Ethereum remains one of the most influential blockchains ever built. It pioneered the concept of programmable money, laid the foundation for decentralized finance (DeFi), and continues to host the most secure and battle-tested smart contracts in the crypto industry.
By traditional metrics, Ethereum’s dominance appears unquestionable. It boasts the deepest developer ecosystem, the highest Total Value Locked (TVL), and plays a central role in regulated stablecoin settlements worldwide. From tokenized treasuries to institutional-grade DeFi protocols, Ethereum has long been considered the default settlement layer of crypto.
However, technological obsolescence rarely arrives as a sudden collapse. Instead, it unfolds quietly—hidden behind backward-looking metrics that celebrate past success rather than future relevance.
Within the Ethereum community, the phrase “we still have TVL” has become shorthand for this contradiction. TVL was once the gold standard of success, but increasingly it reflects capital sitting idle as collateral rather than money actively moving through the economy.
The growing concern is that Ethereum is leaning on legacy indicators while the velocity of capital is shifting elsewhere. Whether this divergence will still matter by 2030 has become one of the most important questions facing the entire crypto industry.
The Data Divergence
The long-discussed “flippening” narrative has resurfaced—this time driven not by market capitalization, but by activity.
According to Nansen, Ethereum’s annualized revenue has fallen roughly 76% year-over-year, dropping to around $604 million. This decline followed major upgrades such as Dencun and Fusaka, which significantly reduced the fees paid by Layer 2 networks to Ethereum’s base layer.
In contrast, Solana generated approximately $657 million over the same period, while TRON earned nearly $601 million, largely fueled by high stablecoin velocity across emerging markets.
The gap becomes even more pronounced when viewed through the lens of Artemis, a data platform that prioritizes user behavior over capital depth. In 2025 alone, Solana processed around 98 million monthly active users and more than 34 billion transactions, outperforming Ethereum across most high-frequency usage metrics.
Alex Svanevik, CEO of Nansen, has warned that dismissing these indicators could foster a dangerous sense of complacency. According to him, Ethereum must remain in a constant state of vigilance—even while TVL remains elevated. The issue is not merely competition, but the temptation to defend leadership using metrics that are becoming less relevant as crypto’s primary use cases evolve.
Volume vs. Economic Density
A fair assessment, however, requires nuance.
While Artemis data shows Solana winning the volume war, Ethereum is arguably fighting a different battle: economic density.
A substantial portion of Solana’s 34 billion transactions originates from arbitrage bots, MEV strategies, and consensus-related messages. These activities generate massive throughput, but often carry lower economic value per byte of data compared to Ethereum’s high-value settlements, institutional transfers, and large-scale DeFi operations.
As a result, the market appears to be bifurcating. Solana is increasingly positioning itself as the “NASDAQ” of high-speed, high-frequency crypto transactions, while Ethereum functions more like “FedWire”—a settlement layer optimized for finality, security, and trust.
The Crisis of Urgency
Still, dismissing competitors as “spam-driven” risks missing a deeper cultural shift.
The true threat to Ethereum is not simply user migration, but the erosion of urgency—the sense that retaining users requires relentless execution. That urgency, critics argue, has been missing for years.
Kyle Samani, Managing Partner at Multicoin Capital, famously summarized this frustration when explaining his gradual exit from the Ethereum ecosystem. He traced his loss of conviction back to Devcon3 in Cancun (November 2017)—a moment when ETH became the fastest asset in history to reach a $100 billion market cap. Gas fees were exploding, scalability was urgent, yet progress felt slow and fragmented.
This lack of a “wartime mindset” exposes Ethereum to a MySpace-style risk: not disappearing outright, but losing relevance as engagement migrates toward platforms offering smoother, faster, and more intuitive user experiences.
Layer 2s: Solution or Structural Risk?
Ethereum’s answer to scalability has largely been Layer 2 rollups such as Base, Arbitrum, and Optimism. These solutions have dramatically reduced transaction fees, but they’ve also introduced a fragmented user experience.
Liquidity is now scattered across multiple rollups, bridges add friction, and composability—the original superpower of Ethereum—has weakened. Meanwhile, as L2s pay less in data availability fees, the direct economic link between user activity and ETH value accrual has become less clear.
The risk is structural: Ethereum may remain the security backbone of the ecosystem, while profit margins, user loyalty, and brand gravity migrate upward to L2s.
A Shift Toward Acceleration
Recognizing these challenges, the Ethereum Foundation has begun to adjust its operational posture.
The long-standing philosophy of “protocol ossification”—changing as little as possible—has softened since early 2025. The new priority is faster iteration and tangible performance improvements.
Leadership changes have reinforced this shift. The appointment of Tomasz Stańczak, founder of Nethermind, alongside Hsiao-Wei Wang as Co-Executive Directors signals a renewed emphasis on engineering urgency.
This pivot is already visible through upgrades such as Pectra and Fusaka, deployed this year. Beyond that, Justin Drake’s proposed Beam Chain roadmap aims to overhaul Ethereum’s consensus layer entirely—targeting 4-second slot times and single-slot finality.
If successful, Ethereum would directly compete with integrated high-performance chains like Solana—without sacrificing decentralization, the very property that makes ETH a premium collateral asset.
The Final Verdict
The argument “we still have TVL” offers comfort rooted in the past. But liquidity is ruthlessly pragmatic—it flows to where it is treated best.
Ethereum’s bullish thesis remains intact, but it now hinges almost entirely on execution. If Beam Chain is delivered swiftly and Layer 2 fragmentation is resolved into a cohesive, unified user experience, Ethereum could solidify its role as the world’s global settlement layer.
If not—if usage continues to explode on high-speed chains while Ethereum becomes primarily a collateral warehouse—the network risks becoming systemically important yet commercially secondary.
By 2030, markets may care less about the history of smart contracts and far more about invisible, frictionless infrastructure.
The coming years will determine whether Ethereum remains the default choice for that infrastructure—or evolves into a specialized component within a much larger, more competitive landscape.
👉 Follow for more deep dives on crypto, blockchain infrastructure, and market narratives shaping the next decade.
