In late January, according to the latest report released by Bitfinex, the Ethereum mainnet processed 2.88 million transactions in a single day over the past week, setting a new historical record and prompting the market to reassess the scalability effectiveness and fundamental changes of this established public chain. During the same period, the average Gas fees remained relatively low, and there was no large-scale congestion on the chain; meanwhile, over 36 million ETH were staked, accounting for about 30% of the circulating supply, significantly tightening the available liquidity. In the context of high transaction volume, low Gas fees, and high staking rates, the key question is: does this surge in on-chain activity represent a genuine leap in economic activity, or is it merely "noise amplification" diluted by a large number of low-value interactions? The following will analyze the underlying quality and potential risks behind this new high from three perspectives: Ethereum's modular transformation, the usage structure of dollar-denominated assets on Ethereum, and the funding and regulatory environment.
New Transaction High and Reassessment of On-Chain Structure
● Record and Magnitude: The Bitfinex report shows that the Ethereum mainnet processed 2.88 million transactions in a single day, setting a historical high, significantly above the average levels commonly seen during previous bull market phases. This figure represents a magnitude leap in Ethereum's historical range, indicating that after the large-scale launch of Layer 2, the mainnet still maintains a very high frequency of settlement and interaction, rather than being completely "migrated and hollowed out." However, since the briefing did not provide precise comparative data for previous peaks, we can only confirm that this has reached a historical high point, without being able to finely characterize its multiple changes relative to the previous peak.
● Potential for Noise Amplification: In the current public chain environment, low-value behaviors such as address poisoning, bulk airdrop interactions, and mechanical contract rebalancing often significantly inflate the raw transaction count, creating a risk that the single metric of "transaction volume" may be amplified by high-frequency but low economic significance operations. The briefing clearly states that the proportion of address poisoning and wash trading in the 2.88 million transactions is lacking, making it impossible to seriously determine the proportion of noise, and thus we cannot conclude that the active components of this round are denied. It is certain that transaction counting alone is no longer sufficient as a direct proxy for economic activity, requiring more refined structural breakdowns.
● The Paradox of High Volume and Low Fees: According to data sources such as Jinse Finance and Techflow, during this round of transaction highs, average Gas fees remained relatively low, avoiding the congestion scenario seen in early bull markets where Gas prices soared and users were forced to "exit." One interpretation is that modularization and Layer 2 scaling have allowed the mainnet to balance its load better, accommodating more batch settlements and contract calls; another is that the newly added on-chain interactions have limited economic value, and even with a large quantity, they are insufficient to drive up fees. Since the briefing did not provide precise Gas values and historical curves, we can only judge directionally: the coexistence of high transaction volume and low fees at least indicates that Ethereum's engineering capability in handling peak traffic has significantly improved.
● From Total Volume to Structure: In this environment, merely looking at "2.88 million transactions" cannot answer whether Ethereum is more "prosperous." More importantly, it is necessary to break down: how many come from inter-protocol settlements, how many from user-side capital inflows and outflows, how many belong to stablecoin transfers and cross-domain bridging, and how many are purely internal adjustments of contracts. The judgment of on-chain economic activity is shifting from total volume indicators to transaction structure and application types, which is also a prerequisite for understanding the role changes of Ethereum after modularization.
Reconstruction of Mainnet Role under Modular Architecture
● Shift in Role Narrative: Bitfinex pointed out in the report that the Ethereum mainnet is evolving from a "neutral settlement layer" to a "coordination layer," capturing the key turning point under the current modular architecture. The so-called coordination layer does not abandon settlement functions but, beyond security and settlement, takes on state alignment, governance coordination, and data routing among different Layer 2s, Rollups, and applications. Under this concept, the mainnet no longer seeks to handle all terminal transactions but rather acts more like a "coordination hub" in a multi-layer scaling ecosystem.
● Division of Labor between Mainnet and Layer 2: In a clear modular path, the Ethereum mainnet is responsible for security, final settlement, and consensus, while various Layer 2s handle most high-frequency, low-value, and user-sensitive interactions, periodically settling these interactions back to the mainnet through batch packaging and compressed proofs. The briefing explicitly prohibits fabricating specific Layer 2's TVL or TPS data, so this article does not compare individual projects but seeks to understand from a macro structure: the division of labor between the mainnet and Layer 2 essentially outsources "throughput" while keeping "security and finality" at the base layer.
● Batch Settlement and Data Availability: In the context of 2.88 million transactions and low Gas fees, a significant portion of transactions on the mainnet is likely related to batch settlements, state updates, and data availability writes, rather than direct user interactions. In this model, the mainnet primarily assumes the role of "ledger maintainer": on one hand, providing a unified and trustworthy final state for various Layer 2s and applications; on the other hand, coordinating protocol upgrades, parameter adjustments, and cross-domain security rules through governance contracts and system contracts, which also explains why the Ethereum mainnet can maintain high transaction counts without congestion after scaling efforts.
● Impact of Modularization on Performance and Fees: From a macro perspective, the modular architecture, by offloading execution layers, allows high-frequency computations and state storage to be handled externally, enabling the mainnet to accommodate a higher number of "meta-transactions" (such as batch settlements and proof submissions) within a relatively stable Gas range. This means that the actual number of user interactions contained in a single mainnet transaction may significantly increase, enhancing the overall throughput and cost efficiency of the system. However, in the absence of precise split data, we can only confirm that modularization makes "high transaction volume + low Gas" possible, but it cannot simply be equated to linear growth in end-user activity.
36 Million Staked ETH and Funding Constraints from Market Making Cooling
● Staking Shrinks Circulating Supply: According to data sources such as Rhythm and Planet Daily, there are currently over 36 million ETH staked on the Ethereum network, accounting for about 30% of the circulating supply. Such a high staking ratio reflects the trust of validators and long-term participants in the network's security and yield mechanisms, while also substantially reducing the scale of freely circulating tokens in the secondary market, providing a buffer against short-term selling pressure. In this configuration, ETH resembles a form of "productive asset": locked in staking, LPs, and protocol vaults to support network operations and the DeFi ecosystem, rather than being a purely transactional asset.
● Decline in CEX Trading Volume: In contrast to the new highs in on-chain transactions, CryptoOnchain data shows that the daily trading volume of Bitcoin on centralized exchanges has dropped to about 14,000, the lowest level since 2022, indicating a significant decline in traditional CEX market making and active trading. This comparison suggests that liquidity and risk appetite are shifting from CEX to on-chain protocols and multi-layer ecosystems, and it also means that the main battleground for price discovery is increasingly relying on on-chain and derivatives markets rather than single spot matching.
● Strengthening of Internal Circulation: When a high proportion of ETH is staked and the market-making capacity and trading willingness of CEX weaken, on-chain activities are more likely to concentrate on internal protocol circulation: for example, collateralized lending, leveraged re-staking, yield aggregation, and other complex strategies operating frequently within a limited "active circulating supply." This type of internal circulation can significantly increase on-chain transaction counts and asset utilization but may not correspond to a proportional influx of new external funds; rather, it resembles the "rotation" of existing capital among different protocols on-chain.
● Impact on Price Discovery and Depth: This change in funding structure may, on one hand, compress the available tokens for sale in the short term, reducing selling pressure; on the other hand, it amplifies the sensitivity of on-chain indicators and prices to marginal funds. In an environment where the circulating supply tightens and spot depth decreases, large on-chain rebalancing, staking inflows or outflows, or liquidation events may have amplified medium- to long-term impacts on price and volatility. This also means that when interpreting Ethereum's transaction volume and on-chain data, it is necessary to simultaneously assess the funding structure and liquidity carrying capacity, rather than merely looking at superficial "activity."
$180 Billion Scale and $5 Billion Revenue's Double-Edged Effect
● Scale and Status: Research reports indicate that by the fourth quarter of 2025, the total scale of dollar-denominated assets on Ethereum will reach approximately $180 billion, becoming a core underlying asset for network payments, settlements, and DeFi collateral. This scale means that Ethereum is no longer just a "smart contract platform," but rather an important settlement and circulation layer for global dollar-denominated assets, with a large number of on-chain strategies, lending, and pricing logic revolving around these assets, which has a systemic impact on overall network activity and security.
● Revenue and Stickiness: According to Token Terminal data, the annual revenue related to these assets is approximately $5 billion, with an annual scale increment of about $50 billion. Directionally, this reflects the usage stickiness based on these assets: whether in trading, lending, or yield strategies, their role as a unit of account and settlement medium is becoming increasingly solidified, also contributing considerable cash flow to protocols and related infrastructure. However, it is important to emphasize that these data come from a single source, and the briefing explicitly prohibits breaking down the $50 billion annual increment to specific asset or protocol levels; we can only confirm at a macro level that Ethereum's "dollar business" is forming a positive cycle in terms of scale and revenue.
● Activity Structure and Real Economy: Among the 2.88 million transactions, the proportion related to these assets, including transfers, settlements, collateral adjustments, and cross-Layer 2 bridging, is likely not low. Some of these operations correspond to real payments and capital migrations, such as cross-platform transfers, on-chain salaries, and merchant settlements; others are related to leverage and arbitrage strategies, leaning more towards financial-level position management and reallocation. Both will elevate transaction counts, but the former is closer to "real economic activity," while the latter serves as an amplifier at the financial level, making it difficult for a single transaction volume metric to directly reflect the activity level of the real economy.
● Boundaries of Data Interpretation: Although the $5 billion annual revenue and $180 billion scale appear highly attractive, they cannot be simply linearly extrapolated as a long-term sustainable cash flow discount basis. On one hand, this revenue is highly dependent on current fee rates, strategy preferences, and market volatility environments; on the other hand, with the emergence of competitive public chains and other settlement layers, there is a possibility of migration in future scale and revenue. Additionally, due to the single source of data and the briefing's prohibition on breaking down the annual increment of $50 billion at the asset level, investors need to be conservative when using these numbers for valuation, viewing them more as the "capability ceiling" under the current cycle rather than a permanent norm.
Regulatory Shadows over Synthetic Dollars and Funding Migration Paths
● Direction of Regulatory Discussion: Surrounding regulatory topics such as the U.S. CLARITY Act, the market has begun to worry that future compliant dollar-denominated assets will face stricter constraints on revenue distribution, reserve management, and transparency requirements. One of the discussed directional risks is that regulators may impose restrictions on the interest and revenue distribution of compliant products, weakening their appeal to institutions and retail investors. The research report specifically warns against making predictions about the specific timeline or terms of CLARITY's passage, so this article only hints at this policy expectation directionally.
● Alternative Logic of Synthetic Products: As Colin Butler stated, "prohibiting compliant dollar yields may give rise to synthetic dollar products." When on-chain compliant assets find it difficult to distribute yields to holders due to regulation, funds may shift towards "synthetic dollar" assets derived from protocols, over-collateralized, structured through derivatives, or yield-split mechanisms to circumvent direct regulatory scrutiny. These assets may still be dollar-denominated on paper, but behind them are more complex collateral combinations and protocol rules, with risk and return structures significantly different from traditional compliant products.
● Cross-Domain Evasion and Transaction Structure Disturbance: In an environment of heightened regulatory uncertainty, funds are likely to engage in compliant arbitrage through paths such as cross-chain, cross-domain, and synthetic assets: some migrate to other chain ecosystems, some convert into synthetic assets at the protocol layer, and some utilize cross-chain bridges to traverse areas with varying regulatory intensities. This migration not only changes the "geographical location" of transactions (which chain, which layer) but also reshapes the transaction structure on Ethereum— for example, the minting and settlement of synthetic assets, the inflow and outflow of funds through cross-chain bridges, and the secondary circulation of yield certificates will all create new high-frequency interaction patterns on-chain, challenging the existing transaction statistics and risk identification systems.
● Policy Perspective When Interpreting On-Chain Data: In this context, focusing solely on on-chain transaction volume and asset scale can easily overlook the underlying policy expectations and compliance constraints. In the near future, even if the total scale and transaction count of dollar-denominated assets on Ethereum continue to grow, it may not indicate a relaxed regulatory environment; rather, it could be accompanied by a higher degree of structural migration and risk repackaging. Since the briefing emphasizes that specific regulatory timelines should not be speculated, investors need to actively incorporate "policy expectations" into their analytical framework when interpreting on-chain data, rather than retrospectively viewing regulatory impacts as black swans.
Positive Data but Rising Noise: How to Understand This New High
● Strengthening of Surface Signals: From surface data, several key indicators of Ethereum currently present a "collectively positive" picture: 2.88 million transactions in a single day set a new high, average Gas remains low, 36 million ETH staked locks up about 30% of the circulating supply, and the dollar business volume formed by a scale of $180 billion and annual revenue of $5 billion all point to a larger, more efficient, and more liquid network. These data undoubtedly reflect Ethereum's phased achievements in scaling and ecosystem development.
● Mixing of Noise and Deviations: However, the high-frequency interactions on-chain are mixed with address poisoning, wash trading, and internal protocol circulation, combined with the cooling of CEX market making and the on-chain funding structure leaning towards staking and endogenous leverage, further compounded by the expectation that funds may shift towards synthetic assets and cross-domain migration, making any single indicator difficult to fully represent "real prosperity." Transaction volume, staking rates, and scale data are more about describing "the intensity of liquidity and locking" rather than directly answering whether "economic value is synchronously increasing."
● Three Main Evaluation Lines: At the current stage, a more reasonable framework for assessing the health of the Ethereum network needs to consider at least three clues simultaneously: first, transaction quality, which refers to the structural ratio of genuine user interactions, inter-protocol settlements, and low-value noise beneath the total volume; second, sources and destinations of funds, including the distinction between new capital and internal circulation, as well as the directions of cross-chain, cross-Layer 2, and cross-domain migrations; third, sustainability of revenue, assessing the stability of the current $5 billion level of revenue and $180 billion scale under different regulatory, competitive, and fee environments, rather than simply discounting the current situation.
● Neutral but Cautious Conclusion: Overall, the coexistence of the new transaction volume high and low Gas levels indicates that Ethereum's scaling and modularization route has achieved phased success at the engineering level, with the mainnet gradually completing its role transformation from an execution-intensive layer to a coordination and settlement hub. However, against the backdrop of tightening funding structures, weakened market-making capabilities, and rising regulatory uncertainty, the noise and structural distortions in on-chain data are also increasing. A more cautious conclusion is: the effectiveness of scaling has been partially validated, but the true prosperity of the network still needs to be calibrated through continuous tracking of transaction structures, funding flows, and policy evolution for pricing, rather than being swayed by a single record.
Join our community to discuss and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Welfare Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
