burn mechanism and Native Yield. Overall, Linea can be seen as a bold experiment: building a public good L2 with ETH native yield, no VCs, and currently no direct token utility, with a mission of positioning itself as an L2 that brings value back to Ethereum. However, this “no token utility” approach also raises important questions. While it helps reduce regulatory risks and reinforces an Ethereum-first alignment, the lack of inherent utility could affect $LINEA’s long-term value capture and token demand. Whether this model can prove sustainable remains to be seen. Lets wait and see how Linea will strengthen Ethereum.

Deep dive into Linea before itsTGE. Explore its zkEVM tech, Ethereum alignment, tokenomics, dual-burn model, ecosystem growth, and future outlook.

Deep Dive: Linea and What You Need to Know Before TGE

Ethereum Institutional Demand And Its Effect on Decentralization

Ethereum is experiencing rapid institutional accumulation through ETFs, corporate treasuries, and direct demand from whales. This raises the question of whether such inflows threaten decentralization, as validator power and governance could become concentrated. The key issue isn’t only who owns ETH, but how that ETH is staked, whether spread through decentralized liquid staking pools or concentrated with custodial validators. This article will analyze on-chain accumulation trends, the operational risks they could potentially introduce, and the possible long-term trade-offs between institutional adoption and decentralization.

: Institutional interest in Ethereum is increasing through ETFs, corporate treasuries, and whale accumulation, with ETH ETFs exceeding $27 billion AUM by August 2025.

Unlike Bitcoin, Ethereum offers staking yields of 3% to 6%, making it a yield-bearing, infrastructure-backed asset.

Exchange balances are at nine-year lows, staking participation is nearing 30% of total supply, and the number of validators has surpassed 1 million.

Validator power risks being concentrated in major custodians, such as Coinbase and Binance, while Lido has a large but more distributed share.

Governance is increasingly favoring large holders, with institutional treasuries and restaking platforms gaining influence across DAOs and protocols.

 Jurisdictional chokepoints create risks, as U.S.-based custodians dominate staking and custody, leaving Ethereum exposed to regulatory pressures.

Institutional adoption can enhance security and legitimacy, but also poses systemic risks if too much control is consolidated.

Ethereum’s long-term trajectory could lead to it becoming a global financial infrastructure, or it may risk transforming into an institutionally controlled settlement layer.

Ethereum (ETH) is evolving from a platform primarily for developers and early adopters to a key player in traditional finance. With billions of dollars entering through exchange-traded funds (ETFs), corporate treasuries, and significant purchases by large investors (referred to as whales), institutions are becoming major contributors to the demand for ETH.

This transition brings both advantages and challenges. On the positive side, institutional staking lends legitimacy, injects capital, and provides stability. However, there is a more profound concern: while institutional staking may appear to enhance security, it also concentrates power in ways that could jeopardize Ethereum’s decentralization.

Where is the institutional demand coming from - and why?

Institutional demand for Ethereum (ETH) has surged, primarily driven by the adoption of ETH exchange-traded funds (ETFs). By August 2025, these ETFs gained over $27 billion in assets under management (AUM), with BlackRock’s ETHA attracting $16.5 billion in AUM alone’. On August 11, 2025, ETH ETFs experienced a record inflow of approximately $990 million, with nearly $635 million raised via BlackRock.

Goldman Sachs leads as the largest institutional holder of ETH ETFs, with $721.8 million in exposure (288,294 ETH), accounting for 29.8% of total institutional exposure’. Other significant players include Jane Street with $190.4 million and Millennium Management with $186.9 million.

The regulatory landscape significantly facilitated this influx, thanks to the SEC’s 2025 utility token framework and the GENIUS Act, which reduced risks and provided a streamlined approval timeline for cryptocurrency ETFs. This environment allowed institutions to view ETH ETFs as compliant yield-generating instruments, offering staking yields of 3-6%.

July and August saw persistent positive inflows, frequently exceeding 100K ETH, matching peak single-day records. Brief outflows occurred in August during increased volatility, yet the ETH price remained above $3K throughout, indicating steady institutional interest.

A significant driver is the conversion of cash reserves into ETH by companies, which has led to corporate ETH treasuries reaching $13 billion, representing 3.04 million ETH held by firms that are pursuing strategic accumulation strategies by forming said treasuries. BitMine Immersion Technologies, the largest ETH treasury holder, has 1.71 million ETH tokens ($7.65 billion), featuring an aggressive accumulation strategy, adding 190,500 ETH within a single week, demonstrating the level at which institutional players are storming the market’. 

SharpLink Gaming follows with 797,704 ETH ($3.6 billion), as the second-largest ETH treasury holder, having increased its holdings by 141.69% within merely 30 days. After raising $172 million through a public equity offering and converting its balance sheet from Bitcoin to Ethereum, Bit Digital has accumulated over 100,000 ETH. This positions the company as one of the largest corporate treasury firms in the world, led by Ethereum veteran Sam Tabar. These treasuries are driven by the ability to stake holdings to earn yields while also benefiting from price appreciation.

Another pillar of massive demand stems from large-scale whale accumulation, encompassing high-net-worth individuals who make strategic purchases of Ethereum. A notable example occurred on August 26, when a 7-year dormant whale, widely referred to as a “Bitcoin OG”, offloaded close to 25,000 BTC to acquire $2.55 billion worth of Ethereum. They offloaded at least $800 million worth of BTC through Hyperunit, a decentralized protocol for secure cross-chain asset trading on the Hyperliquid platform, and immediately staked that entire amount, while using the remainder to open long positions on the Hyperliquid DEX, highlighting the scale of whale participation’.

Additionally, there has been further activity, with nine whale addresses purchasing a cumulative $456.8 million in ETH in a single coordinated move. They sourced these coins through institutional platforms such as BitGo and Galaxy Digital, a pattern indicating that sophisticated investors are utilizing institutional-grade custody and trading infrastructure to build out their ETH positions, mainly due to ETH’s current massive mindshare and potential price upside.

The trend of whale accumulation also involves previously dormant addresses, as evidenced by a whale that had been inactive for four years returning to purchase $28 million in ETH during a price decline as well as the Bitcoin OG. This behavior demonstrates contrarian buying by institutions during market volatility. Furthermore, over seven days, an anonymous address acquired 221,166 ETH (approx. $1 billion), displaying the sustained nature of large-scale accumulation.

Institutional capital is increasingly shifting towards ETH due to three key features: regulatory clarity, yield potential and strategic exposure. ETFs have created a compliant framework, eliminating legal obstacles that previously hindered funds from entering this market. Unlike Bitcoin, ETH offers staking income (ranging from 3% to 6%), making it an attractive yield-bearing asset in a low-return environment. Additionally, ETH is not merely a speculative currency; it plays a crucial role in DeFi, stablecoins, tokenization and rollup ecosystems, positioning it as a “growth asset” aligned with the broader expansion of Web3.

For corporations and whales, the motivations may be even more pronounced. Corporate treasuries can shift idle reserves into productive, yield-generating assets via staking, while whales may see ETH as both a macroeconomic hedge and a leveraged investment in the future of tokenized finance. The emergence of institutional-grade custody solutions provided by firms like Coinbase, BitGo and Galaxy has also reduced operational risks, potentially making significant investments in ETH relatively safer than in previous market cycles.

Institutional buying has significantly transformed Ethereum’s on-chain landscape since ETF inflows began to accelerate in mid-2025. Unlike in previous cycles, the most notable movement has been out of exchanges and into self-custody, staking contracts, and strategic wallets. This shift indicates a clear pattern of supply consolidation and structural demand.

Firstly, the distribution of wallets is changing. While the number of “mega whales” holding over 100,000 ETH has fallen to a decade low, dropping from more than 200 in 2020 to around 70 today, this trend is not entirely bearish. On the contrary, the number of "shark" wallets (those holding between 10,000 and 100,000 ETH) has risen sharply, increasing from 900 to over 1,000 just in August. Much of this growth has been driven by ETF custodians, corporations, and institutional accumulators. In fact, new wallets have received over 78,000 ETH (approximately $358 million) this month, mainly supplied by prime brokers catering to institutional clients. Mid-sized whales, often comprising public companies or ETF custodians, are now the predominant force, creating a broader but more sophisticated distribution of larger wallet holders.

On the smaller end of the spectrum, retail wallet numbers are declining as individuals move their ETH off exchanges or sell into rising prices. Exchange balances have reached nine-year lows, while balances in non-custodial wallets and staking contracts are steadily increasing. In August, the average net outflow from exchanges was 40,000 ETH per day, and only about 5% of the total ETH supply is currently held on exchanges, down from 15% five years ago. This trend reflects a maturing market in which institutions prefer proper custody and long-term holding strategies.

Staking activity shows similar trends. Approximately 29-30% of the total ETH supply is now staked. While Lido’s dominance is waning, currently holding around a quarter of staked ETH, other providers such as Figment, which was the largest gainer of new stakers (almost 344,000), and Coinbase are gaining market share as institutional clients seek regulatory compliance’. The number of validators has reached new highs, surpassing one million, a 30% year-over-year increase driven primarily by corporate and ETF-linked deposits.

Restaking, which involves using staked ETH to secure additional protocols, is also gaining popularity, led by platforms like EigenLayer, which now manages nearly $19 billion and has over 1,500 operators. This trend enhances network security but introduces new risks related to potential slashing events if any issues arise.

Overall, these patterns illustrate the clear on-chain evidence of capital transitioning from retail trading and speculation to longer-term strategies and active participation in network security. The net result is that Ethereum is evolving into a more institutionally held and staked asset, with whales dispersed across a new and expanding class of mid-sized holders. At the same time, exchange and retail balances continue to decline as demand shifts toward yield and custody solutions.

On-chain activity clearly indicates that Ethereum's supply is shifting from retail investors to institutional custody and staking. Consequently, the shift has created a more stable, yield-driven group of holders, but it also means that operational control is becoming concentrated in fewer hands. The next question to consider is whether this growing presence of institutions strengthens or undermines Ethereum’s decentralization and governance.

Ethereum has historically attracted attention due to its decentralization, ensuring that no single entity can dictate the network's future. However, with billions of dollars now being invested through ETFs, custodians, and corporate treasuries, this balance is shifting. The question is no longer just about who owns ETH, but also about who effectively controls it. From validators to governance forums, the accumulation of assets by institutional investors is quietly reshaping the power dynamics within Ethereum.

Validator Power Concentration Despite Growing Numbers

At first glance, the Ethereum validator landscape appears to be becoming increasingly decentralized. The network currently operates with over 1 million active validators, showing a 30% increase from the previous year, indicating broader participation in ensuring network security. However, the operational reality presents a different picture. Binance controls 8.5% of all staked ETH (approximately 3 million ETH, valued at around $13.2 billion), followed closely by Coinbase, which controls almost 7%, which amounts to about 2.5 million ETH valued at around $11 billion, as of August 30th, 2025. This makes Binance and Coinbase the largest single node operators in the network, even though Lido has a larger collective share of 24.27%’.

The concentration of cotrol in the institutional staking processes raises significant concerns. Lido, for example, distributes its 8.74 million ETH across multiple independent operators. In contrast, Binance and Coinbase manage 174,000 validators under a single, unified control. Although the exchange has deployed these validators in various locations, including Japan, Singapore, Ireland, Germany, and Hong Kong, it still maintains centralized operational authority. When we consider this alongside other major exchanges, it becomes clear that a relatively small number of entities control validator operations for a substantial portion of Ethereum's security.

The trend of institutional staking is accelerating the concentration of assets in the market. Goldman Sachs’ approximately $720 million in ETF exposure and $13 billion in corporate treasury holdings are primarily flowing via established custodians instead of independent staking operations. The rapid growth of Figment, which now holds a 4.5% market share, illustrates how professional staking services are meeting the increasing demand from institutional investors. However, this growth often comes at the expense of smaller, independent validators who struggle to meet the regulatory compliance standards required by these institutions.

Governance Weight and Institutional Voting Power

Ethereum's role goes beyond transaction processing; ETH is crucial in governance for DAOs like Uniswap and Aave. Institutional holders such as BlackRock and Goldman Sachs have significant latent governance power, despite low participation rates, as claimed by Cong et al., 2025. Furthermore, their research shows that in established DAOs like Compound, the top 5% of voters already control 75.7% of voting power, with institutions like a16z holding dominant positions. As institutional ETH holdings grow, this could lead to coordinated influence over the protocols and network upgrades.

A notable illustration of governance issues transpired within the Uniswap DAO, which is a prominent decentralized exchange, where a singular delegate wallet affiliated with a major venture capital firm wielded substantial influence over the outcome of a proposal to activate the protocol fee switch. On-chain analysis has shown that a16z, one of Uniswap’s largest investors, has strategically distributed $UNI tokens across numerous wallets. Each wallet received just enough tokens to submit governance proposals, collectively controlling a significant proportion of $UNI needed for voting decisions. During the governance dispute over the BNB Chain deployment, a16z allocated 15 million $UNI in support of their favored option, while actually holding close to 55 million $UNI, over 5% of the total supply. Furthermore, even when these voting powers were “delegated” to universities and research institutions, a16z maintained the ability to reclaim them at any moment. This control allowed major token holders to propose and enact decisions without border community consensus, raising considerable concerns in the industry about the integrity of decentralized governance and highlighting how concentrated token ownership can diminish genuine democratic participation in DAOs.

Restaking through EigenLayer allows staked ETH to secure multiple protocols simultaneously. This means that one institution’s staked ETH can influence governance and security across the entire ecosystem. With $19 billion in TVL and more than 1,500 operators, there is a risk that large custodians or pools could dominate the landscape. This dominance could lead to coordinated voting, governance, and risk management that extends beyond Ethereum itself. While this setup can enhance both yield and influence, it also introduces “correlated risk.” Issues or slashing in one protocol could quickly affect many others, amplifying the consequences of any mistake or conflict. As institutional involvement increases, the risks of concentrated control and systemic outcomes become more significant.

Jurisdictional Concentration and Regulatory Chokepoints

One of the most significant threats to decentralization comes from the concentration of jurisdiction among major staking providers. Companies like Coinbase, Gemini, and BitGo, all based in the US, serve as primary custodians for institutional ETH holdings. This creates a potential chokepoint that regulators could exploit. There is historical precedent for this risk: during the 2022 Tornado Cash sanctions, over 52% of Ethereum blocks were constructed by relays that excluded sanctioned addresses, highlighting how regulatory pressure can lead to de facto censorship.

The debate surrounding compliance with the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) highlights the ongoing tension between the principles of decentralization and the practicalities of regulation. US-based validators could face severe penalties, including potential criminal liability of up to 20 years in prison, for processing transactions involving sanctioned addresses. This creates strong incentives for preemptive censorship.

Implementing Fork-Choice Enforced Inclusion Lists (FOCIL) would require validators to include specific transactions, which would reduce their ability to censor transactions based on legal or regulatory orders. However, this mandate could significantly increase legal risks, particularly for US-based operators. They might encounter regulatory conflicts if they are compelled to process transactions involving sanctioned addresses. Given the precedent set by previous actions from the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and the increasing number of custodial validators based in the U.S., it is likely that such proposals would attract heightened scrutiny and potential enforcement actions from regulators. This situation could make the adoption of FOCIL controversial and legally challenging for operators under U.S. jurisdiction.

Additionally, while geographic distribution of validators may offer some level of protection, it is limited when operational control remains centralized within a specific jurisdiction. For instance, Coinbase's global deployment of validators does not eliminate US regulatory authority over its operational decisions. Similarly, institutional ETF custody managed by US-based providers subjects billions in ETH to potential regulatory interference, regardless of the locations of the underlying validators.

Centralization Risks vs. Institutional Benefits

The surge in institutional adoption has mixed effects on Ethereum's decentralization. Positive outcomes include increased validators, enhanced infrastructure, and reduced reliance on retail speculation, with Coinbase demonstrating high uptime and security. Professional staking services like Figment facilitate regulatory compliance, potentially broadening institutional involvement due to upcoming frameworks like the SEC's 2025 utility token regulations.

However, centralization pressures are rising, as institutional needs tend to favor large, professionally managed validators. Complex multi-module restaking benefits those with extensive infrastructure, creating economies of scale that smaller operators struggle to achieve, further consolidating control among sophisticated institutions.

Ethereum is currently seeing significant involvement from institutional investors, which highlights a complex issue known as the "decentralization paradox." To the casual observer, ETH appears more secure than ever, as large institutions are staking billions, operating professional infrastructure, and lending the network an aura of legitimacy and stability. This gives the impression of enhanced security, with improved uptime, reduced risks of slashing, and more predictable operations. However, this situation can amount to pseudo security. The increasing concentration of staking power among a small number of custodians introduces systemic vulnerabilities. This consolidation of control undermines decentralization, making Ethereum more susceptible to coordinated failures, regulatory pressures, or censorship.

Institutional participation has brought benefits, including improved resilience, deeper staking, enhanced infrastructure, and reduced volatility. However, it has also shifted governance and restaking power towards larger holders. The most significant risk lies in jurisdiction: Ethereum’s technical decentralization loses significance if regulators can pressure a few custodians to enforce censorship.

Moving forward, the challenge will be to harness the long-term advantages of institutional involvement without undermining the network’s core principle of decentralization. Whether Ethereum evolves into a resilient decentralized infrastructure or becomes dominated by institutional control will depend on how this balance is managed in the coming years.

Should the prevailing trend of restaking and institutional accumulation persist, the long-term dynamics of Ethereum may undergo a substantial transformation. The rise of ETFs, corporate treasuries, and significant whale wallets as influential entities indicates that an increasing volume of ETH is likely to be retained, staked, and governed by a more concentrated cohort of sophisticated investors and institutional custodians. This transition could foster greater stability and vital liquidity, ultimately positioning Ethereum as a fundamental pillar for global settlements, tokenized assets, stablecoins, and programmable finance.

On the positive front, institutional capital plays a pivotal role in enhancing infrastructure, mitigating volatility, and bolstering network security. Significant protocol upgrades, such as Pectra and Dencun, are further refining the network’s efficiency and utility, enabling Ethereum to facilitate over $28 trillion in annual stablecoin transactions while retaining a 61% dominance in DeFi TVL. The flywheel effect suggests that increased institutional staking could lead to a tighter supply, thereby pushing ETH towards a deflationary model and supporting price targets up to $25,000 by 2028, contingent upon regulatory clarity and ongoing adoption.

However, there are considerable trade-offs to contemplate. Should ETH remain predominantly concentrated within custodial services and pooled platforms, a significant risk arises that validator power, voting influence within DAOs, and operational control could become increasingly centralized. Such centralization would undermine the fundamental objectives of censorship resistance and decentralization. Institutional restakers on platforms like EigenLayer, which currently boasts a TVL of $19 billion and continues to expand, may evolve into validators with extremely high levels of influence. These entities could potentially wield considerable influence over outcomes across multiple networks if governance transitions from a passive to an active state.

Another significant concern is jurisdictional risk. Substantial staking via US-based custodians, such as Coinbase and Gemini, raises concerns about regulatory chokepoints. This scenario raises concerns that a limited number of entities, possibly even the regulators of a single nation, could alter the network's operational framework or impose compliance measures. The tension between global accessibility and local governance could likely present a considerable challenge as traditional finance increasingly permeates the cryptocurrency ecosystem.

The institutional adoption of Ethereum is enhancing its legitimacy and utility as a programmable infrastructure. However, it is simultaneously redefining the concept of decentralization. Should current trends persist, the network may become increasingly professionally managed and resilient, yet it could also become more vulnerable to centralized influence and regulatory intervention. The principal challenge for the Ethereum community and its ecosystem will be to uphold diversity in governance and operational fragmentation. In this manner, the burgeoning institutional investments can continue to fortify, rather than undermine, the foundational principles of decentralized finance.

Ethereum Institutional Demand is rising via ETFs, treasuries & whales. Does this growth strengthen or threaten decentralization?

Ethereum Institutional Demand: Risks, Opportunities & the Decentralization Paradox

The Rise of Next-Gen Stablecoin Projects: WLFI, Plasma, and Ethena

In recent times, the stablecoin sector in crypto has been attracting much attention because of the emergence of outstanding projects. Notably, there is World Liberty Financial with the backing of the Trump family, and Plasma with the support of Tether. In addition, it is impossible not to mention Ethena, a stablecoin project that has been rising strongly with a TVL of more than 12 billion dollars. In this article, let’s go deeper into these three prominent projects.

: These projects highlight the rapid growth of 

World Liberty Financial is a DeFi project announced by Donald Trump in September 2024, with the participation of his two sons, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. The platform focuses on developing on-chain products including stablecoins, lending, and borrowing, with the ambition of becoming the DeFi bank for Americans. In addition to the Trump family, the WLFI team also includes finance and real estate figures such as Chase Herro, Zak Folkman, Steven Witkoff, and Zach Witkoff, along with the advisory support of Justin Sun.

The heart of the WLFI ecosystem is USD1. Similar to USDT and USDC, USD1 is a stablecoin pegged 1:1 to the US dollar, fully backed by cash and short-term government bonds.

USD1 is used for cross-border payments, DeFi, and has already been integrated on several CEXs such as KuCoin, Coinbase, and Gate.io. In addition, USD1 is integrated with Chainlink CCIP (Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol). This is a leading interoperability solution in DeFi, which currently secures tens of billions of dollars in assets. CCIP comes with robust security mechanisms and Proof-of-Reserves, providing users and institutions with greater confidence that every USD1 issued is fully backed by real assets. By August 2025, the total supply of USD1 had surpassed 2.4 billion dollars.

If the US dollar is the foundation of payments, then lending and borrowing will be the engine that generates value. WLFI is developing a lending and borrowing protocol built on the infrastructure of AAVE v3, but aimed at providing a more user-friendly experience for both newcomers and institutions. Along with this, the WLFI app allows users to deposit fiat directly and participate in community governance through token voting in a simpler way. This will create a cycle that transforms WLFI into a money market that can serve as an alternative to traditional banks. Although full of potential, WLFI is still in the building stage and is working to complete its product.

The native token of the ecosystem is $WLFI, with a total supply of 100 billion tokens. Of this amount, 35% is allocated to token sale, 32.5% to community growth and incentives, 30% to initial supporter allocation, and 2.5% to the team and advisors. A key point is that the token is designed solely for governance, meaning it only grants voting rights in the protocol and does not represent equity or profit sharing. This helps WLFI avoid legal risks related to securities, but it also means the token’s value depends entirely on community trust and the attractiveness of governance.

WLFI is one of the largest fundraising projects in crypto during 2024–2025, raising at least $590 million across multiple rounds. Details include:

Public sale: Raised $550 million from more than 85,000 investors across two rounds, at different prices of $0.015 and $0.05.

Private & Strategic Investors: The Aqua1 Foundation from the UAE invested $100 million, while Justin Sun contributed around $90 million. DWF Labs also added $25 million and committed to providing liquidity support for WLFI during its listing phase.

ALT5 Sigma Agreement (August 2025): A commitment of $1.5 billion for WLFI’s treasury strategy, along with the purchase of approximately 7.5% of the total WLFI supply to be added to the treasury.

WLFI stands out thanks to the Trump brand, its large fundraising amount, and the rapid rise of its USD1 stablecoin, which quickly entered the top 6 with a supply of more than 2.4 billion. Overall, the project possesses abundant financial resources, a wide partner network ranging from Binance to ALT5 Sigma, and a large community of investors from the United States.

Stablecoins can be considered one of the most important components of crypto. In the path toward mass adoption, stablecoins can be seen as the best RWA product-market fit, with more than 280 billion dollars in circulation and trillions of dollars in transactions every month. Plasma has emerged as an infrastructure project dedicated entirely to stablecoins, with support from Tether, the company behind today’s leading USDT stablecoin.

Plasma is an L1 blockchain, a sidechain of Bitcoin, yet fully compatible with the EVM. It is designed to become a global payment infrastructure for stablecoins. Unlike Ethereum, Tron, or BNB Chain, Plasma brings several key differences, including free USDT transfers, full EVM compatibility, and high-speed transaction processing, while still inheriting the security of the Bitcoin network.

A Hybrid Architecture Between Bitcoin Security and EVM Convenience

The most distinctive feature of Plasma’s architecture is the combination of two elements that may seem contradictory. On one hand, Plasma uses the PlasmaBFT consensus mechanism, which is developed based on HotStuff (an algorithm capable of processing thousands of transactions per second), delivering high throughput, low latency, and fast finality. On the other hand, the execution layer is built on Reth, an EVM client written in Rust, allowing all dApps from Ethereum to be migrated with minimal modifications.

In terms of security, Plasma anchors its chain state directly to Bitcoin, turning it into a trust-minimized settlement layer that reduces reliance on third parties. This means Plasma inherits Bitcoin’s censorship resistance and the security of the UTXO model. The BTC bridge that Plasma is developing also follows a trust-minimized approach, eliminating the need for custodial entities such as wBTC. Before its mainnet launch, Plasma underwent three rounds of audits with Veda, Spearbit, and Zellic to ensure a high level of security for its infrastructure.

Bitcoin has long been considered the most liquid asset in the crypto market, yet the paradox lies in the fact that its surrounding ecosystem remains relatively underdeveloped. Sidechains or Layer 2s such as Stacks, Rootstock, or Liquid have all attempted to build financial infrastructure for BTC (BTCFi). However, the biggest gap continues to be the lack of stablecoin liquidity. This limitation prevents Bitcoin from becoming the center of activities such as swap, lending, or borrowing as efficiently as Ethereum.

In addition, Plasma is also developing a bridge that allows native BTC to be brought into smart contracts without the need for wrapped tokens or centralized custodians like WBTC or cbBTC. It introduces pBTC, an ERC-20 token backed 1:1 by real BTC and fully compliant with the OFT standard of LayerZero, enabling cross-chain transfers without liquidity fragmentation.

With this combination, Plasma preserves the security and stability of Bitcoin while delivering a smooth and familiar experience for Ethereum developers. This is why many consider Plasma not simply a sidechain but a hybrid infrastructure layer specifically designed for stablecoins. If successful, Plasma will not only be a chain but will also become the SWIFT of the crypto world, bringing USDT closer to the vision of becoming a global payment currency.

Plasma impresses not only with its technology but also with its fundraising campaign. Previously, the project secured $24 million in investment from Founders Fund (Peter Thiel), Bitfinex, Paolo Ardoino (CEO of Tether), and well-known figures in the crypto community such as Cobie.

However, the real breakthrough came from the Public Sale with results beyond expectations: $373 million was committed to purchasing XPL tokens, while the total stablecoins deposited into the Vault system reached $1 billion. This figure is seven times the initial target, making Plasma the fastest blockchain in history to hit the milestone of $1 billion in deposits, surpassing high-profile names like Aptos, Sui, and Sonic.

Regarding the tokenomics, Plasma issued 10 billion XPL at a public sale price of $0.05 per token, equivalent to an FDV of $500 million. This is a moderate valuation compared to the market average, leaving significant room for growth when the token is listed in the current hot stablecoin narrative.

Plasma also has more than 50 partners, focusing on stablecoins and DeFi, with deep integrations to build its ecosystem. These include organizations such as Tether and Binance, as well as leading DeFi projects like AAVE, Fluid, and Pendle. In addition, there is a wide range of notable stablecoin partners, including USDe and USDS.

Ethena is a synthetic dollar stablecoin protocol on Ethereum, providing USDe as a crypto-native monetary solution that does not rely on the traditional banking system, with a delta-hedging mechanism to maintain stability.

Ethena operates on a delta-neutral hedging mechanism to maintain the price of USDe steadily at 1 USD. Users can mint USDe by depositing collateral such as ETH, stETH, BTC, USDT, USDC, or other approved assets. The protocol will automatically open short perpetual futures positions on exchanges such as Bybit and Binance to hedge against the price volatility risk of the collateral.

For example, if a user deposits ETH worth $2,000 and then mints 2,000 USDe, the protocol will open a short ETH perpetual position with a notional value of $2,000. Whether the price goes up or down, the total of the long and short positions remains equal to zero (the initial 1 ETH still holds a value of $2,000), ensuring that the overall value stays stable.

The backing assets are stored on-chain and are maintained in custody by off-exchange providers to reduce counterparty risk.

The yield of USDe is generated from three main sources:

Funding and basis spread from hedging (usually positive due to high leverage demand),

Rewards from liquid stables (such as USDT earning interest on platforms),

And consensus/execution rewards from staked ETH.

Users stake USDe into sUSDe to earn yield, and they can unstake at any time.

The data shows that Ethena is experiencing strong growth, with a TVL of $12.4 billion. USDe supply has reached an all-time high of 12 billion (an increase of more than 100% within one month), demonstrating high adoption from both institutions and retail users. The sUSDe APY of around 9% outperforms traditional fiat interest rates.

From a financial standpoint, the protocol generates revenue from funding spread (mostly positive), rewards from stablecoins, and staked assets. Annual revenue is approximately $307 million, fees are about $914 million, and cumulative gross interest revenue has exceeded $500 million.

In addition, the Reserve Fund is a pool used to cover negative funding, ensuring a stable yield. There are no incentives from token emissions, which helps avoid inflation. Financials are transparent through on-chain dashboards, with revenue distributed primarily to sUSDe holders.

In 2025, Ethena is focusing on the “Convergence” strategy, which is a blockchain initiative aiming to bring DeFi closer to TradFi. The main highlight is iUSDe, which is the institutional version of USDe, and it is designed to integrate yield into the bond market and payment instruments, while also expanding backing assets since BNB, XRP, and HYPE have already been approved.

At the same time, Ethena is launching a Telegram mini-app for payments and savings with sUSDe, and it is also developing additional derivative protocols such as Ethereal (perps) and Derive (options), while expanding into multi-chain. In the long run, Ethena aims to become the “Internet Bond,” which is an asset class that provides higher yield than T-Bills, although major challenges remain because of market volatility and regulatory frameworks.

The greatest strength of Ethena is its ability to generate high yield for stablecoins, which at certain times exceeded 60 percent and is now stabilizing at around 8 to 10 percent. This has allowed USDe to quickly attract capital inflows and rise into the top three stablecoins with more than $12 billion in TVL. With its delta-neutral mechanism, Ethena is both capital-efficient and easily scalable across DeFi as well as CeFi. At the same time, the ENA token is directly tied to revenue when staked, which turns ENA into a cash-flow generating asset and creates a value loop for the entire ecosystem.

However, Ethena also carries risks. In the early stages, most of the yield depended on the funding rate, so when the market corrects, yields could drop to 2 to 4 percent and capital outflows may occur. Relying on CEXs for hedging still exposes the protocol to counterparty risk, while using LSTs as collateral may trigger cascading liquidations if the market becomes highly volatile.

Therefore, Ethena’s backing strategy has undergone a shift. Since the beginning of 2025, the proportion of backing with LSTs compared to the total backing has decreased from 7 percent to 4 percent, while the proportion of backing with stablecoins has increased from 12 percent to 53 percent. This transition shows that Ethena is making a trade-off: instead of relying heavily on LST yield and hedging yield, it is prioritizing stablecoins in order to enhance liquidity and reduce volatility risk. This adjustment also enables USDe to scale more rapidly.

Ethena represents innovation in DeFi stablecoins, with USDe offering high yield and scalability, achieving major milestones such as $12 billion in TVL and $307 million in annual revenue. However, the model remains dependent on the crypto market, with hedging and counterparty risks that need to be closely monitored. The 2025 roadmap promises expansion into TradFi, but success will require both favorable bull market conditions and stronger risk mitigation. Overall, Ethena is suitable for risk-tolerant investors, although diversification is recommended along with careful monitoring of governance updates.

WLFI

Explore next-gen stablecoin projects WLFI, Plasma, and Ethena, Trump-backed, Tether-supported, and $12B TVL growth redefining DeFi finance

The Rise of Next-Gen Stablecoin Projects: WLFI, Plasma & Ethena’s $12B DeFi Disruption

The second half of 2025 is expected to be a breakout period for the crypto market, as many well-invested, high-quality projects are preparing to enter the listing phase. In this article, we will review four notable names: 

What are the highlights and interesting points of these projects? Let’s find out!

, and ecosystem-first tokenomics (no VCs).

There are more and more Layer 2s on Ethereum; however, most recent projects have failed to meet expectations, with only a few leading names built on Optimistic Rollup technology, such as Arbitrum and Optimism, standing out. Starknet and ZkSync, using Zk rollup technology, were once considered strong competitors, but now only see 6-7k daily active users, a disappointing figure after their token launches.

Amid the fierce competition among Layer 2s, Linea zkEVM stands out as a bright spot. Developed by Consensys, a Web3 infrastructure company that has raised up to $725 million at a $7 billion valuation, Linea’s differentiation comes from three main points: Ethereum-aligned, yield native, and network-of-rollups.

Unlike many L2s following the token-first model, Linea remains loyal to Ethereum:

Dual-burn mechanism: 20% of fees are burned in ETH, 80% used to buy & burn LINEA.

Native yield mechanism: staking $ETH on Linea will soon be available (similar to layer 2 Blast).`

Not only does Linea build its own zkEVM Layer 2, but it also introduces Linea Stack, a toolkit that helps projects easily deploy new Layer 2s, similar to OP Stack or Polygon SDK. Notably, Status is the first layer 2 project built using Linea Stack. This strategy allows Linea to:

Create network effects from multiple chains using the same technology.

85% Ecosystem (75% development fund + 10% early users)

Fund management by The Linea Consortium consists of a group of credible Ethereum organizations already significantly contributing to strengthening Ethereum, including @eigen_labs, @ensdomains, @SharpLinkGaming, @ethstatus, and @Consensys.

Besides its strengths, Linea also faces several challenges such as competition from established Layer 2s with strong dApp ecosystems like Arbitrum or Base. In addition, the Linea token still lacks clear utility and mainly depends on burning from gas fees.

Linea could be a bold experiment: building a public-good Layer 2 with ETH-native yield, no VCs, and positioning itself as zkInfra-as-a-Service. But to succeed, Linea needs to prove its utility and create a sustainable flywheel for its ecosystem.

Camp Network - A Dedicated Layer 1 for AI and IP

In the era of rapidly advancing AI, data management and creating valuable models from this data are receiving increasing attention. A critical question arises: Who owns the data, and who gets compensated for the value generated from that data?

Camp Network is one of the pioneering projects built to solve this problem-a place where ownership is recorded, protected, and value flows are distributed fairly.

Camp Network is a Layer 1 blockchain designed with a modular architecture, consisting of two main components:

Base Camp: The primary Layer 1 blockchain optimized for IP management.

Side Camp: Application-specific chains that settle back to Base Camp, providing dedicated blockspace for each app.

Example: An AI uses your image to create new art, and revenue from the new art is split according to rules defined in an on-chain smart contract.

Former bankers lead camp Network from CRV, Raine, Goldman Sachs, and Figma, who have experience in media, M&A, and token design. The project has raised $30 million at a ~$400 million valuation. Currently, Camp Network has not yet launched its mainnet and is expected to release its token in 2025.

Camp Network will face competition from two projects focused on IP x AI-Story and Soneium-both of which are backed by major players such as a16z and Sony. However, the blockchain-based IP x AI market is still in its early stages, and Camp Network could secure significant market share as one of the first movers and trendsetters in this field. Evidence of this is that Camp Network attracted 5 million wallets to its testnet within just two months of launch. Camp Network not only protects IP but also enables AI agents to respect it, create new value, and distribute it fairly via smart contracts-a Layer born for an ethical AI economy.

In this cycle, as base-layer blockchain infrastructure has matured in terms of speed, projects are diversifying into new sectors to solve various problems and attract more users from web2. Among these, SocialFi is a notable trend, with Farcaster standing out as the “Web3 version of Twitter.”

Farcaster is a decentralized social infrastructure platform where identity, data, and social applications are on-chain, scalable, and not controlled by any single party.

Initially, Farcaster used a hybrid architecture, combining on-chain and off-chain storage. Identities, keys, and storage fees are kept on-chain, while content like casts, replies, follows, etc., are stored off-chain. Later, Farcaster introduced Snapchain, a blockchain specialized for social data. All previously off-chain data is now stored on Snapchain.

Snapchain uses blocks to order actions like likes, posts, etc., enabling fast access, easy synchronization, support for data pruning, and the ability to rent storage space instead of paying per transaction. This dramatically improves the user experience, making interactions feel more like Web2.

Mini-apps: Turning Every Post Into a New Experience

Mini-apps are arguably Farcaster’s most unique feature. They allow users to integrate mini-apps directly into their posts and interact on-chain through the post itself-such as minting NFTs, voting, or making payments.

Mini-apps turn the news feed into an app layer for social Web3, creating an ecosystem akin to an App Store right inside the timeline.

Currently, Farcaster has about 20,000-30,000 daily active users (more than Layer 2s like zkSync and Starknet), demonstrating real demand for a web3 social network. Additionally, airdrops from projects like Degen and Procoin have helped attract even more users to Farcaster.

Monad - The Most Anticipated Layer 1 of 2025

Monad is currently one of the most anticipated Layer 1s, with an average of about 1 million daily active wallets over the past 90 days. The project has raised $225M, led by Paradigm, a VC firm known for investing in top projects. Monad’s founder, Keone Hon, has prior experience at Jump Trading (a prominent market maker and VC with strong support for Solana).

Monad has two main distinguishing features:

 Monad is an EVM blockchain, compatible with Solidity-the most widely used programming language in crypto. This compatibility makes it easy to attract developers and enables rapid product launches.

 Monad is the first EVM blockchain to apply parallel execution technology, allowing multiple transactions to be processed simultaneously instead of sequentially. This directly addresses scalability issues faced by other EVM chains.

Besides parallel execution, Monad also employs the optimistic execution model (the same technology used by Layer 2s like Arbitrum and Optimism) to achieve high throughput and efficient transaction processing. In theory, Monad claims to scale up to 

-just slightly less than the max TPS achieved by Solana and Sui.

Parallel execution is the technology used by Solana and Sui as well. However, both Solana and Sui are non-EVM chains, meaning developers may face more obstacles since they must use less popular programming languages.

Even in its testnet phase, Monad has attracted many projects across different sectors, from DePIN to high-frequency trading decentralized exchanges, from gaming to liquid staking.

Monad has also excelled at building community culture through NFT collections.

Notable projects in Monad’s ecosystem include:

 Perpl Trade, Kuru Exchange, Drake Exchange, Bean Exchange

 fantasy.top, Let’s Play Sparkball, Meta Leap

Abstract - From NFT Collection to a Layer 2

When naming iconic NFT collections in web3, Pudgy Penguins is impossible to leave out. Under Luca Netz, Pudgy Penguins has become not only a powerhouse in NFTs but also a brand-building operation with valuable IP (Intellectual Property). The brand has signed retail deals to put products on shelves at Walmart (US), Smyths (UK), and Toys “R” Us (Canada). Building on that brand momentum, in January 2025, Igloo Inc., the parent company of Pudgy Penguins, launched the Abstract chain.

Abstract is an Ethereum Layer-2 blockchain that uses ZK rollups to address Ethereum’s limitations in transaction speed and cost. Unlike many blockchains that focus mainly on DeFi, the Abstract chain is positioned for consumer dApps to attract users in gaming and social. This positioning is natural given that Abstract can tap into the strong, culture-rich community built by Pudgy Penguins.

A key feature is a UX designed to hide the complexity of the blockchain, featuring a global wallet, gasless interactions, and a portal that works like an app store, so users can interact much like they would on Web2.

Currently, Abstract also lets users earn XP points by trying dApps across the Abstract ecosystem, livestreaming gameplay, or holding certain ecosystem NFTs. These XP points may become a key criterion for an airdrop when Abstract launches a token, which also serves as an incentive to attract and retain users.

Discover the top 5 crypto listings for Q3–Q4 2025: Linea, Camp Network, Farcaster, Monad & Abstract. See why they could lead the next bull run.

Insights & Expert Advice on Web3 and Cryptocurrency

Research

Quai Network’s Bold Solution to the Blockchain Trilemma

Aethir Q1 2025 Report: Record Growth in AI & Gaming

How Avalon Labs is Unlocking Bitcoin's $1.4 Trillion DeFi Potential

Insights

Deep Dive: Linea and What You Need to Know Before TGE

Ethereum Institutional Demand: Risks, Opportunities & the Decentralization Paradox

The Rise of Next-Gen Stablecoin Projects: WLFI, Plasma & Ethena’s $12B DeFi Disruption