⚡ The Real Dilemma Ethereum Faces in 2026 | A Multidimensional Crisis from Technology to Funding
Many are still hoping for Ethereum to continue last year's narrative, but frankly, the issues exposed in the current ecosystem warrant deep reflection.
**The Double-Edged Sword of Layer2**
While Layer2 scaling solutions have solved throughput problems, they have introduced new issues—value capture on the mainnet has become dispersed. Transaction fees flow to the second layer network, and with the mainnet positioned as a "settlement layer," the token's economic model faces a reassessment. Without a burn mechanism, relying solely on issuance to maintain validator rewards—how long can this approach last?
**The Tidal Phenomenon of Institutional Funds**
After the ETF listing, it was seen as a symbol of institutional recognition. But don’t forget, capital is profit-driven. Starting in 2025, modular public chains and high-performance public chains began attracting incremental funds. Once this pattern is established, the migration of existing funds becomes highly probable. The chain reaction triggered by large-scale withdrawals and liquidations poses significant risks.
**The Underlying Concerns of Consensus Crisis**
The early story of Ethereum was about technological ideals and decentralization visions. Today, the discussion revolves around exit strategies and cost dilemmas. When validator yields decline to the point where operational costs cannot be covered, node reduction becomes inevitable. Once the ecosystem’s foundational support wavers, the chain reaction will be faster than imagined.
**Possible Response Strategies**
Staying firm does not mean wisdom. In the face of market changes, flexible adjustment of positions is more rational than rigidly holding on. Focus on cash flow and risk exposure; the uncertainties in 2026 could exceed expectations. Proactively planning to reduce risks is always better than passive responses.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
#比特币2026年行情展望 $ETH $BTC
⚡ The Real Dilemma Ethereum Faces in 2026 | A Multidimensional Crisis from Technology to Funding
Many are still hoping for Ethereum to continue last year's narrative, but frankly, the issues exposed in the current ecosystem warrant deep reflection.
**The Double-Edged Sword of Layer2**
While Layer2 scaling solutions have solved throughput problems, they have introduced new issues—value capture on the mainnet has become dispersed. Transaction fees flow to the second layer network, and with the mainnet positioned as a "settlement layer," the token's economic model faces a reassessment. Without a burn mechanism, relying solely on issuance to maintain validator rewards—how long can this approach last?
**The Tidal Phenomenon of Institutional Funds**
After the ETF listing, it was seen as a symbol of institutional recognition. But don’t forget, capital is profit-driven. Starting in 2025, modular public chains and high-performance public chains began attracting incremental funds. Once this pattern is established, the migration of existing funds becomes highly probable. The chain reaction triggered by large-scale withdrawals and liquidations poses significant risks.
**The Underlying Concerns of Consensus Crisis**
The early story of Ethereum was about technological ideals and decentralization visions. Today, the discussion revolves around exit strategies and cost dilemmas. When validator yields decline to the point where operational costs cannot be covered, node reduction becomes inevitable. Once the ecosystem’s foundational support wavers, the chain reaction will be faster than imagined.
**Possible Response Strategies**
Staying firm does not mean wisdom. In the face of market changes, flexible adjustment of positions is more rational than rigidly holding on. Focus on cash flow and risk exposure; the uncertainties in 2026 could exceed expectations. Proactively planning to reduce risks is always better than passive responses.