Layer-2 (L2) solutions offer relatively fast and cheap Web3 interactions and remain a cornerstone of Ethereum’s scaling. Yet they raise UX demands, strain the economics of the second-largest cryptocurrency and complicate life for developers. The latter must build and maintain their own proof systems, rely on a rollup security council and manually apply changes after network upgrades.
A potential answer is the idea of native rollups—those synchronised with Ethereum from the outset and relying on base-layer security. ForkLog explores how they work and what the new technology could do for the ecosystem.
From based to native
In March 2023 leading Ethereum developer Justin Drake proposed boosting network decentralisation by adopting based rollups. The idea is to put all validators to work, limiting reliance on off-chain mechanisms. Vitalik Buterin first outlined the concept in 2021.
L2s such as Arbitrum and Base attract users with speed thanks to fast yet centralised sequencers—systems that determine the order in which transactions are processed and added to the blockchain.
Built on a similar principle is the new project MegaETH—a rollup whose public testnet launched on March 21, 2025. In its early architecture a single sequencer is used to deliver ultra-fast transactions.
On January 25, 2025, an online meeting of Ethereum developers and L2 leaders took place, with the transition to based rollups on the agenda.
Base’s head Jesse Pollak said based rollups are “a flexible and powerful tool” that can make Base more tightly coupled to Ethereum and enhance security.
Optimism Foundation’s director Ben Jones backed the effort, adding that the technology would improve L1–L2 interaction.
In June 2024 Drake highlighted the Taiko startup as the first based rollup and sketched a roadmap for Ethereum’s “native” solutions.
The first ever based rollup—Taiko—is live!
the endgame is based pic.twitter.com/v3Aqa4w1od
— Justin.eth Drake (@drakefjustin) June 6, 2024
According to Cointelegraph, zkEVM Linea lead Declan Fox forecast the emergence of new based rollups this year. He cautioned, however, that migrating existing L2s will take longer given the need to develop new interoperability standards.
In January 2025 Drake published a post on “native” rollups. He explained that the ideas of based and native rollups apply to different parts of the blockchain stack.
The former focus on block creation and ordering, whereas the latter use L1 as the execution layer. A rollup combining both approaches is close to ideal.
No duplicated logic
There are several main ways to confirm transactions in EVM-compatible L2 networks:
- optimistic proofs—assume all operations are valid, then post them to Ethereum. Within a seven-day window selected participants can challenge suspicious transactions before assets are withdrawn back to L1;
- ZK-rollups use cryptographic proofs attesting to computations performed in the rollup, significantly speeding withdrawals to Ethereum.
The native-rollup proposal means L2s would no longer need complex proving systems or security councils. Instead, they would simply pass a list of transactions to Ethereum’s base layer.
Proofs are small cryptographic snapshots recording the state of asset ownership in rollups, periodically committed to Ethereum.
Justin Drake describes an EXECUTE-precompile that turns native rollups into “programmable sharded mechanisms”. The process resembles Ethereum’s earlier sharding plan, albeit in a different form.
The term “precompile” refers to a special type of contract embedded in the Ethereum protocol that extends the EVM’s capabilities.
By recording L2 state on Ethereum, rollups benefit from its decentralised network. In turn, users can permissionlessly withdraw funds and force through transactions censored by a sequencer.
Native rollups would process transactions while inheriting L1 security with only a few lines of code. Automatic network upgrades are also envisaged, without governance votes or security-council intervention.
Eliminating duplicated Ethereum logic would cut maintenance costs and simplify security while keeping L2s synchronised with the base layer. For users, native rollups offer a higher-trust option suitable for large balances.
Rollups pivot towards Ethereum
Native rollups could return a share of revenues to Ethereum’s base layer, which in time could support the price of ETH.
They would be forced to forgo a large slice of MEV—extra income block producers earn by reordering, including or excluding transactions. They would also have to say goodbye to big fee takes on centralised sequencers.
According to Dune Analytics, at the time of writing Arbitrum has earned 64,250 ETH (~$122m) in fees, and Base 34,570 ETH (~$66m).
In an AMA session on February 25, 2025, Vitalik Buterin, Justin Drake and Dankrad Feist discussed the network’s future.
Buterin voiced support for native rollups; Drake outlined their prospects.
“The discussion around the novelty is only just beginning. In my experience, the concept of native rollups is surprisingly easy to sell to EVM-equivalent rollups. If the latter have the option to become native, then why not? It is a strict improvement that L1 provides, essentially for free,” Drake explained.
According to him, Arbitrum, Base, Optimism and Scroll are already interested in becoming native.
Native rollups do not require separate proving systems or external validators—Ethereum handles the process. As a result, L2s gain several key advantages:
- conformity with Ethereum standards. Native rollups automatically inherit L1 upgrades, ensuring consistency, compatibility and quantum security;
- greater security. Users can hold assets on a native rollup and trust it as they do Ethereum. The risk of multisig wallet compromise is reduced;
- prospects for appchains. As dapps seek security, they can opt for a native-rollup model while adding custom features;
- simplified development. No need for bespoke fraud proofs or ZKPs, making deployment and maintenance easier;
- efficient ZKPs. Aggregate multiple proofs to cut verification costs in ZK-rollups.
Drawbacks, trade-offs and expectations
Native rollups tackle governance and security issues but do not remove all of Ethereum’s scalability limits—and sometimes add new ones:
- re-executing every transaction on-chain can be inefficient without additional ZKPs or optimistic techniques, given the gas limit;
- imperfect equivalence for EVM-compatible rollups. Specialised transaction formats or custom gas accounting may face compatibility issues, implying UX trade-offs;
- no path for EVM-incompatible networks such as popular SVM or MoveVM;
- the execution precompile on which native rollups rely materially increases data-availability costs, potentially inflating L2 overheads by 5–10 times.
Though native designs are a notable step forward for Ethereum scalability, not every rollup is likely to adopt them. Instead, as Dogan of Cyber Fund argues, the ecosystem may evolve into three main categories:
- enterprise rollups: custom-built and business-controlled to meet specific needs such as transaction ordering or privacy;
- performance-oriented rollups. Projects like MegaETH push throughput and cut costs via alternative data-availability solutions such as EigenDA;
- native rollups: fully integrated with Ethereum, inheriting base-layer security and upgrading automatically, removing the need for external governance or separate proving mechanisms.
Drake expects a first version of native rollups as soon as next year. Full technical maturity—including integrated ZKPs and a higher gas limit—will take longer.
Native rollups offer a clear path in which L2s stay synchronised with Ethereum without complex governance structures, creating a safer, cleaner experience for users, developers and the wider ecosystem.
Given Ethereum engineers’ contribution to the ecosystem and the industry’s evolution, a fair return from their offspring—layer‑two solutions—would be no surprise.