Back to Dashboards

Chain Revenue

Public

🦙By Gentle Graceful Llama

40Views

Chain Revenue & Transactions Dashboard

A real-time breakdown of on-chain fee generation, sequencer/validator revenue, and transaction activity across all major blockchains. Chain fees = gross gas/tx fees paid by users. Chain revenue = what the protocol actually retains. Data as of June 11, 2026.

📊 Revenue Landscape — June 2026

The chain fee rankings reveal a surprising hierarchy. Canton ($60.7M, 30d) leads — the Goldman Sachs/DTCC-affiliated institutional settlement chain, where transaction fees reflect high-value regulated financial transactions. Tron ($31.3M, +3% MoM) holds steady at #2, driven entirely by USDT transfer volume — and uniquely, Tron converts 100% of fees into chain revenue.

Ethereum ($13.5M, -54% MoM) has seen a sharp decline, reflecting post-Dencun blob fee compression and continued user migration to rollups. Yet Ethereum's app ecosystem still generates $200M in 30d app fees — the gap between chain fees and app fees is the widest of any blockchain. Solana ($12.5M, -17% MoM) follows a similar pattern.

The standout movers: Base is up +103% MoM ($5.5M) — Coinbase's L2 retains ~99.8% of its sequencer fees and is accelerating. Hyperliquid L1 surged +430% MoM ($1.2M), driven by explosive derivatives trading volume. Revenue retention varies dramatically: Ethereum keeps only ~29% of gross fees (validators take the rest); Solana retains ~13%; but Tron, Base, Canton, and Hyperliquid all keep near 100%.

Chain Revenue: What Protocols Actually Keep

Chain revenue strips out the validator/miner share and shows what the protocol itself retains. Ethereum revenue ($3.9M, 30d) is just 29% of its gross fees — EIP-1559 burns the base fee but validators capture priority fees. Solana retains only ~13% ($1.6M). Base retains nearly all sequencer revenue ($5.5M ≈ fees), flowing entirely to Coinbase. Hyperliquid L1 keeps 100% of its fees ($1.2M), making it the most capital-efficient L1 among fast-growing chains.

Transaction Volume

Transaction counts tell a different story from fee revenue. High-throughput chains like Solana and BSC process orders of magnitude more transactions than Ethereum mainnet — but at far lower per-tx costs. Ethereum's lower tx volume commands premium fees per transaction, while L2s like Base are rapidly closing the throughput gap.