Who is the cheapest cross-chain bridge?

Author: Hart Lambur

Compiled by: 深潮TechFlow

Conclusion

For regular L2 to L2 transfers, @AcrossProtocol is clearly the fastest and cheapest cross-chain bridge. For regular ETH to L2 transfers, Across is much faster and cheaper than Stargate's fast bridge, and Across's slow bridge is roughly on par with Stargate's in terms of fees (but Across is 20 times faster). For regular L2 to ETH transfers, Across is much faster and cheaper than Stargate's fast option, although it is slightly more expensive than Stargate's slow option, but Across is 100 times faster.

Analysis

In the past few days, @PrimoridalAA has accused me of cherry-picking favorable data when comparing our cross-chain bridges. I believe the best response to this is to develop a method to explain what "cheaper" means and then see who wins.

My approach is: For regular bridging transactions, which bridge is the cheapest? Given the significant differences in transaction volume and fees for L2 to L2, ETH to L2, and L2 to ETH, I will examine these cases separately. For the choice of which L2s to consider, I suggest we look at the three largest: Arbitrum (Arb), Base, and Optimism (OP).

Here is the 30-day rolling average of L2 to L2 bridging transaction volumes, measured using data from Across and Stargate:

The average transaction volume for L2 to L2 bridging is about $55, or about 0.015 ETH. (Note that the average volume has a downward trend; this will be discussed in detail later).

So, which bridging option is cheaper when moving 0.015 ETH between L2s? This should answer "which bridge is cheaper for regular bridging transactions between L2s."

The answer is: regardless of which L2 you transfer 0.015 ETH between, Across is cheaper and faster than Stargate.

I just bridged 0.015 ETH from Base to OP. The results are as follows:

Across took 4 seconds and cost 1.1 cents.

Stargate's "fast" option took 50 seconds and cost 5.6 cents.

Stargate's "cheap" option took 1 minute and 2 seconds and cost 3.0 cents.

I believe I will certainly be accused of cherry-picking the Base to OP route, but honestly, just check any route for 0.015 ETH, and it is clear that Across is significantly cheaper and definitely faster in any L2 to L2 scenario! There is no doubt about it.

Conclusion: Across is clearly the fastest and cheapest cross-chain bridge for regular L2 to L2 transactions.

Next, let's look at the data for ETH to L2.

Here are the 30-day rolling averages of ETH to L2 transaction volumes for the three largest L2s, measured using data from Across and Stargate:

The average transaction volume from ETH to [Arb, Base, OP] is approximately $100 for Across and approximately $400 for Stargate. Let's take an average of $250, or approximately 0.06 ETH.

Now let's bridge 0.06 ETH from ETH to OP.

The results:

Across took 28 seconds and cost 2.6 cents.

Stargate's "fast" option took 4 minutes and cost 5.5 cents.

Stargate's "cheap" option took 9 minutes and 40 seconds and cost 2.2 cents.

Across is much cheaper and faster than Stargate's fast option.

Compared to Across's cheap option, Stargate costs 2.2 cents, while Across costs 2.6 cents, but Across takes 28 seconds, while Stargate takes 9 minutes and 40 seconds.

As for whether this cost difference is worth the speed difference, I will leave that for the market to decide. Similarly, you can try it out for yourself.

Finally, let's look at the data for L2 to ETH.

Here are the 30-day rolling averages of L2 to ETH transaction volumes for the three largest L2s, measured using data from Across and Stargate:

The average transaction volume from Across to ETH [Arb, Base, OP] is approximately $700, while Stargate is approximately $200. Let's take an average of $450, or approximately 0.06 ETH.

Now let's bridge 0.06 ETH from ETH to OP. The results:

Across took 4 seconds and cost $5.41.

Stargate's "fast" option took 2 minutes and 12 seconds and cost $16.80.

Stargate's "cheap" option took 6 minutes and 34 seconds and cost $4.41.

Again, Across dominates both speed and cost compared to Stargate's fast option.

Stargate's slow option is slightly cheaper, but it takes 6 minutes and 34 seconds, while Across only takes 4 seconds.

Where will the cross-chain bridge wars go?

Personally, I believe that as the next billion people enter the cryptocurrency space, they will (1) almost entirely use L2 (or alt-L1), and (2) transaction volumes will continue to shrink. Across is already the cheapest and fastest bridge for L2 transfers, and as transaction volumes decrease, Across's intent-based architecture will continue to dominate.

Stargate's "slow" option can save some costs when transacting with the Ethereum mainnet, but the speed compromise is very evident. I think whether it is worth sacrificing speed for marginal cost savings should be left to the market to decide.

In any case, users are the ultimate winners in these "cross-chain bridge wars," and I believe that crypto Twitter users are at least somewhat interested in the debate between my brother Bryan and me.