A blockchain data analysis by Bitquery examined Ethereum arbitrage over a 30-day period ending August 29, 2026, and found that builders received approximately $5.24 in receipts for every $1 burned by the network. The allocation of measured surplus was distributed as 49.3% toward block assembly, 9.4% toward burned fees, and 41.3% with trading operators.
The distinction between builder payments and validator compensation is important for understanding the flow of capital on Ethereum. Builders gather transactions and construct blocks, then bid for validators' blockspace through relays. The validator acting as proposer receives a separate payment, which builders fund through a transaction included at the end of the block. Builder profit is calculated as direct payments plus priority fees, minus the payment made to the proposer.
Bitquery's allocation does not measure what fraction of builder receipts are passed onward to proposers, which would require matching sampled trading payments to their subsequent transfers. The research notes that assigning this money between builders and validators would require additional data not currently supplied by the protocol.
Fee Burn and ETH Supply
Ethereum's EIP-1559 specification separates the base fee from the priority fee, with the base fee destroyed by the protocol. The base fee adjusts according to gas used relative to the block target, operating through a different mechanism than a searcher's willingness to pay for a profitable trading position.
For holders assessing supply effects, the relevant measurement is ETH destroyed over a defined period compared with ETH created during that same period. Fee burn reduces supply relative to a scenario without destruction, but does not by itself establish whether total supply fell, nor does it transfer cash to passive holders.
Study Limitations
The study filtered for surplus no greater than capital committed in each transaction and acknowledged that wallet reconciliation can reduce apparent earnings further. Incomplete Ethereum venue decoding misses some activity. A separate annual comparison covered Ethereum, BNB Chain, Base, Arbitrum, and Polygon for 12 months through August 29, 2026, while Optimism and Solana were excluded.
The research notes that a later comparison would require consistent coverage, periods, and accounting to establish trends in participant profits. Changes in reported shares could reflect differences in what was counted rather than actual shifts in profitability.
