Ethereum’s Block Production Centralized: 3 Builders Control 90%

• Three builders produce over 90% of Ethereum’s blocks, raising centralization concerns.
• High costs and access barriers prevent new builders from competing effectively.
• 79% of MEV-Boost auctions are efficient, revealing significant system inefficiencies.

Blockchain reporter Martin Hiesboeck recently shared a study that raised concerns about Ethereum’s decentralization. The report investigates the reasons behind this trend and examines the security implications for MEV-Boost auctions.

The study’s findings reveal that a mere three builders now create over 90% of Ethereum’s blocks. This indicates a high degree of centralization in block production on a blockchain often lauded for its security and decentralized nature.

Ethereum introduced a builder market mechanism through MEV-Boost auctions to address centralization issues caused by Maximal Extractable Value (MEV). However, two years after its implementation, this market has become significantly centralized.

Moreover, the study highlighted one of Ethereum’s key mechanisms—Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS). PBS is designed to separate the roles of creating and proposing blocks within the Ethereum network. Block proposers are validator nodes selected by the network to submit blocks. Builders are responsible for block construction to maximize rewards from transaction fees and MEV opportunities.

The study highlights several key findings that underscore inefficiencies in the current system. Access to private order flows poses a major hurdle for new builders, potentially costing up to 1.4 ETH. This high cost creates an entry barrier, preventing new participants from effectively competing with established players.

Furthermore, the study investigates the inequality among builders’ block-building capabilities. Per the report, approximately 88% of MEV-Boost auctions were competitive, but 12% were not. This result indicates disparities among builders. Additionally, it suggests unequal access to the resources and opportunities necessary to compete on an even playing field.

Importantly, the finding notes that only 79% of the auctions were considered efficient, highlighting potential inefficiencies in the current system. This shows that while Ethereum aims to be a decentralized platform, significant centralization in block production persists.

The study emphasizes the need for additional measures to address these centralization issues. Ensuring a more equitable and secure blockchain environment requires ongoing efforts to reduce barriers to entry and promote fair competition among builders.