2026 Ethereum Future Development Outlook: A 22,000-Word Research Report (Part 1): How Far Is It From "Infrastructure" to "Ecological Center"?

As one of the most important smart contract platforms today, Ethereum has built the most diverse on-chain ecosystem and continues to lead the direction of Web3 technological innovation. However, as the ecosystem's scale expands, a series of issues accumulated in Ethereum's underlying architecture and development path are gradually emerging and becoming more complex. For example, controversies persist over ecosystem governance and benefit distribution mechanisms; during scaling, it is difficult to balance consensus security, verification efficiency, and decentralization; uncertainties remain regarding data availability and scaling paths (such as sharding and the Blob mechanism); the Rollup-centric architectural transformation impacts the main chain's value capture and ecosystem structure; the power distribution and sequencing mechanisms centered around MEV are reshaping the block production system; and competition from high-performance public chains puts external pressure on Ethereum's performance and ecosystem appeal.

Against this backdrop, the Ethereum Foundation and core developers have intensively advanced a series of key adjustments and innovative attempts over the past year. For instance, they have reorganized the Foundation's organizational structure, clarified the responsibilities of the Protocol team, redefined the functions of L1 and L2, adjusted the Foundation's positioning within the ecosystem, explored commercial pathways for Ethereum, and participated in setting agent economy standards. These changes signify that Ethereum is evolving from a single technical system into a comprehensive infrastructure system encompassing execution, verification, coordination, and fund allocation.

Based on this, this research report takes the core issues currently faced by Ethereum as its starting point. It systematically reviews the latest progress in technology, architecture, and the ecosystem while interpreting Ethereum's medium-to-long-term development direction. Additionally, it analyzes the Ethereum Foundation's strategic direction by examining its exploration of funding mechanisms and potential commercial pathways and assesses the potential risks that may arise during its development. This is intended to help you fully understand the logic behind Ethereum's frequent moves.

Author: ShirleyLi, Researcher at Web3Caff Research

Cover: Photo by Unsplash+, Typography by Web3Caff Research

Word Count: Nearly 22,000 words in total

Note: Due to space constraints, this research report is published in two parts. This is Part 1 (covering sections: Background, Review of Ethereum's Core Issues). The remaining sections (Detailed Explanation of the Strawmap Draft, Exploring Compliant Commercialization Paths, Market Competition and Risk Assessment, Other Directions Worth Watching, Ethereum Foundation's Support Directions, New Risks the Ethereum Ecosystem May Face, and Future Outlook) will be completed in Part 2.

Table of Contents

• Background
• Review of Ethereum's Core Issues
• Criticisms Surrounding the Ethereum Foundation and Vitalik Buterin
• Improvements in PoS Technology
• Blob Capacity Strain
• The Rollup-Centric Future
• The Battle Over MEV
• The Impact from Layer 1s like Solana and Sui
• Detailed Explanation of the Strawmap Draft
• Gigagas L1
• Post Quantum L1
• Private L1
• The 7 Upgrades Planned in the Strawmap Draft
• Exploring Compliant Commercialization Paths
• Commercialization Attempts
• Compliance
• Other Directions Worth Watching
• Adjustments to the Gas Mechanism
• From DeFi to Defipunk
• AI
• Ethereum Foundation's Support Directions
• New Risks the Ethereum Ecosystem May Face
• Future Outlook
• Key Points Structure Diagram
• References

Background

Since Vitalik Buterin and his team officially introduced Ethereum to global users at international conferences in 2014, the network has undergone nearly twelve years of development. From an early niche experiment to the core infrastructure supporting a diverse ecosystem today, Ethereum has grown into one of the most influential underlying platforms in the Web3 world. However, as the ecosystem's scale continues to expand, the "behemoth" that is Ethereum has grown larger, and its pace has become heavier. Under the harsh law of the jungle, this inherent burden is constantly amplified by external challengers—it must not only cope with its own operational pressures but also face eager newcomers.

For Ethereum, "maintaining stability" and "seeking change" have always been contradictory yet tightly intertwined directions. On one hand, it needs to maintain network stability, ensuring the steady progress of the entire ecosystem; on the other hand, it must continuously chart new courses for the ecosystem. To this end, Ethereum has continuously confirmed and revised its development coordinates by releasing phased roadmaps.

Between 2014 and 2016, Ethereum gradually formed an early phased development plan during its progress, divided into four stages: Frontier, Homestead, Metropolis, and Serenity. The first three stages are generally considered the Ethereum 1.0 phase, primarily focused on improving basic functionality and enhancing network stability. Serenity represents its long-term evolutionary goal, centered on achieving a leap in scalability and performance through the reconstruction of the consensus mechanism and underlying architecture.

In 2020, Ethereum further clarified the technical path for the Serenity phase, formally establishing the transition to the Proof-of-Stake (PoS) mechanism and introducing the concept of sharding, marking the beginning of a systematic architectural restructuring phase for Ethereum.

In 2022, Ethereum released a relatively complete medium-to-long-term roadmap, establishing a Rollup-centric scaling path. This meant that Ethereum shifted execution layer scaling to Layer 2 networks, while the main chain's focus began to center on security and data availability. This change set a new tone for subsequent ecosystem development but also laid the groundwork for potential risks.

In February 2026, the Ethereum Foundation again released a draft roadmap for the next ten years, known as the "Strawmap," proposing more specific optimization goals across multiple dimensions such as the consensus layer, data layer, and execution layer. This further refined Ethereum's long-term optimization direction, reflecting its ongoing reflection on the overall architectural evolution at a mature stage.

Review of Ethereum's Core Issues

However, the adjustment and refinement of the development path themselves reflect Ethereum's dynamic trade-offs between multiple goals—scalability, security, decentralization, and ecological benefit distribution—based on actual development progress. Each version of the plan or roadmap can be seen as a phased balance for the system's overall structure.

In a research report from late 2024 titled "Ethereum's Future Path: Development Amid Controversy, Can the Ecosystem Giant Withstand Potential Crises?," the author discussed some of the challenges Ethereum was facing, including:

• Controversies persist over ecosystem governance and benefit distribution mechanisms;
• During scaling, it is difficult to balance consensus security, verification efficiency, and decentralization;
• Uncertainties remain regarding data availability and scaling paths (such as sharding and the Blob mechanism);
• The Rollup-centric architectural transformation impacts the main chain's value capture and ecosystem structure;
• The power distribution and sequencing mechanisms centered around MEV are reshaping the block production system;
• Competition from high-performance public chains puts external pressure on Ethereum's performance and ecosystem appeal.

So, over a year later, what are the latest developments on these issues? The author will address them one by one in the following content.

Criticisms Surrounding the Ethereum Foundation and Vitalik Buterin

Since the establishment of the Ethereum Foundation, the team centered around Vitalik Buterin has undergone multiple rounds of personnel changes. Due to Vitalik Buterin's prominent influence in the Ethereum ecosystem, the power structure of the Foundation has been subject to long-term external attention and discussion.

In this context, some argue that certain projects may tend to align with Vitalik Buterin's technical preferences or the Foundation's funding directions in their development, leading to periodic resource concentration or even overcapacity in specific tracks. Meanwhile, the distributed nature of the technical team also makes it difficult for Ethereum's overall progress speed to meet people's expectations for its iteration and innovation pace.

Additionally, selling activities by the Ethereum Foundation and Vitalik Buterin have once caused market concerns. Although Vitalik Buterin and related Foundation members have stated that these funds are primarily used to support ecosystem development and project funding, these actions have still triggered discussion and interpretation at the market level.

Latest Developments:

In early 2025, as the overall market environment warmed up and new narratives emerged, Ethereum's development pace was relatively slow, which to some extent sparked community dissatisfaction. Some argued that the Ethereum Foundation and core developers lagged in terms of progress efficiency, market communication, and ecosystem expansion, showing a certain disconnect from the industry's overall rhythm.

In response to these criticisms, the Ethereum Foundation made a series of important adjustments.

In February 2025, Aya Miyaguchi, who had served as the Executive Director of the Ethereum Foundation since 2018, transitioned to the newly established role of President. Her responsibilities shifted from daily operations and execution management to external partnerships, institutional relations, and cultural dissemination. At the same time, Nethermind founder Tomasz Stańczak and Hsiao-Wei Wang jointly assumed the role of Co-Executive Directors.

Under the new management structure, the Ethereum Foundation streamlined its operations, laying off 19 employees, and shifted its strategic focus from Layer 2 back to Layer 1 itself. Simultaneously, the Foundation began to place greater emphasis on external communication, enhancing transparency in technical roadmaps, development directions, and resource usage to strengthen community trust.

In June 2025, the Ethereum Foundation also restructured its internal research and development system. The former department name was simplified from "Protocol Research & Development (PR&D)" to "Protocol," aiming to achieve three goals in the short term: scale L1 performance; scale Blobs; and improve user experience. This adjustment marked a shift in R&D focus from being research-oriented towards engineering implementation and actual delivery. Earlier this year, the Protocol team further upgraded its work objectives, clearly defining them as:

• Scale: Expand L1 performance by increasing the Gas limit, advancing Proposer-Builder Separation, introducing zkEVM to the mainnet, and optimizing the Blob mechanism;
• Improve UX: Enhance user experience by consistently advancing native account abstraction and cross-chain interoperability;
• Harden the L1: Strengthen L1 security and censorship resistance by reinforcing post-quantum security preparedness, reducing node burdens, and decreasing reliance on centralized infrastructure.

However, in February 2026, Tomasz Stańczak announced his resignation as Co-Executive Director of the Ethereum Foundation, with Bastian Aue and Hsiao-Wei Wang jointly succeeding him. During his tenure, Tomasz Stańczak promoted explorations in areas including privacy protection, quantum computing security, and the integration of AI with Ethereum. After stepping down, he will focus more energy on products and infrastructure related to the convergence of AI and blockchain. [1]

Notably, in his resignation statement, Tomasz Stańczak conveyed a sentiment of "realizing he was no longer the core driving force and gracefully handing over the baton." This also reflects the gradual dispersion of power within the Ethereum Foundation's governance layer. This change essentially embodies the friction and balance between "Ethereum," the decentralized open ecosystem, and the "Ethereum Foundation," the centralized core coordination body. This contradiction, in fact, exists throughout the entire Web3 system and is one of the key issues all projects in the industry must continuously address.

According to the latest internal organizational structure, the board members of the Ethereum Foundation include Vitalik Buterin, Aya Miyaguchi, Patrick Storchenegger, and Hsiao-Wei Wang, primarily responsible for Ethereum's governance and strategic direction adjustments. Specific execution and operations are jointly undertaken by the management team and various functional teams. The Ethereum Foundation divides its overall work into several directions based on function, mainly including:

• Protocol Team: Responsible for advancing the design and implementation of Ethereum's underlying protocol, covering sub-fields such as zkEVM, post-quantum, and dAI;
• Privacy Team: Responsible for promoting the research and implementation of on-chain privacy-related technologies, such as private transactions and zero-knowledge proof systems;
• Ecodev (Ecosystem Development) Team: Responsible for promoting Ethereum ecosystem building, including developer support, project incubation, and ecological coordination;
• Ecosystem Unblocking Team: Responsible for promoting ecosystem development through fund coordination, research support, and public infrastructure construction;
• Operations Team: Responsible for the day-to-day operations of the organization, including finance, legal, human resources, and internal management functions.

Source: Ethereum Foundation

Meanwhile, to adapt to changes in the ecosystem's developmental stage and resource allocation needs, the Ethereum Foundation made a key adjustment to its grant system in August 2025. It paused the open grant program that had been running since 2018 and relaunched a new Ecosystem Support Program (ESP) in November. Following the adjustment, the fund allocation model shifted from "passively receiving applications" to "actively guiding." The initial funding directions covered areas such as cryptography, privacy, application layers, security, and community growth. At the same time, the Foundation decided to reduce the annual expenditure rate from approximately 15% to 5% to slow the depletion of its ETH reserves. [2] This adjustment marked a shift for the Ethereum Foundation from a broad-coverage ecosystem funding model to a refined resource allocation strategy focused on infrastructure and core technologies.

In May of this year, Ethereum Foundation researchers Carl Beek and Julian Ma announced their resignations one after another. Former Ethereum Foundation researcher Dankrad Feist even publicly stated that the Ethereum ecosystem needed to establish a new organization more aligned with Ethereum's economic interests to "save" Ethereum. In response, Vitalik Buterin and Ethereum co-founder Joe Lubin responded, both stating that these controversies essentially reflect the friction between Ethereum's "long-term technology building" orientation and the current commercialization process, but this is a necessary "growing pain" in the development process.

Improvements in PoS Technology

While the transition to Proof-of-Stake (PoS) allowed Ethereum to abandon the high-energy-consumption consensus model, the 32 ETH staking threshold raised the barrier to entry for validators, indirectly inducing the risk of validator centralization. To lower the staking threshold for individual validators, a key issue becomes how to reduce the communication and coordination costs for the network to reach consensus and increase the cost of malicious behavior when the number of validators increases.

In response, Vitalik Buterin proposed enhancing network security by increasing the participation ratio required for block finality (e.g., from the current ~2/3 threshold signature to 75% or even higher). [3] The core idea of this approach is to hedge against potential security risks by raising the consensus threshold, which can to some extent balance decentralization and security.

Latest Developments:

In May 2025, the Pectra upgrade was activated on the Ethereum mainnet.

In this upgrade, EIP-7251 raised the maximum effective balance limit for validators from 32 ETH to 2048 ETH. It is important to note that 32 ETH remains the minimum staking threshold to become a validator. This proposal's main effect is to increase the upper limit of consensus weight a single validator can account for, meaning one validator can directly represent more ETH in voting. Through this adjustment, large stakers no longer need to split their stake into multiple validator nodes to receive corresponding rewards, reducing situations where the same entity controls multiple validator nodes, thereby lowering the communication and coordination overhead among nodes during the network's consensus process.

EIP-7002 optimized the staking withdrawal mechanism. This proposal introduced an execution layer-triggered withdrawal method, allowing stakers to complete withdrawals under specific conditions without requiring the validator's active signature. This mechanism enhances stakers' control over their assets, reduces operational complexity for entering and exiting staking, and further improves the overall flexibility of the PoS system.

Additionally, the Ethereum Foundation explored applying Distributed Validator Technology (DVT) to optimize the staking structure. This technology essentially reduces the risk of single points of failure by splitting the private key and signing capabilities of a single validator to be completed collaboratively by multiple nodes. In traditional models, systems have high requirements for the stability and private key management of validator nodes. Under the multi-node collaborative model, validation responsibilities are shared among multiple nodes, which helps lower