2026展望（三）：Ethereum与Solana，非对称趋同演进中的困境与重构

In 2026, the competitive logic of the public chain landscape will shift from opposing technical roadmaps to a convergent evolutionary framework oriented towards Ethereum. As the paradigm leader in institutionalization and modularity, Ethereum has established a mature ecosystem of "mainnet settlement layer + L2 execution layer." Solana, as the high-performance challenger, is accelerating its convergence towards the industry standards set by Ethereum through its Firedancer modular transformation and institutional adaptation strategy. The market's core focus revolves around two key propositions: "Can Ethereum uphold its decentralized principles while absorbing traditional capital?" and "Can Solana overcome its centralization risks through technological evolution to complete its identity reconstruction into an institutional-grade public chain?"

On-chain data and institutional practices jointly confirm that the total TVL of the Ethereum ecosystem (mainnet + L2s) has reached $85.345 billion (with mainnet at $75.544 billion, Base at $5.15 billion, Arbitrum at $3.168 billion, etc.). 28 institutions hold 6.14 million ETH, accounting for 5.09% of the circulating supply. However, the conflict between capital concentration risks and decentralization principles is becoming increasingly prominent. The total TVL of Solana is $9.167 billion, equivalent to 10.7% of the Ethereum ecosystem. The Firedancer client launched on the mainnet in December 2025 to drive modular transformation, but whether its targeted 1M+ TPS performance and the Alpenglow consensus upgrade can deliver institutional-grade stability remains to be verified.

In 2026, the ultimate competition between the two chains essentially revolves around the differentiated propositions of "Can Ethereum resolve its internal contradictions while leading the paradigm, and can Solana achieve an identity leap during its convergent evolution?" Ethereum needs to embrace institutional capital like BlackRock and absorb 80% of tokenized treasury bonds while safeguarding its decentralized foundation through mechanism design. Solana needs to address the centralization risks inherent in its Proof of History (POH) through the Firedancer modular architecture and node governance optimization during its catch-up process, completing its identity reconstruction from a "retail trading chain" to a "high-performance infrastructure recognized by institutions." The progress in solving these two propositions will directly determine the retention quality of the $192 billion ETH DAT and $26 billion SOL DAT funds.

1. Introduction: From Opposing Technical Roadmaps to Converging Industry Standards

The early narrative core of the public chain race was the paradigm clash between Ethereum's "modular layering" and Solana's "high-performance monolithic" approach. However, as the blockchain ecosystem moves from infrastructure competition to the institutional application adoption phase, the competitive landscape has shifted from opposing technical roadmaps to later players converging towards industry standards: Ethereum, with its first-mover advantage and ecosystem depth, has become the de facto standard and paradigm leader for institutional public chains. Solana, as the high-performance challenger, is accelerating its convergence towards the institutional adaptation framework, modular thinking, and compliance systems established by Ethereum through technological evolution and strategic adjustments.

This asymmetric convergence is first reflected in Ethereum's industry leadership position. On-chain data shows that the total TVL of the Ethereum ecosystem has reached $85.345 billion, with the mainnet at $75.544 billion, Base at $5.15 billion, Arbitrum at $3.168 billion, Polygon at $1.171 billion, and Optimism at $0.312 billion, accounting for 65.9% of the global DeFi market TVL. This data not only reflects a funding scale advantage but also validates that Ethereum's modular architecture of "the mainnet as a secure settlement layer, with L2s handling high-frequency execution" has become an industry consensus: the flourishing development of L2s like Base and Arbitrum is essentially an extension and validation of Ethereum across different scenarios. In comparison, the total TVL of Solana is $9.167 billion, only 10.7% of the Ethereum ecosystem, indicating its funding scale and ecosystem maturity are still in a catch-up phase.

Secondly, the allocation logic of institutional capital reveals Ethereum's standard status. 28 institutions hold 6.14 million ETH, accounting for 5.09% of the circulating supply. Bitmine alone holds 4.17 million and stakes 1.685 million ETH to earn 2.8-3.5% APY. 19 institutions hold 18.319 million SOL, accounting for 2.96% of the circulating supply, with Forward holding 6.91 million SOL to specifically support Firedancer validators. In terms of holding size, the value of institutional ETH holdings far exceeds that of SOL. In terms of allocation strategy, ETH institutions focus on "long-term staking + stable yield," while SOL institutions emphasize "infrastructure support + network optimization." This difference reflects the positioning divergence of the two chains in the eyes of institutions: Ethereum is a mature store of value and financial infrastructure, while Solana is a high-potential asset requiring continuous investment to improve stability.

More crucially, Solana is converging towards the modular and institutional standards established by Ethereum. Technically, the Firedancer client launched on the mainnet on December 12, 2025, introducing a "modular tile" architecture for fault isolation and independent upgrades, which aligns closely with Ethereum's modular philosophy. The Alpenglow consensus upgrade is planned for activation in mid-2026, optimizing decentralization through out-of-band voting (Votor) and stake-weighted propagation (Rotor), addressing institutional compliance demands for node governance. Strategically, the Solana Foundation proactively incorporates DAT institution suggestions to optimize network stability. Actions like Western Union integration and the SOL spot ETF surpassing $10 billion AUM are examples of Solana learning from and imitating Ethereum's "institutional adaptation + compliance-first" strategy.

Messari pointedly noted in "Crypto Theses 2026": After the Cancun upgrade, Ethereum faces the "settlement landfill" risk and must uphold its decentralized principles while embracing traditional capital. Solana needs to shift from Meme speculation, which accounts for 80% of its transactions, to a sustainable revenue model, addressing the centralization risks of the POH mechanism. These contradictions reveal the essence of convergent evolution: As the leader, Ethereum needs to resolve its internal contradictions to consolidate its standard status. As the chaser, Solana needs to complete its convergence towards Ethereum's standards through technological upgrades and strategic transformation, achieving identity reconstruction from a "retail trading chain" to "institutional-grade infrastructure."

2. Core Convergence: A Unified Logical Framework for Public Chain Development

Both Ethereum and Solana have moved beyond the stage where technology alone determined valuation, shifting to a dual-driver model of ecosystem vitality and capital quality. The core indicator is: The value anchor has shifted from traditional narratives like TPS and Gas fees to ecosystem and capital dimensions such as scenario adaptability, application retention rate, and the quality of institutional capital deposits.

2.1 Value Support: Ethereum's Dominant Institutional Infrastructure vs. Solana's Differentiated Path

In this shift, Ethereum has established the industry standard for value support with its first-mover advantage and ecosystem depth, while Solana is gradually converging towards this standard during its catch-up process.

The Ethereum ecosystem, with its $85.345 billion TVL, commands 65.9% of the DeFi market share, becoming the absolute core carrier for institutional RWA deployment. Within the mainnet's $75.544 billion TVL, stablecoin protocols like Aave and Ethena, and RWA projects like Ondo Finance form the foundation of institutional-grade financial infrastructure, hosting 80% of tokenized US Treasury bonds. In the L2 ecosystem, Base's $5.15 billion TVL and Arbitrum's $3.168 billion TVL represent the successful validation of the modular strategy: The architectural design of "mainnet as secure settlement layer, L2s handling high-frequency execution" has become the paradigm standard for public chain scaling. Grayscale reports show Ethereum dominates stablecoins, DeFi TVL, and tokenized US Treasuries. The commonality of these scenarios is their need for institutional-grade applications requiring high security, strong compliance, and complex logic. BlackRock explicitly positioned Ethereum in its 2026 outlook as "the sole settlement layer standard for stablecoins and digital liquidity," emphasizing its key role in bridging TradFi.

Solana, with its $9.167 billion TVL, sits in the second tier, equivalent to 10.7% of the Ethereum ecosystem. It has built user moats in scenarios like memes and high-frequency trading, but its funding scale and scenario maturity remain in the catch-up phase. On-chain data shows Solana DEX volume over the past 30 days was approximately $126.66 billion. Although its TVL is only 10.7% of Ethereum's ecosystem, its trading activity far exceeds the mainnet. Its extremely low average transaction cost of <$0.01 enables high-frequency trading and social applications for tens of millions of users.

The evolving role of DAT funds further validates this convergence path. Ethereum's DAT funds primarily focus on "long-term allocation + network security contribution": Bitmine holds 4.17 million ETH and stakes 1.685 million to earn 2.8-3.5% APY, transforming institutional capital into long-term locked value for network security. SharpLink holds 865,000 ETH focused on staking yield, reducing circulating supply volatility. Solana's DAT funds emphasize "infrastructure support + network optimization": Forward holds 6.91 million SOL deployed in staking and lending, specifically supporting the Firedancer validator client. SOL Strategies manages $12.4 billion in delegated SOL to validators, directly strengthening network security. This difference reflects that Solana is learning from Ethereum's institutional adaptation model: shifting from pure speculative allocation to infrastructure investment, though the quality of capital retention still needs improvement through the Firedancer and Alpenglow upgrades.

a16z's "State of Crypto 2025" data shows Ethereum + L2s remain the top destination for new developers, but developer interest in Solana grew 78% over 2 years. This data validates that ecosystem vitality attracts developers and users, while institutional capital provides liquidity and value support. Solana is replicating Ethereum's successful dual-driver model of "ecosystem + capital."

2.2 Ecosystem Governance: From Community-Led to "Community + Institution" Collaborative Governance

Decentralized community governance was once a core label for public chains, but the influx of institutional capital is pushing both chains towards a "community + institution" collaborative governance model. This transformation is not a simple power transfer but an inevitable choice to find a dynamic balance between decentralized foundations and institutionalized needs.

When the Ethereum community advances core issues like L2 profit-sharing proposals and restaking mechanism optimization, it must fully consider the compliance and yield stability demands of institutions like BlackRock. On-chain data reveals a stark reality: In Ethereum's DAT, Bitmine alone holds 3.45% of the ETH supply and continues buying to reach a target of 5%. This highly concentrated capital structure gives institutions significant voice in governance decisions. For example, in restaking mechanism optimization discussions, institutions favor lowering technical barriers and providing standardized low-risk or even risk-free yield products to attract more traditional capital. The community, however, fears this could lead to capital oligopolization, eroding the decentralized foundation of node dispersion. In discussions on L2 profit-sharing proposals, institutions' core demand is establishing predictable revenue-sharing mechanisms to ensure the mainnet directly benefits from L2 prosperity, while the community emphasizes profit distribution rights for smaller nodes to avoid concentration towards large institutions.

The Solana Foundation, in designing the Alpenglow upgrade plan, proactively incorporates DAT institution suggestions on network stability and node governance to avoid disconnection between technical optimization and capital demands. On-chain data shows 19 institutions hold 18.319 million SOL, but the top 5 holders control about 85%, indicating extreme concentration. These institutions presented clear demands during the Alpenglow upgrade process: expanding POH timestamp nodes from 3 to 12 with a rotation mechanism to reduce single points of failure and censorship risk; optimizing the Firedancer validator client to strengthen spam transaction filtering, preventing past outages caused by client bugs and dust attacks. The Solana Foundation incorporated these suggestions into its technical roadmap, demonstrating the substantive influence of institutional capital on network evolution.

The core of this collaborative governance model is finding a balance between decentralized foundations and institutionalized needs. Ethereum strengthens quantum resistance and censorship resistance through Peer DAS and ZK-EVM while attracting institutions through RWA compliance adaptation. Solana enhances network resilience through the Firedancer client while leveraging high performance to drive the rise of native applications. Fidelity emphasized in its 2026 outlook that DAT drove ETH's price rebound from the April 2025 low of $1,472 to the August high of $4,832, validating the value support from institutional recognition. Galaxy, in its 26 predictions on December 18, 2025, noted Solana needs to shift from Memes to a revenue model, but inflation reduction proposals will be rejected in 2026, hinting at the tug-of-war between community and institutions over monetary policy adjustments.

Both chains recognize that pure community leadership struggles to absorb large-scale institutional capital, while over-accommodating institutions erodes core public chain attributes. Collaborative governance becomes the inevitable choice. Vitalik Buterin emphasized Ethereum's 2026 priorities: sovereignty, scaling ZK-EVM/PeerDAS, and reducing reliance on centralized services. This is precisely the path exploration to uphold decentralized foundations amidst the institutionalization wave. Solana attempts to optimize POH decentralization within its high-performance architecture through DAO-governed node admission/exit mechanisms and establishing on-chain timestamp data verification systems. This "community + institution" collaborative governance constitutes a common choice for both chains in the institutional era.

2.3 Goal Transformation: From General Infrastructure to Scenario-Specific Value Hubs

The early vision of one chain handling all scenarios has been disproven by the market. Public chains need to transform into scenario-specific value hubs. In this transformation, Ethereum has established the paradigm positioning of "global financial settlement layer" with its first-mover advantage and ecosystem depth. Solana seeks differentiated survival in vertical scenarios like high-frequency trading and is gradually converging towards institutionally recognized standards.

Ethereum focuses on the narrative of a global financial settlement layer, building institutional-grade financial infrastructure, dominating scenarios like stablecoins, DeFi, and RWA, and becoming the bridge between TradFi and Crypto. Solana focuses on high-frequency trading scenarios, forming advantages in areas like Memes and DePIN, leveraging low fees and high TPS to handle massive user interactions. A 21Shares report notes Solana excels in speed, engagement, and revenue across DeFi, Meme, DePIN, and AI scenarios. However, this positioning essentially seeks differentiated survival space outside the institutional tracks dominated by Ethereum.

Nevertheless, Solana is converging towards Ethereum's institutional standards through technological upgrades and strategic adjustments. The mainnet launch of the Firedancer client introduces a modular architecture. The planned Alpenglow consensus upgrade optimizes decentralization and compliance adaptability. Western Union integration and the SOL spot ETF surpassing $10 billion AUM are efforts to position itself as "high-performance infrastructure recognized by institutions." However, data like Ondo Finance's TVL on Solana being only $248.64M and institutional DAT fund retention rates <40% show that Solana remains in the catch-up phase regarding institutional-grade application deposits. It needs to fulfill stability promises through the Firedancer/Alpenglow upgrades to achieve true convergence towards Ethereum's standards.

A Coinbase institutional monthly report states: Ethereum is the institutional proxy for RWA, while Solana excels in speed, engagement, and revenue. Their narratives are differentiated but not mutually exclusive. This "differentiated but not opposing" relationship's essence is: Ethereum has established industry standards and leadership. Solana seeks differentiated survival in vertical scenarios while converging towards the institutionalized, modular, and compliant standards established by Ethereum through technological evolution and strategic adjustments, jointly pushing blockchain from infrastructure competition to a new stage of high-quality application adoption.

3. Dilemmas: Differentiated Challenges Within the Convergent Framework

Under the unified development logic, Ethereum and Solana still face their own core dilemmas. These stem from inherent differences in their technical architectures and development paths and are key to determining whether they can break through growth bottlenecks. On-chain data and institutional reports reveal that both chains' unique dilemmas revolve around the main theme of "how to uphold core attributes during institutional expansion," but their specific manifestations differ drastically.

3.1 Ethereum: The Erosion of Decentralization Under Traditional Capital Invasion

As the benchmark of the public chain ecosystem, Ethereum's decentralized attributes are facing unprecedented erosion as it absorbs traditional capital and RWA scenarios. This erosion is not a single-dimensional risk but a systemic challenge spanning capital structure, governance voice, and network security, becoming the core proposition determining whether Ethereum can uphold its identity as a decentralized financial infrastructure.

Capital concentration risk has become a core隐患, directly threatening governance equality and node dispersion. On-chain data reveals a严峻 reality: Ethereum DAT funds have a CR5 (concentration ratio of the top 5 institutions) exceeding 75%, forming a closed loop of "capital holding → network governance → profit acquisition." 28 institutions collectively hold 6.14 million ETH (5.09% of circulating supply, and this比例 is expanding). This highly concentrated capital structure causes Ethereum's governance decisions to increasingly tilt towards institutional interests—in core议题 like restaking mechanism optimization and L2 profit-sharing scheme design, institutional诉求权重 far exceeds that of中小节点 and the community. Decentralized governance risks becoming an附属 of "capital consensus."

Messari also warned in its annual report that this concentration could lead to "institution-led network evolution" and "governance oligopolization." Specific manifestations include: In restaking protocols like EigenLayer, large institutions monopolize high-yield validation services凭借资金规模优势, while中小节点 struggle to participate due to capital