Private Order Flows and Builder Bidding Dynamics: The Road to Monopoly in Ethereum's Block Building Market
Shuzheng Wang, Yue Huang, Wenqin Zhang, Yuming Huang, Xuechao Wang, Jing Tang
Abstract
Ethereum, as a representative of Web3, adopts a novel framework called Proposer Builder Separation (PBS) to prevent the centralization of block profits in the hands of institutional Ethereum stakers. Introducing builders to generate blocks based on public transactions, PBS aims to ensure that block profits are distributed among all stakers. Through the auction among builders, only one will win the block in each slot. Ideally, the equilibrium strategy of builders under public information would lead them to bid all block profits. However, builders are now capable of extracting profits from private order flows. In this paper, we explore the effect of PBS with private order flows. Specifically, we propose the asymmetry auction model of MEV-Boost auction. Moreover, we conduct empirical study on Ethereum blocks from January 2023 to May 2024. Our analysis indicates that private order flows contribute to 54.59% of the block value, indicating that different builders will build blocks with different valuations. Interestingly, we find that builders with more private order flows (i.e., higher block valuations) are more likely to win the block, while retain larger proportion of profits. In return, such builders will further attract more private order flows, resulting in a monopolistic market gradually. Our findings reveal that PBS in current stage is unable to balance the profit distribution, which just transits the centralization of block profits from institutional stakers to the monopolistic builder.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 8a617bc0-89ee-43e1-9cff-015f23414eb1Builds on21
- Hawk: The Blockchain Model of Cryptography and Privacy-Preserving Smart ContractsAhmed E. Kosba, Andrew Miller, Elaine Shi, Zikai Wen et al.S&P 2016 · 2,201 citations
- Flash Boys 2.0: Frontrunning in Decentralized Exchanges, Miner Extractable Value, and Consensus InstabilityPhilip Daian, Steven Goldfeder, Tyler Kell, Yunqi Li et al.S&P 2020 · 607 citations
- On the Instability of Bitcoin Without the Block RewardMiles Carlsten, Harry A. Kalodner, S. Matthew Weinberg, Arvind NarayananCCS 2016 · 387 citations
- Quantifying Blockchain Extractable Value: How dark is the forest?Kaihua Qin, Liyi Zhou, Arthur GervaisS&P 2022 · 336 citations
- High-Frequency Trading on Decentralized On-Chain ExchangesLiyi Zhou, Kaihua Qin, Christof Ferreira Torres, Duc Viet Le et al.S&P 2021 · 243 citations
Related papers
- Decentralization of Ethereum's Builder MarketSen Yang, Kartik Nayak, Fan ZhangS&P 2025
- Blockchain CensorshipAnton Wahrstätter, Jens Ernstberger, Aviv Yaish, Liyi Zhou et al.WWW 2024 · 60 citations
- Characterizing Ethereum's Mining Power Decentralization at a Deeper LevelLiyi Zeng, Yang Chen, Shuo Chen, Xian Zhang et al.INFOCOM 2021 · 14 citations
- Non-Atomic Arbitrage in Decentralized FinanceLioba Heimbach, Vabuk Pahari, Eric SchertenleibS&P 2024 · 35 citations
- Speculative Denial-of-Service Attacks In EthereumAviv Yaish, Kaihua Qin, Liyi Zhou, Aviv Zohar et al.USENIX Security 2024 · 38 citations
