The Future Revealed by Robinhood’s Choice: The Era of Single L1 Is Over, and Thousands of Companies Are Moving to Ethereum L2

3-Point Summary

• Robinhood Chain demonstrates why hybrid architecture — Application Layer + L2 + L1 — is becoming the dominant model for onchain finance.
• Revenue distribution reveals a structural imbalance: the application layer captures most value while Ethereum L1, the settlement layer, earns almost nothing.
• This case explains why tens of thousands of companies will adopt Ethereum L1, L2, and Private EVM — and why a redesigned incentive model between layers is essential.

Ethereum’s modular architecture is accelerating — and the next wave of companies will be built across L1, L2, and Private EVM.

20‑Second Shorts Video (Updated July 18, 2026)

The Single‑L1 Era Is Over — Enterprises Are Moving to Ethereum L2
#EndOfSingleL1 #EthereumL2Shift #OnchainEnterpriseWave

Why Robinhood Did Not Choose a Single L1 — And What This Reveals About Ethereum

Robinhood Chain is a representative example of a hybrid application layer that delivers Web2-level user experience while relying on Web3 infrastructure (L2 and L1) for actual financial functionality. In this model, Robinhood handles the user-facing service, UI, accounts, and operations, L2 handles transaction execution, and L1 provides final settlement, security, and liquidity — forming a clear three-layer structure.

For deeper analysis on why the Ethereum L1–L2 structure is becoming the core of future finance, see “Ethereum’s Next Decade: The L2 Revolution Transforming Finance, AI, Gaming, and Social Networks” .

Robinhood Chain generated $816K (89%) in total revenue, while Ethereum L1 earned only 0.15% ($1,538). This shows that the application layer captures most of the user value, while L1 provides essential security, settlement, and finality yet receives almost no economic reward — revealing the reality of the modular Web3 structure.

This example explains why many companies over the next 2–3 years are expected to build L2-based onchain infrastructure rather than using a single L1 directly. It allows them to maintain Web2-level UX while leveraging Web3 scalability and security.

At the same time, it becomes clear why Ethereum’s L1–L2 modular architecture is winning. L2 enables execution and application-layer growth, while L1 provides final settlement, security, and liquidity — functioning as the most valuable settlement layer. Yet within this structure, L1 performs essential duties while receiving minimal economic compensation.

For detailed analysis of how Robinhood Chain implements L1 settlement and L2 execution, see “Settlement on L1, Execution on L2: How Robinhood Chain Set a New Standard for Onchain Finance” .

1) Why Robinhood Did Not Choose Solana, Sui, or Any Single L1

Robinhood was never likely to choose a monolithic single L1 like Solana. They wanted to be a landlord, not a renter.

Choosing a single L1 means the company cannot customize structure, fees, performance, or governance. In other words, it becomes impossible to maintain Web2-level UX while controlling Web3 infrastructure.

Ethereum, on the other hand, provides a modular stack that allows companies to become owners of their onchain infrastructure:

• L1 (Settlement & Security)
• L2 (Execution)
• Private EVM (e.g., Besu)

Through this stack, Robinhood was able to connect its existing Web2 user base directly into Web3. Ethereum won this deal through technical superiority.

2) What Robinhood Chain Reveals — Ethereum L1 Earns Almost Nothing

Robinhood Chain Total Revenue: $816K — Robinhood 89%, Arbitrum 10%, Ethereum L1 0.15% ($1,538)

Ethereum provides the most important function as the global settlement layer, yet receives almost no economic reward.

This structure leads to two opposite interpretations:

If ETH is “money” → Ultra Bullish
More activity → more collateral → more staking → more burn → ETH value increases

If ETH is a “yield asset” → Ultra Bearish
L1 receives almost no economic compensation.

Robinhood Chain exposes the structural distortion in Ethereum’s economic model.

3) Over the Next 2–3 Years, Tens of Thousands of Companies Will Build on L1, L2, and Private EVM

The current structure — where L1 has no economic greed — keeps L1 fees low and helps the entire ecosystem (including L2s) grow. This leads to the following natural outlook:

• Tens of thousands of companies will build on Ethereum L1, Ethereum L2, and Private EVM (Besu, etc.) within 2–3 years.
• All these chains will have full interoperability.
• ETH will strengthen in value through monetary premium, staking, and burn.

Robinhood’s choice is not an exception — it is the first example of what companies will follow.

4) A Healthy Reward Distribution Model Between L1, L2, and Private EVM

The Robinhood Chain case clearly shows that Ethereum L1 currently receives far too little compensation. A new distribution model is needed to reflect the value provided by the settlement layer.

Out of $816K in total revenue, Ethereum earned only $1,538 — just 0.15%. Considering the security, final settlement, liquidity foundation, and monetary asset (ETH) that L1 provides, this is disproportionately low.

The current structure allows the application layer and L2 to capture most economic value, while L1 performs essential duties with almost no reward. For Ethereum to continue functioning as the global settlement layer of the L2 era — enabling ecosystem-wide growth — a healthy reward distribution model is necessary.

In the previous DCT article ( The Future of Blockchain Was Already in the Internet: L1 Public Goods and the L2 Co‑Funding Model ), it was argued that L2 revenues must be reinvested into L1 public goods. This is not a novel invention but a sustainability model already proven for decades in the Internet ecosystem — specifically the cloud–ISP structure, where upper‑layer service revenues continuously fund lower‑layer public infrastructure. The same logic applies directly to Web3.

Proposed Healthy Distribution Model:

The application layer delivers Web2-level UX but relies on Web3 infrastructure (L2 and L1) for actual functionality. Since each layer’s role and contribution are clearly defined, the following distribution is most rational:

• Robinhood — 75% As the application layer, it provides user experience, service operations, and UI — the core of value creation.
• Arbitrum (L2) — 10% As the execution layer, it provides transaction processing, performance, and scalability.
• Ethereum L1 — 15% As the settlement layer, it provides security, finality, liquidity foundation, and the monetary asset (ETH).

Conclusion

Robinhood Chain is a decisive example showing why Ethereum’s modular architecture is winning. It reinforces the outlook that tens of thousands of companies will build on Ethereum L1, Ethereum L2, and Private EVM within the next few years.

However, Ethereum L1 is currently severely undervalued economically. For Ethereum to continue growing as the global settlement layer of the L2 era, the economic reward structure between L1 and L2 must be redesigned into a healthy distribution model that benefits both sides.

Younchan Jung
Researcher exploring structural shifts in AI, blockchain, and the on‑chain economy.

If you would like to read this article in Korean, please click the button below.

Read This Article in Korean →