ChainScore Labs
LABS
Guides

Gas Economics on Layer 2 DeFi Platforms

Chainscore © 2025
concepts

Core Concepts in L2 Gas Economics

Understanding the fundamental mechanisms that determine transaction costs and execution on Layer 2 networks.

01

L1 Data Publishing Fee

The calldata cost for posting transaction data to Ethereum's base layer. This is the primary, non-refundable component of L2 gas fees.

  • Cost scales with data size and L1 basefee.
  • Optimistic Rollups post full transaction data.
  • ZK Rollups post succinct validity proofs and minimal data.
  • This fee ensures L1 security guarantees and finality for the L2.
02

L2 Execution Fee

The cost for processing a transaction's computation and storage on the Layer 2 network itself, paid in the L2's native gas token.

  • Covers VM execution, state updates, and sequencer/prover effort.
  • Typically much cheaper than equivalent L1 execution.
  • Can be subsidized or dynamic based on network congestion.
  • Users must hold the L2's gas token (e.g., ETH on Arbitrum, MATIC on Polygon zkEVM) to pay this fee.
03

Sequencer & Prover Economics

The incentive models for network operators who order transactions (sequencers) and generate proofs (provers).

  • Sequencers earn fees from L2 execution and may extract MEV.
  • Provers in ZK Rollups incur high computational cost for proof generation, funded by fees.
  • Economic security relies on these roles being profitable.
  • Fee market designs must balance operator profit with low user costs.
04

Fee Token Abstraction

Mechanisms that allow users to pay transaction fees in tokens other than the network's native gas currency.

  • Enabled by gas sponsorship or meta-transactions.
  • DApps can subsidize fees to improve UX.
  • Requires a system to convert payment token to native gas, often via a relay or a pool.
  • Critical for onboarding users who don't hold the base chain's asset.
05

Dynamic Fee Calculation

How L2s compute the total gas fee by combining variable L1 and L2 cost components in real-time.

  • Formula: Total Fee = L1 Calldata Cost + L2 Execution Cost.
  • L1 cost is estimated using an L1 basefee oracle.
  • L2 cost uses a local congestion-based multiplier (EIP-1559 style).
  • Wallets and RPCs must fetch both components to provide accurate estimates.
06

Priority Fee Mechanisms

Systems that allow users to pay extra to expedite transaction ordering and inclusion, similar to L1 tips.

  • On L2s with centralized sequencers, priority fees influence queue position.
  • In decentralized sequencing futures, it will drive a fee auction.
  • Helps users manage latency during periods of high demand.
  • Unlike L1, finality speed is also gated by proof publication intervals.

Layer 2 Fee Structure Comparison

Comparison of fee components, finality, and data handling across major L2 rollups.

Fee ComponentOptimism (OP Stack)Arbitrum NitrozkSync EraBase

L1 Data Publishing Fee

~0.0001 ETH per 100k gas

~0.00008 ETH per 100k gas

~0.00005 ETH (ZK proof + data)

~0.0001 ETH per 100k gas

L2 Execution Fee (Avg Simple Tx)

~0.00001 ETH

~0.000015 ETH

~0.00002 ETH

~0.00001 ETH

Finality Time (to L1)

~1-3 minutes

~5-10 minutes

~10-15 minutes (proving time)

~1-3 minutes

Sequencer Fee Model

EIP-1559 on L2

Priority Fee Auction

Fixed + EIP-1559

EIP-1559 on L2

Data Availability

CallData on Ethereum

CallData on Ethereum

Validium option available

CallData on Ethereum

Priority Fee (Max Fee Cap)

Dynamic, ~2x base fee

Dynamic, auction-based

Fixed + dynamic component

Dynamic, ~2x base fee

Withdrawal Time (Fast Bridge)

~1-3 minutes (via Dapps)

~10-30 minutes (via Dapps)

~1-2 hours (ZK proof finality)

~1-3 minutes (via Dapps)

Gas Token

ETH

ETH

ETH (paymaster abstraction)

ETH

Analyzing Your DeFi Transaction Costs on L2

A methodical process for dissecting and understanding the components of transaction fees on Layer 2 networks.

1

Identify the Core Fee Components

Break down the total transaction cost into its constituent parts: L2 execution and L1 data publication.

Detailed Instructions

Every L2 transaction fee comprises two primary elements. The L2 execution fee pays for the computational work on the rollup itself, denominated in the network's native gas token (e.g., ETH on Arbitrum, MATIC on Polygon zkEVM). The L1 data/security fee covers the cost of posting transaction data or proofs to the Ethereum mainnet, which is the fundamental security cost. To see this breakdown, use a block explorer like Arbiscan or Blockscout for your specific L2. Look for fields like TxFee, L1 Fee, or L2 Fee in the transaction details. For a precise calculation, you can query the eth_estimateGas RPC call, which often returns a detailed fee object.

javascript
// Example RPC call to estimate gas on an Optimism-like L2 const feeDetails = await provider.send('eth_estimateGas', [{ from: '0xYourAddress', to: '0xContractAddress', data: '0xCallData' }]); // The response may include l1GasUsed, l1GasPrice, l1Fee, etc.

Tip: The L1 fee is highly volatile and correlates directly with Ethereum mainnet base fee spikes, often dominating total cost during network congestion.

2

Calculate and Compare Effective Gas Prices

Convert L2 fees to a common denominator (USD or ETH) to compare costs across different networks and transaction types.

Detailed Instructions

Raw gas units are not comparable. You must calculate the effective gas price in USD. First, fetch the current price of the L2's native gas token and Ethereum from an oracle or API. For the L2 execution cost: multiply gasUsed by gasPrice (in wei) to get the cost in the native token, then convert to USD. For the L1 data fee, which is usually provided directly in ETH, convert that ETH amount to USD. Sum these for the total USD cost. To understand efficiency, calculate the cost per operation, such as USD per swap or per token transfer. Use this to benchmark: a simple ERC-20 transfer, a Uniswap v3 swap, and a complex lending interaction like a leveraged loop on Aave.

  • Sub-step 1: Query transaction receipt for gasUsed and effective gasPrice.
  • Sub-step 2: Use CoinGecko's API to get current token/USD prices.
  • Sub-step 3: Compute: (gasUsed * gasPrice / 1e18) * tokenPrice for L2 cost.
  • Sub-step 4: Add the converted L1 data fee (if provided in ETH) using the ETH/USD price.

Tip: For recurring transactions, script this analysis to build a historical dataset and identify the most cost-effective times to transact.

3

Profile Contract Interaction Costs

Analyze how specific smart contract functions and states impact gas consumption on L2s.

Detailed Instructions

Gas costs on L2s are sensitive to specific contract logic and storage patterns. Calldata usage is critical because it directly influences the L1 data fee; each non-zero byte of calldata costs significantly more than a zero byte. Functions that update storage slots incur higher L2 execution fees. Use a tool like eth_call to simulate a transaction and trace its execution using debug_traceTransaction (if supported by the RPC provider) to see opcode-level gas consumption. Pay special attention to operations like SSTORE for writing to contract storage or CALL to external contracts, which are expensive. Compare the gas of a swap on a stablecoin pair versus a volatile pair, as the latter involves more price calculation logic.

solidity
// Example of a gas-inefficient pattern on L2: excessive calldata function inefficient(bytes memory _largeData) external { // _largeData is expensive to post to L1 data = _largeData; } // Better: Pass a hash or use more storage writes if data is large function efficient(bytes32 _dataHash) external { dataHash = _dataHash; }

Tip: When developing, test gas costs on an L2 testnet with mainnet fee parameters to get accurate estimates.

4

Monitor Network Fee Dynamics and Optimize Timing

Track L1 and L2 base fee fluctuations and schedule transactions to minimize costs.

Detailed Instructions

L2 fees are not static. The L1 base fee on Ethereum is the primary driver of cost volatility for the data publication component. Monitor Ethereum's base fee via sites like ultrasound.money or through the eth_feeHistory RPC call. L2 networks also have their own sequencer fee markets which can congest during peak demand, raising L2 execution prices. Set up alerts for when the Ethereum base fee drops below a threshold (e.g., 15 gwei). For batch submissions, consider using L2-specific features: Arbitrum's delayed inbox for non-urgent transactions or zkSync's paymaster system for fee abstraction. Utilize gas estimation APIs from providers like Alchemy or Infura that offer fee predictions for specific L2s.

  • Sub-step 1: Subscribe to a service like Etherscan's Gas Tracker API for Ethereum base fee alerts.
  • Sub-step 2: Check the L2 network's status page or Discord for sequencer health updates.
  • Sub-step 3: For programmable strategies, use eth_feeHistory to calculate a moving average and predict low-fee windows.
  • Sub-step 4: Implement a fallback RPC endpoint to switch networks if one L2 experiences a fee spike.

Tip: The lowest fees are often found during off-peak hours for the North American and European time zones, corresponding to lower Ethereum mainnet activity.

Platform-Specific Gas Optimization

Understanding Gas on Layer 2s

Gas fees on Layer 2s like Arbitrum and Optimism are paid in ETH but are significantly cheaper than Ethereum mainnet. The key is understanding that each platform has unique fee components. On Optimism, you pay a L1 data fee for posting transaction data to Ethereum and a L2 execution fee for processing. Arbitrum uses a similar model but with different calculation methods.

Key Points

  • Transaction Batching: Platforms batch thousands of transactions before posting to Ethereum, sharing the L1 cost among users.
  • Gas Token Differences: You always pay with ETH, but the gas price is set in gwei specific to the L2 network.
  • Timing Matters: Submitting transactions during network congestion on the L2 or high activity on Ethereum L1 will increase costs.

Practical Example

When swapping tokens on Uniswap deployed on Arbitrum, your total cost is the sum of the L2 execution fee (low) and your share of the L1 data fee. Using a gas tracker for the specific L2 can help you submit transactions during lower-fee periods.

cost_drivers

Key Drivers of L2 Gas Costs

Understanding the components that determine transaction fees on Layer 2 networks, from data publication to execution complexity.

01

Data Availability

Calldata publishing to Ethereum L1 is the primary cost. L2s compress and batch transactions, but the volume of data posted directly impacts fees.

  • Zero-knowledge rollups post validity proofs and state diffs.
  • Optimistic rollups post full transaction data for fraud proofs.
  • Higher L1 gas prices exponentially increase this base cost for all L2 users.
02

Execution & Computation

Opcode execution within the L2's virtual machine consumes gas. Complex smart contract interactions cost more.

  • A simple token transfer uses minimal L2 compute units.
  • A multi-step DeFi swap with price oracles and liquidity pools is computationally intensive.
  • This cost is native to the L2 and scales with its own congestion and resource usage.
03

State Storage Updates

Writing to storage modifies the chain's persistent state, a costly operation. Each SSTORE opcode has a significant gas cost.

  • Minting an NFT writes new data to a contract's storage.
  • Updating a user's balance in a lending protocol triggers a storage write.
  • L2s optimize this, but it remains a major factor in contract interaction fees.
04

Proof Generation (ZK-Rollups)

Zero-knowledge proof creation is a specialized, computationally heavy process required to validate rollup blocks on L1.

  • Provers generate SNARKs or STARKs for batched transactions.
  • Proof generation cost is amortized across all transactions in a batch.
  • This overhead is a unique, fixed cost component for ZK-rollups like zkSync and StarkNet.
05

Sequencer & Network Congestion

L2 network demand creates mempool congestion, leading to priority fee auctions. Users bid to have transactions included faster.

  • During an NFT mint or token launch, pending transactions queue up.
  • Sequencers prioritize higher-fee transactions, similar to Ethereum L1.
  • This dynamic pricing is separate from the fixed L1 data publication cost.

Implementing Cost-Saving Batch Strategies

Process overview for aggregating and executing multiple transactions in a single batch to amortize fixed gas costs.

1

Analyze Transaction Patterns for Batching Candidates

Identify recurring, non-time-sensitive operations suitable for aggregation.

Detailed Instructions

Begin by auditing your application's transaction history to find recurring operations that can be deferred and grouped. Common candidates include user reward claims, periodic liquidity rebalancing, or NFT airdrops. The key is that these actions do not require immediate execution for user experience.

  • Sub-step 1: Query your subgraph or database for transactions with similar function selectors and low time-sensitivity over the last week.
  • Sub-step 2: Calculate the average fixed cost per transaction (e.g., base fee, calldata cost on L2) versus the variable execution cost.
  • Sub-step 3: Model the potential savings by simulating a batch of 10, 50, and 100 operations, factoring in the slightly increased execution gas for the batch contract's loop.
solidity
// Example query for similar transactions // SELECT COUNT(*), `to`, `data` FROM transactions // WHERE `from` = '0xYourContract' // AND `data` LIKE '0xa9059cbb%' // transfer function selector // GROUP BY `data`;

Tip: Focus on operations where the fixed cost (calldata) is a high percentage of the total; savings are greatest here.

2

Design the Batch Execution Smart Contract

Create an efficient contract that loops through an array of calls.

Detailed Instructions

Develop a contract that uses a low-level call pattern or a specific interface to execute multiple actions. The primary goal is to minimize overhead within the loop. Use delegatecall if operating on the same contract state, or aggregate call for external interactions.

  • Sub-step 1: Define a function executeBatch(address[] targets, bytes[] calldatas) that loops and makes calls.
  • Sub-step 2: Implement a failure mode strategy—decide if the batch halts on any error (require) or continues for non-critical failures.
  • Sub-step 3: Add access control (e.g., onlyOwner) and potentially a gas limit per sub-call to prevent runaway loops.
solidity
function executeBatch( address[] calldata targets, bytes[] calldata calldatas ) external onlyOwner { require(targets.length == calldatas.length, "Array length mismatch"); for (uint256 i = 0; i < targets.length; ++i) { (bool success, ) = targets[i].call(calldatas[i]); // Decide to require(success) or emit result for off-chain tracking if (!success) emit CallFailed(i, targets[i], calldatas[i]); } }

Tip: On L2s, optimize calldata by using tightly packed bytes arrays instead of multiple separate transactions.

3

Implement Off-Chain Batching Logic and Scheduling

Build a keeper or cron job to assemble and submit batches.

Detailed Instructions

Create a backend service that aggregates pending actions and determines the optimal batch size and submission time. This service monitors mempool conditions and gas prices to submit when costs are low.

  • Sub-step 1: Set up a database or queue (e.g., Redis) to store pending operations eligible for batching.
  • Sub-step 2: Write a script that fetches current base fee from the L2's eth_gasPrice or a gas station API. On Optimism, check the L1Fee estimator.
  • Sub-step 3: Define a threshold (e.g., 50 actions or 12-hour window) to trigger batch creation. Encode the calldata for each action and call the batch contract's executeBatch function.
javascript
// Example using ethers.js to build calldata array const calldatas = pendingTxns.map(txn => { const iface = new ethers.utils.Interface(abi); return iface.encodeFunctionData('claimRewards', [txn.userAddress]); }); // Submit batch when conditions are met const tx = await batchContract.executeBatch(targets, calldatas, { gasLimit: estimatedGas });

Tip: Schedule batches during network off-peak hours, which often correlate with lower L1 calldata fees on rollups.

4

Calculate and Verify Gas Savings

Measure the actual cost reduction and optimize parameters.

Detailed Instructions

After deployment, benchmark gas usage meticulously. Compare the cost of N individual transactions against the single batched transaction. The savings per operation is (Individual_Cost * N - Batch_Cost) / N.

  • Sub-step 1: Use a testnet or a simulated environment to run controlled experiments with varying batch sizes (10, 25, 50). Record the gasUsed for each.
  • Sub-step 2: Analyze the marginal cost of adding one more operation to the batch. Savings increase linearly until loop overhead or block gas limits become constraints.
  • Sub-step 3: Monitor real mainnet transactions using a block explorer. Verify that the effectiveGasPrice (including L1 data fee) aligns with your models.
solidity
// Helper function in contract to estimate gas inside a view function function estimateBatchGas(address[] calldata targets, bytes[] calldata calldatas) external view returns (uint256) { uint256 gasStart = gasleft(); // Simulate calls using staticcall in a view context (simplified) for (uint i; i < targets.length; i++) { (bool success, ) = targets[i].staticcall(calldatas[i]); require(success, "Simulation failed"); } return gasStart - gasleft(); }

Tip: Remember that on Optimistic Rollups, the dominant cost is often the L1 data posting fee. Batching drastically reduces this by sharing a single fixed overhead.

5

Manage Security and Failure States

Implement safeguards for partial failures and access control.

Detailed Instructions

Batch transactions introduce new failure modes. A single reverted sub-call in a strictly require-based batch will revert the entire batch, wasting gas. Design a robust system to handle this.

  • Sub-step 1: Consider implementing a "try-catch" pattern within the batch loop that logs failures but continues execution, saving successful operations.
  • Sub-step 2: Set up off-chain monitoring for the CallFailed event. Create a remediation queue to retry or handle failed actions manually.
  • Sub-step 3: Use multisig or timelock controls for the batch executor contract, especially if it holds funds or has significant authority. Regularly audit the batching logic for reentrancy or gas limit attacks.
solidity
// Example of a continue-on-failure pattern for (uint256 i = 0; i < targets.length; ++i) { (bool success, bytes memory result) = targets[i].call(calldatas[i]); if (!success) { // Store failure index, don't revert failedOperations.push(i); emit OperationFailed(i, result); } } // Optionally, return an array of results or failures

Tip: For critical state updates, a halting failure mode may be safer. The choice depends on whether atomicity or cost savings is the higher priority.

Gas Economics on Layer 2s: Common Questions

Gas fee variance stems from core architectural differences. Optimistic rollups like Arbitrum and Optimism incur costs for posting transaction data to Ethereum L1 and for fraud proof verification, which can spike during high L1 congestion. ZK-rollups like zkSync and StarkNet have higher proving costs but cheaper data posting, leading to different fee profiles. Validium solutions and sidechains like Polygon PoS have minimal L1 dependency, offering lower but less secure fees. Network-specific congestion and sequencer prioritization models also create immediate price disparities.