base

What growthepie.com Shows About Ethereum L2s That Almost Nobody Is Reading
Most people track price. The real alpha is in the data nobody bothers to pull.
growthepie.com is an open analytics platform tracking every Ethereum L2 across active addresses, throughput, transaction costs, TVL, stablecoin supply, profit, and sequencer revenue. It is one of the most data-rich sources in crypto and one of the least cited in mainstream discourse.
I went through it chain by chain. Here is what I found;
The Dominant Optimistic Rollups — And Why TVL Is Lying to You
Three chains control roughly 90% of all L2 transaction volume: #Base , #ARBİTRUM One, and #OP Mainnet. But the metrics most people track TVL rankings are telling the wrong story.
Base holds $12.8B in TVL, but that is not its most important number. Its most important number is 87%. That is its onchain profit margin. In 2025, Base generated $80M in onchain profit more than three times what Arbitrum earned on roughly $16.9B in TVL. In February 2026, Base processed $164 billion in a single day of stablecoin transactions, surpassing Ethereum mainnet by more than 3×. Its average transaction cost sits at roughly $0.02 — the lowest of any major L2. Daily active addresses hit a record 3.6 million. Base has no token. Every dollar of sequencer profit flows to Coinbase. The play here is the ecosystem: Aerodrome, Morpho, Aave-on-Base.
Arbitrum One leads TVL at $16.9B, about 40–44% of the entire L2 market. But its 2025 onchain profit was $25M. Base earned $80M. That divergence is the signal. Arbitrum's real moat is not its TVL headline; it is its $4.2B in stablecoin reserves, the deepest stablecoin liquidity pool on any L2 anywhere. GMX, Aave, Uniswap, Camelot, and Curve sit on top of that liquidity. The ARB token currently trades at a P/S ratio of approximately 149×, which suggests significant overvaluation relative to current revenue. Watch fee recovery before sizing in.
OP Mainnet looks weak on its own dashboard: $1.9B standalone TVL, $3.8M in 2025 profit. But this is where most analysts stop and where the real insight begins. Optimism's Superchain strategy means Base, Zora, Mode, and World Chain all built on the OP Stack, pay sequencer rent back into the Optimism treasury. The economic footprint of OP is 5–10× what its standalone dashboard shows. In April 2026, ether.fi migrated $220M in TVL to OP Mainnet with zero downtime across 70,000 active payment cards and 300,000 user accounts. The Superchain flywheel is invisible unless you look at the aggregated revenue flow. The OP token captures it.
The ZK Challenger Tier — Four Chains, Four Very Different Risk Profiles
ZK rollups hold roughly 20% of total L2 TVL. That share has been stable, but the dynamics within it are not.
zkSync Era is the largest ZK rollup by raw TVL, though figures vary significantly by source methodology ($400M to $4.1B depending on whether you count bridge TVL or protocol TVL). Its per-transaction cost is approximately $0.07, and it earned $23M in revenue in the first half of 2024. The structural challenge is Type 4 EVM compatibility, developers have to rewrite contracts, which slows migration from Ethereum. Ongoing token unlock tranches have created persistent sell pressure. The real catalyst to watch is ZK Stack: Matter Labs is enabling third parties to launch their own app-chains using zkSync's proving infrastructure, which could drive a utilisation surge that the token has not yet priced in.
Starknet has the most differentiated narrative in the entire L2 space right now. The strkBTC initiative enabling Bitcoin staking and DeFi on Starknet via a ZK-verified bridge launched in May 2026 and triggered a 50% price surge. Over 1,700 $BTC have already been staked. The Nightfall privacy integration (EY's protocol) and the STRK20 native privacy standard make Starknet the only rollup actively pursuing quantum-resistant, institutional private transactions. This is genuinely distinct. The problem is tokenomics: 38.21% of supply is allocated to early contributors and investors, with monthly unlocks running until March 2027. A 127M $STRK unlock hit in May 2026 alone. Strong narrative, persistent headwind. You need to hold the thesis through monthly sell pressure.
Linea is the most underreported chain in the ZK tier. Built by Consensys the company behind MetaMask it earned $36.6M in revenue in 2024. That is more than OP Mainnet earned. Almost nobody was talking about it. As a Type 2 zkEVM, it is the most Solidity-compatible ZK chain, meaning existing Ethereum contracts migrate with minimal changes. The distribution moat is structural: Linea is one click away for every MetaMask user over 30 million wallet holders. That default integration is worth more than most people's TVL analysis gives it credit for.
Scroll_ZKP has a more complicated story than it appears. The $SCR token launched in October 2024 via @binance launchpad, two airdrop seasons have already been distributed. Only 19% of the total 1 billion supply is currently circulating, with the next major cliff unlock hitting in October 2026 and the full vesting schedule running to 2028. That means 81% of supply is still locked, significant dilution risk ahead. The revenue picture is also messier than the $35M 2024 figure suggests: by late 2025, on-chain data via @growthepie_eth showed Scroll running negative net revenue fees collected were not covering the costs being paid to Ethereum. Add a governance controversy in April 2026, where the Foundation proposed replacing its security council with a team-controlled multisig, and this is a chain trading primarily on its ZK technology credibility rather than economic fundamentals. The tech is genuinely strong, Type 2 SNARK, audited by Trail of Bits and OpenZeppelin, but the tokenomics and governance trajectory deserve scrutiny before sizing a position.
The Hidden Signals — What growthepie Shows That Price Charts Never Will
This is the batch that matters most. These are the signals sitting in the data that the majority of crypto Twitter is not reading.
Base's profit margin is more important than its TVL. An 87% onchain profit margin at $0.02 per transaction is structurally superior to any L1 on earth. Ethereum mainnet operates at far lower margins with far higher costs. The fact that Base produces this margin while having the lowest fees in the space is not a coincidence it is the outcome of EIP-4844 dramatically reducing data posting costs while Base's Coinbase-driven volume keeps revenue high.
Arbitrum's TVL lead is a liquidity moat, not a growth signal. The $4.2B in stablecoin reserves on Arbitrum is the real barrier to entry for competitors. Liquidity begets liquidity. But the P/S of 149× on ARB means the token is pricing in growth that has not materialised in revenue terms. The divergence between TVL rank and profit rank is the core tension in the ARB thesis.
OP's Superchain revenue is an accounting trick that works in your favour. The standalone OP dashboard makes Optimism look like it is declining. The Superchain view makes it look like a protocol tax on every Base transaction. Both are true. The question is which lens you apply when valuing OP.
Scroll's asymmetry is in the unlock calendar. With 81% of $SCR supply still locked and the next major cliff not until October 2026, near-term sell pressure is structurally lower than peers but the dilution runway to 2028 is real. The tech credibility is there; the governance and revenue trajectory need watching before it becomes a clean thesis.
Linea's MetaMask distribution is a moat nobody is pricing. 30 million wallet users with Linea as a native option is not a small thing. It is the same distribution advantage Coinbase gave Base — except it has not translated into TVL yet. When it does, the move will have already happened.
Polygon PoS is the silent giant. growthepie data shows 82 million organic transactions in 2024 surpassing Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Base. 4.5 million monthly #stablecoin users, more than Ethereum mainnet, Base, and Solana combined. Polygon dominates small-transaction use cases and developing-market stablecoin flows. This is visible on growthepie. It does not show up in the TVL narratives that dominate X.
TVL Market Share vs Profit Efficiency — The Table That Reframes Everything
When you put TVL share and profit side by side, the story inverts:
TVL variation reflects methodology differences between DeFiLlama, L2Beat, and growthepie (bridge TVL vs protocol TVL vs total value secured).
The takeaway is simple: Base is producing almost $60M more in annual profit than Arbitrum on $4B less in TVL. If Base had a token, this spread would be the loudest conversation in DeFi.
The Rent Paid to Ethereum — The Metric Nobody Talks About
growthepie tracks a metric called "rent paid" the amount each L2 pays to Ethereum mainnet for data availability and security.
In 2025, all L2 networks combined paid approximately $10 million in rent to Ethereum. Their combined revenue was $129 million. They kept $119 million as profit.
This is the direct consequence of EIP-4844 (the Dencun upgrade, March 2024), which cut L2 data posting costs by 80–90% by introducing blob transactions. The upgrade was celebrated as a user fee reduction. It was also the moment L2s became extraordinarily profitable businesses.
Ethereum, meanwhile, transitioned into an inflationary state. It sacrificed over $100 million in guaranteed fee revenue to subsidise L2 growth. The bet is long-term: if L2 activity scales sufficiently, demand for blob space will rise and fees will return to Ethereum. That has not happened yet at scale.
The rent-paid-to-revenue ratio is the cleanest measure of how efficiently a chain is scaling. Lower ratio means the chain is keeping more of what it earns. Base's ratio is the best in the ecosystem.
Bull Run Readiness — How Each Chain Scores on What Actually Matters
Scoring across six factors: TVL depth, profit margin, stablecoin presence, token unlock risk (inverted), narrative strength, and ecosystem moat.
Base — 9.1/10. Highest profit efficiency. Lowest fees. Coinbase distribution. 87% margin. $164B daily stablecoin volume. No token means zero unlock pressure. The bull run play here is ecosystem tokens, not a native chain token.
Arbitrum — 7.8/10. Deepest DeFi stack in L2. $4.2B stablecoin moat. But ARB token is pricing growth that revenue does not yet justify. High-beta when altseason arrives. Watch the P/S compression trade.
OP Mainnet — 7.4/10. Superchain revenue is systematically undervalued by standalone metrics. OP token captures protocol fees across every child chain. Structural undervaluation if the Superchain flywheel accelerates.
Scroll — 7.1/10. Pre-TGE with $35M in demonstrated revenue. The cleanest asymmetric setup in ZK. Zero unlock pressure until TGE. TGE timing is the single catalyst to monitor.
Linea — 6.8/10. $36.6M 2024 revenue. MetaMask distribution moat. Type 2 compatibility. Most underreported ZK chain relative to its real competitive position. No token yet either.
Starknet — 5.9/10. Best narrative differentiation (BTCFi, ZK-verified bridge, quantum-resistant privacy). Monthly token unlocks through March 2027 are the ceiling on near-term price. Strong conviction thesis for patient holders past the unlock schedule.
zkSync Era — 5.4/10. Solid technology, real activity, but Type 4 migration friction and ongoing token unlocks have suppressed both developer migration and token price. ZK Stack app-chain launches are the event to watch.
The One Framework That Changes How You Read L2 Data
Most people open a price chart. A smaller number check TVL on DeFiLlama. Almost nobody pulls up growthepie and reads profit margins, rent paid, stablecoin supply growth, and daily active address trends simultaneously.
When you do, three things become clear:
Profit margin beats TVL as a quality signal. Base proved this in 2025.Token unlock schedules are more important than narrative. Starknet has the best story and the worst unlock calendar. Scroll has no story yet and no unlock pressure. The trade is obvious.Distribution moats are invisible until they are not. MetaMask built Linea's moat quietly. Coinbase built Base's moat the same way. By the time the TVL reflects it, the move has already happened.
The data is public. growthepie publishes all of it for free.
Most people just are not reading it.
Data sourced from growthepie.com, cross-referenced with DeFiLlama, L2Beat, and on-chain reports. May 2026. Not financial advice. Always do your own research.

While Bitcoin consolidates, thousands of memecoins are born every single day on Solana ($SOL ) and Base. Stories of turning $100 into $50,000 overnight are driving retail investors crazy. But here is the brutal reality: 99% of these tokens are pure scams (Rug Pulls), designed to drain your wallet in 5 minutes flat.
​How do "Smart Money" players hunt for gems in a mountain of trash while keeping their capital safe? Let’s break down the golden rules of survival.
​The 3 Critical Contract Rules (Anti-Scam Checklist)
​Before hitting that "Buy" button on a DEX, copy the token's contract address (CA) and run it through safety scanners (like RugCheck for Solana or Token Sniffer):
​🛑 Mint Function: It must be Revoked. If the mint authority is still active, the developer can print a trillion new tokens out of thin air and instantly dump the price to absolute zero.
​🔒 Liquidity Pool (LP Locked): The liquidity must be burned or heavily locked. If the LP is unlocked, the creator can pull all the underlying $SOL / $USDC out of the pool at any moment, leaving you holding worthless bags.
​👥 Top Holders (Insiders): Check the supply distribution using tools like Bubblemaps. If the top 10 wallets hold more than 20% of the total supply (and they are linked together), it’s a cluster of developer wallets. They are just waiting for you to add your liquidity so they can crush the chart.
​The Illusion of Volume (Wash Trading)
​Never trust massive green candles right after launch. Scammers use AI-powered bots that cycle dust amounts between 10-20 different wallets, creating a false illusion of huge trading volume and wild FOMO. If the chart is pumping but the project’s socials are dead silent — you are walking straight into a slaughterhouse.
​💬 My Take: Memecoins are the Wild West of 2026. You can absolutely pull 100x gains here, but only if you treat it as a mathematical game of probability, not a belief in some "great project utility." Never buy into the hype with emotions, and only risk capital that you are 100% prepared to lose right now.
​What’s your memecoin track record? 👇 Have you ever been brutally rugged, or did you manage to bag a 10x gem? Share your wildest shitcoin stories in the comments below!
​#memecoins #solana #Base #cryptotrading #Rugpull

This article serves as a public verification statement for CoinMarketCap Ticket #1364560 regarding the official $BANGKAR project
$BANGKAR is a community-driven project connected to the Base network and Zora creator ecosystem, exploring SocialFi, creator participation, and on-chain community interaction.
Official Contract Address:
0xc8707166db335febfa8846995f440dfacc181ee3
Official Project Links:
bangkarbuakar.taplink.bio/zora.co/bangkarbase.app/coin/base-mainnet/0xc8707166db335febfa8846995f440dfacc181ee3x.com/bangkarbuark
This Binance Square article confirms that:
the official project team controls the associated social accounts,the submitted contract address belongs to the official $BANGKAR project,and the CoinMarketCap listing/update request under Ticket #1364560 was submitted by the legitimate project representatives.
The ecosystem currently focuses on:
community interaction,creator ecosystems,SocialFi experimentation,and Web3 social identity concepts built around Base and $ZORA
This post is published publicly for verification and transparency purposes.
#BANGKAR #Base #zora #SocialFi #Web3

More Than Just a Token, It’s an On-Chain Identity!
The buzz is growing, but let’s get the facts straight! BANGKAR is the authentic personal influence meme token of influencer Bangkar Buakar, powered by the Base network.
⚠️ Crucial Clarification:
BANGKAR has ABSOLUTELY NO CONNECTION to BankrCoin (BNKR). BANGKAR is all about community, social influence, and the true SocialFi movement.
Official Details:
Network: BaseContract Address (CA): 0xc8707166db335febfa8846995f440dfacc181ee3
Supporting the Zora Ecosystem
Aligned with our spirit on $ZORA , BANGKAR celebrates creativity and digital ownership. We are committed to strengthening the creator economy within the decentralized world. Let’s keep building positive narratives and collecting meaningful moments on-chain!
Stay sharp, stay bullish, and always verify the CA. Keep pushing boundaries on Base and Zora!
#BANGKAR #Base #Zora #SocialFi

Inside the $BANGKAR SocialFi Experiment
Understanding BANGKAR ($BANGKAR): The Personal Influence Token on #Base & #zora Ecosystems
The crypto landscape is shifting from purely financial assets to instruments of self-expression. One of the latest niche phenomena emerging on the Base network is BANGKAR ($BANGKAR)—a digital asset that blurs the lines between investment, creative content, and on-chain identity.
What is $BANGKAR?
BANGKAR is a #CreatorCoin or personal influence token operating on the Layer-2 Base network. It was birthed through integration with the Zora protocol, a platform dedicated to the creator economy. Unlike Bitcoin, which acts as a store of value, $BANGKAR is designed to represent the digital presence and social weight of its creator, known as BANGKAR BUAKAR.
With the tagline "Influence you can hold," the project attempts to give a tangible, blockchain-based form to a creator's digital reputation.
Technical Analysis and Tokenomics
Based on the latest on-chain data as of May 2026, here are the technical specifications for the $BANGKAR contract:
Contract Address: 0xc8707166db335febfa8846995f440dfacc181ee3
Total Supply: 1,000,000,000 (1 Billion) $BANGKAR.
Distribution Mechanism: It follows the $ZORA Coins standard, where a significant portion of the supply is typically allocated for long-term creator incentives, while the remainder is available for community circulation.
Holder Count: Currently remains highly exclusive, with approximately 99 unique wallet holders.
Uniqueness and the SocialFi Ecosystem
The primary appeal of $BANGKAR lies in its connection to #SocialFi (Social Finance). This token does not exist in a vacuum on speculative exchanges; instead, it is linked to:
Zora Integration: Holders and supporters can interact with social media content that has been converted into collectible digital assets (NFTs).
On-Chain Identity: Owning $BANGKAR is viewed as a form of direct support or "holding a stake" in the creator’s digital journey.
Meme Culture: The project embraces the experimental side of blockchain—sometimes chaotic, often humorous, but always transparent on the digital ledger.
Challenges and Risk Factors
As an asset in the micro-cap category, $BANGKAR carries several critical considerations for observers:
Limited Liquidity: Currently, the available liquidity in the open market is extremely low. This makes price fluctuations highly volatile, even with small transaction volumes.
Purely Experimental: The creator openly states that the project lacks a rigid roadmap or promises of financial gain. Its value is driven purely by community attention and cultural relevance.
Name Ambiguity: It is crucial to distinguish $BANGKAR from other projects like $BNKR. While both reside on the Base network, they serve different functions and are managed by different teams.
Conclusion
BANGKAR ($BANGKAR) serves as a prime example of how blockchain technology is being used to tokenize individual influence. For those interested in the Base ecosystem and the future of SocialFi, $BANGKAR offers an intriguing case study on how small communities can build an economy around a single creator’s identity.
💡 Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Investing in micro-cap tokens involves a very high risk of capital loss.

$BANGKAR and the Growing Zora Creator Ecosystem
The rise of creator-driven ecosystems is changing how communities interact in Web3.
Platforms like Zora are helping transform content, culture, memes, and social interaction into on-chain assets that communities can participate in directly.
$BANGKAR exists within this growing ecosystem.
Built around the culture of Base and Zora, $BANGKAR explores how:
creators,communities,memes,engagement,and digital identity
can evolve together through blockchain technology.
Unlike traditional crypto projects focused only on speculation, ecosystems connected to Zora are increasingly experimenting with:
creator ownership,social participation,collectible content,community-driven value,and on-chain culture.
This is why many creator-related coins and experimental community tokens are starting to appear across the Zora ecosystem.
The idea is simple:
culture itself can become part of the blockchain economy.
$BANGKAR supports this direction by exploring:
SocialFi conceptscreator interactionmini appscommunity engagement systemsNFT participationand social identity mechanics
As the Zora ecosystem grows, more creator coins and community-based projects may continue emerging around:
art,memes,internet culture,social interaction,and digital communities.
The future of Web3 may not only be about finance.
It may also be about:
identity,participation,creators,and communities building culture directly on-chain.
$BANGKAR is part of that experiment.
#BANGKAR #zora #Base #SocialFi

One of the biggest limitations in DeFi today is fragmented liquidity across different blockchains.
Users often deal with slow bridges, inconsistent execution, and overly complicated cross-chain workflows. Builders face a similar challenge maintaining fragmented infrastructure across multiple ecosystems.
STON.fi’s Omniston protocol is now taking a major step toward solving that problem.
With the release of Omniston v1beta8 Sandbox, the protocol is evolving beyond standard TON-native aggregation toward a broader cross-chain execution layer. The first testing flows already include TON ↔ Base stablecoin routes such as USDC.
The Shift Toward Cross-Chain Execution
Earlier versions of Omniston mainly focused on intrachain routing inside TON: collecting liquidity routes, comparing swap paths, and optimizing execution quality.
v1beta8 introduces a more advanced execution architecture based on RFQs (Requests for Quote).
Instead of relying on one predefined route, users submit swap parameters while multiple resolvers compete to provide the best execution conditions and pricing. The protocol then selects the strongest quote available.
This creates a more flexible and competitive execution environment, especially important once liquidity moves across multiple chains.
Swap Settlement vs Order Settlement
The protocol now supports two settlement models:
Swap Settlement handles traditional swaps inside one ecosystem, similar to standard TON-native routing.
Order Settlement is where the cross-chain expansion becomes more important. Instead of forcing immediate execution through one route, users create executable orders fulfilled by resolvers across different networks.
This architecture opens the door for:
• partial fills
• escrow-based execution flows
• future gasless UX scenarios
• more scalable cross-chain coordination
Why It Matters for TON
For users, the goal is simpler execution without needing to manage fragmented routing manually.
For builders, Omniston becomes infrastructure they can integrate directly through APIs and widgets instead of maintaining separate cross-chain systems themselves.
Most importantly, this expansion increases the accessibility of TON liquidity beyond its native ecosystem.
As TON assets become easier to route externally through ecosystems like Base, liquidity depth improves and the broader TON DeFi surface becomes significantly stronger.
The sandbox environment is already live, and this likely represents only the early stage of Omniston’s long-term direction toward unified execution infrastructure across chains.
#STONfi #Omniston #TON #Base #DeFi