Arbitrum has established itself as the preeminent Layer 2 (L2) scaling solution for Ethereum, commanding a dominant market share in Total Value Locked (TVL), transaction volume, and decentralized application (dApp) deployment. As of early 2025, Arbitrumâs TVL stands at approximately $19.3 billion, representing a significant portion of the total value locked across all of Ethereumâs L2s, while hosting over 2,200 dApps in its ecosystem.
The strategic imperative: Ethereumâs blockchain trilemmaâthe persistent trade-off between security, decentralization, and scalabilityâhas limited the mainnet to approximately 15 to 40 transactions per second (TPS). During high demand periods, this bottleneck drives transaction fees to prohibitive levels, creating a barrier to mainstream adoption. Layer 2 solutions like Arbitrum address this by processing transactions off-chain and posting compressed batches to Ethereum mainnet, achieving dramatic cost reductions while preserving the security guarantees of the underlying Layer 1.
Arbitrumâs competitive advantage: The platformâs success is primarily attributable to its early focus on high-fidelity Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) compatibility, which facilitated seamless migration for established protocols and developers. This strategy fostered a vibrant and deeply liquid ecosystem, particularly within the Decentralized Finance (DeFi) sector, where Arbitrum is often referred to as the âDeFi Titan.â
This comprehensive analysis examines Arbitrumâs Optimistic Rollup architecture, the evolutionary Nitro and Stylus upgrades, competitive positioning against Optimism and Zero-Knowledge Rollup solutions, ecosystem dynamics, and the strategic roadmap toward full decentralization and next-generation scalability.
Understanding Ethereumâs Scalability Challenge and Layer 2 Solutions
The Blockchain Trilemma and Ethereumâs Bottleneck
The foundational challenge confronting blockchain networks like Ethereum is the âblockchain trilemma,â a concept positing a persistent trade-off between three essential properties: security, decentralization, and scalability. In its pursuit of becoming a global settlement layer, the Ethereum mainnet (Layer 1) has deliberately prioritized robust security and a high degree of decentralization. This design choice, while critical for creating a trustless and censorship-resistant platform, has come at the direct expense of scalability.
The practical consequence is a severe limitation on the networkâs transaction processing capacity. The Ethereum blockchain can handle approximately 15 to 40 transactions per second for its entire global user base. During periods of high demand, this low throughput creates a bottleneck where users must compete for limited block space, driving transaction feesâknown as âgasââto prohibitively expensive levels that can reach hundreds of dollars for simple operations.
Layer 2 Scaling Architecture
Layer 2 (L2) solutions have emerged as the primary strategy to overcome Ethereumâs inherent scalability limitations. An L2 is a distinct protocol built on top of an existing L1 blockchain, designed to dramatically increase transaction throughput and reduce costs without compromising the foundational security and decentralization guarantees of the underlying L1.
The core mechanism involves moving the bulk of transaction execution and computation off the main Ethereum chain. L2 nodes process transactions independently, bundle or âroll upâ hundreds of them into a single batch, and then post a compressed summary or cryptographic proof of this batch back to the L1 for final validation and settlement. By amortizing the cost of a single L1 transaction across many L2 transactions, this approach drastically reduces the data footprint on the main chain, leading to significant performance gains and cost efficiencies.
Impact: L2 networks collectively process 11 to 12 times more transactions than the Ethereum main chain itself, demonstrating the effectiveness of this scaling paradigm.
The L2 landscape is diverse, with several competing technologies each possessing distinct trade-offs. Major categories include Optimistic Rollups, ZK-Rollups, State Channels, Plasma, and Sidechains. Arbitrum is a leading implementation of the Optimistic Rollup model.
Arbitrumâs Core Architecture: Optimistic Rollups Deep Dive
Transaction Lifecycle: From Submission to Settlement
The journey of a transaction on the Arbitrum network begins when a user submits it to a specialized node known as the Sequencer. The Sequencerâs primary role is to receive transactions from users, determine their order, and compress them into a highly optimized batch. This ordering function is critical for the networkâs operation, though its current centralized implementation remains a key area for future improvement.
Once a batch is formed, the Sequencer posts the compressed transaction data to the Ethereum mainnet as calldata, a more cost-effective method of data storage compared to contract storage. This step is the cornerstone of the ârollupâ security model. By ensuring that all transaction data is available on the L1, Arbitrum guarantees that anyone can independently verify the chainâs state and detect any fraudulent activity. This on-chain data availability ensures that users can always recover their funds, so long as the underlying Ethereum network remains secure.
The primary source of cost savings comes from this batching process; the fixed gas cost of a single L1 transaction is effectively shared among the hundreds of L2 transactions contained within the batch, dramatically lowering the per-transaction cost for each user.
The âOptimisticâ Principle and State Assertions
Arbitrum is an âOptimistic Rollup,â a name derived from its core operational principle. The network optimistically assumes that all transactions included in a batch by the Sequencer are valid by default. This âinnocent until proven guiltyâ approach distinguishes it from ZK-Rollups, which proactively generate cryptographic proofs for every batch.
While the Sequencer posts transaction batches, network participants known as Validators (also referred to as provers or watchers) monitor the chainâs activity. After a batch is posted to L1, a validator computes the resulting new state of the Arbitrum chain and posts a formal claim called an assertion or state root to an Ethereum smart contract. This assertion acts as a checkpoint, representing the validatorâs claim about the correct state of the L2 chain. To ensure accountability, validators must post a bond in the form of ETH as collateral when making an assertion.
Interactive Fraud-Proof Mechanism
The security of the optimistic model is enforced by the fraud-proof mechanism. If a dishonest validator posts an incorrect state assertion, any honest validator can initiate a challenge within a predefined time window known as the challenge period.
A key innovation in Arbitrumâs design is its use of a multi-round interactive fraud proof system. Re-executing an entire batch of hundreds of transactions on the L1 to verify a dispute would be computationally intensive and prohibitively expensive. Instead, Arbitrumâs protocol facilitates an efficient, off-chain âgameâ between the challenger and the original assertor. Through a call-and-response process, the two parties interact to narrow down their disagreement from an entire batch of transactions to the single, specific computational step where their results diverge.
Only this single, disputed instruction is then executed and verified by the smart contract on the Ethereum L1. This process is vastly more efficient than naive fraud-proof models. If the original assertion is proven fraudulent, the dishonest validatorâs bonded ETH is slashed, with a portion used to reward the honest challenger.
This architectural decision creates a more favorable environment for complex DeFi protocols to operate. By minimizing the on-chain cost of dispute resolution for computationally intensive applications, Arbitrumâs design has created a powerful flywheel: sophisticated protocols are drawn to Arbitrum, bringing deep liquidity and an active user base, which in turn makes Arbitrum the most attractive venue for the next generation of DeFi innovation.
The Challenge Period Trade-off
The most significant trade-off inherent in the optimistic security model is the challenge period. This is a mandatory waiting period, lasting approximately 6.4 to 7 days on Arbitrum, before a transaction is considered fully final on L1. This delay is a crucial security feature, providing ample time for honest validators to detect potential fraud and submit a challenge before an invalid state change becomes irreversible.
From a user experience perspective, this delay is most acutely felt when withdrawing funds from Arbitrum back to Ethereum using the native bridge. Users must wait for the full challenge period to elapse before their assets become available on L1. This stands in stark contrast to ZK-Rollups, which can offer near-instant withdrawals due to their use of validity proofs.
To mitigate this significant UX friction, the Arbitrum ecosystem relies heavily on third-party liquidity networks and âfast bridgesâ like Connext and Across. These services act as liquidity providers, fronting users funds on L1 immediately in exchange for a small fee, assuming the risk of the 7-day waiting period themselves.
Evolution of the Arbitrum Stack: AVM to Nitro to Stylus
The Arbitrum Virtual Machine (AVM) and EVM Equivalence
In its initial design, Arbitrum did not execute transactions directly within the standard Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM). Instead, its developers, Offchain Labs, created a custom-designed environment known as the Arbitrum Virtual Machine (AVM). The creation of the AVM was a strategic decision driven by the need to support the protocolâs unique features, most notably its multi-round interactive fraud-proof mechanism and a specialized operating system, ArbOS.
Despite being a custom virtual machine, the AVM was engineered with a paramount goal: to be fully compatible with the EVM at the bytecode level. This concept, often referred to as EVM equivalence, was the cornerstone of Arbitrumâs adoption strategy. It ensured that developers could write smart contracts using familiar Ethereum languages like Solidity and Vyper, compile them with standard tooling, and deploy them on Arbitrum with minimal or no code modifications. This seamless developer experience was critical in Arbitrumâs ability to quickly attract a vast ecosystem of existing Ethereum dApps.
The Nitro Upgrade: Performance Paradigm Shift
The Nitro upgrade, which went live in August 2022, was a landmark event representing a fundamental re-architecture of the entire technology stack. It was a direct response to performance bottlenecks and rising fees the network experienced during periods of high growth in late 2021.
The core innovation of Nitro was the replacement of the original AVMâs custom emulator. Instead of interpreting AVM bytecode, the Nitro stack compiles the core software of Gethâthe most widely used Ethereum clientâdirectly into WebAssembly (WASM) for execution. This ingenious move allowed Arbitrum to leverage the battle-tested and highly optimized Geth codebase directly, leading to dramatic increases in raw performance and near-perfect EVM compatibility.
Nitro also introduced more advanced algorithms for calldata compression, further reducing the amount of data that needed to be posted to the L1, directly translating into lower transaction fees. The successful deployment resulted in a significant increase in transaction throughput and a reduction in fees by over 50%, solidifying Arbitrumâs position as a performance leader in the L2 space.
Arbitrum Stylus: Multi-VM Future with WASM
Arbitrum Stylus represents the next major evolutionary step, introducing a second, high-performance virtual machine based on WebAssembly (WASM) that operates in parallel with the traditional EVM. This innovative dual-VM architecture is referred to as a âMulti-VMâ or âEVM+â paradigm.
The primary significance of Stylus is that it breaks the confines of the EVMâs language monopoly. It empowers developers to write smart contracts in popular and highly efficient programming languages, such as Rust, C, and C++, which can be compiled to WASM. This dramatically lowers the barrier to entry for millions of skilled developers outside the Web3 ecosystem and enables the direct porting of existing, high-performance code libraries to the blockchain.
Crucially, this new environment is designed for full interoperability. A smart contract written in Solidity can seamlessly call a function in a Rust-based contract, and vice versa, allowing developers to use the best language for a given task within a single application. Contracts executed in the WASM VM benefit from superior computational efficiency and memory optimization, resulting in significantly lower gas fees and faster execution speeds. This performance boost is expected to enable new categories of on-chain applications that are currently too resource-intensive for the EVM, such as complex on-chain games, generative art, and advanced cryptographic functions.
Arbitrum Orbit: Customizable Layer 3 Chains
Arbitrum Orbit is a framework that extends Arbitrumâs scaling capabilities into a third layer. It empowers projects to launch their own customizable Layer 3 (L3) blockchains that settle on one of Arbitrumâs L2 chains, such as Arbitrum One or Nova.
This ârollup-as-a-serviceâ model provides developers with a high degree of sovereignty and control. Projects can define their own chainâs governance model, choose a custom token for gas fees, and implement specific privacy features tailored to their applicationâs needs. Orbit chains can be deployed as high-security Rollups or as AnyTrust chains, which utilize a Data Availability Committee to offer ultra-low transaction fees at the cost of a minor trust assumption.
Arbitrum Orbit represents a strategic vision for horizontal scaling. Instead of forcing all activity onto a single L2 chain, it enables the creation of a vast, interconnected ecosystem of application-specific L3s, positioning Arbitrum as a foundational settlement and security hub for a universe of specialized blockchains.
Competitive Landscape: Arbitrum vs. Optimism vs. ZK-Rollups
Optimistic Rollup Duel: Arbitrum vs. Optimism
Arbitrum and Optimism are the two dominant forces in the Optimistic Rollup space, sharing foundational technology but possessing key architectural differences.
From a technical standpoint, a notable differentiator has been their approach to fraud proofs. Arbitrum implemented a more complex, multi-round interactive fraud-proof system from early on, which is considered more gas-efficient for resolving disputes involving complex smart contract transactions. Optimism historically used a simpler, single-round fraud proof, though it is evolving its proofing system.
In terms of performance metrics, Arbitrum often cites a higher theoretical ceiling, with a potential throughput of 40,000 TPS compared to Optimismâs 20,000 TPS, and significantly faster block times at approximately 0.25 seconds versus Optimismâs 2 seconds.
This technical edge has translated into clear market leadership. Arbitrumâs TVL exceeded $12 billion in early 2025, more than double Optimismâs figure of approximately $6 billion. Arbitrum has also cultivated a more robust on-chain governance framework through its DAO and the ARB token. However, both protocols currently face a similar critical challenge: their reliance on a centralized sequencer to order transactions. Decentralizing this core component is a top priority for both projects.
Optimistic vs. Zero-Knowledge Rollups
The Layer 2 landscape is broadly divided between two competing philosophies: Optimistic Rollups (ORUs) and Zero-Knowledge Rollups (ZKRs).
Core difference: ORUs like Arbitrum operate on âinnocent until proven guilty,â using fraud proofs to challenge invalid transactions after the fact. ZK-Rollups take the opposite approach: âguilty until proven innocent.â They proactively generate sophisticated cryptographic validity proofs (e.g., ZK-SNARK or ZK-STARK) for every batch of transactions, mathematically guaranteeing correctness without revealing underlying data.
Key trade-offs:
| Feature | Optimistic Rollups (Arbitrum) | ZK-Rollups (zkSync, StarkNet) |
|---|---|---|
| Transaction Finality | ~7-day challenge period | Near-instant (minutes) |
| EVM Compatibility | Equivalent (achieved early) | Historically limited (improving) |
| Computational Cost | Lower (only disputes require computation) | Higher (proof generation per batch) |
| Withdrawal Speed | 7-8 days (native bridge) | Minutes |
Competitors in the ZKR space are carving out distinct niches. zkSync is heavily focused on achieving EVM compatibility with its zkEVM and pioneering user experience enhancements like native account abstraction. StarkNet utilizes the highly scalable STARK proof system and its own custom programming language, Cairo, which presents a steeper learning curve for developers accustomed to Solidity.
Market Positioning: Data-Driven Leadership
Quantitative metrics position Arbitrum as the current market leader among Layer 2 solutions:
| Metric | Arbitrum | Optimism | zkSync | StarkNet |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TVL (Q1 2025) | ~$19.3B | ~$6B | ~$6.5B | ~$4.2B |
| Ecosystem Size | 2,200+ dApps | ~1,000 dApps | ~1,100 dApps | ~870 dApps |
| Technology Type | Optimistic Rollup | Optimistic Rollup | ZK-Rollup (zkEVM) | ZK-Rollup (STARKs) |
This market dominance is a direct consequence of strategic timing and focus. The relative simplicity of ORU technology allowed Arbitrum to launch and mature well before ZK-Rollups were ready for general-purpose smart contracts. Combined with immediate, high-quality EVM compatibility, this created a low-friction pathway for the entire battle-tested Ethereum DeFi ecosystem to migrate, enabling Arbitrum to capture immense network effects in liquidity, users, and developer talent.
The Arbitrum Ecosystem: DeFi Dominance and Beyond
Flagship DeFi Protocols
Arbitrumâs status as the leading Layer 2 is most evident in its dominance of the Decentralized Finance (DeFi) sector, where it is often referred to as the âDeFi Titan.â The network hosts a comprehensive suite of blue-chip DeFi protocols, many of which have established their largest and most active deployments on Arbitrum.
Key ecosystem anchors:
-
Decentralized Exchanges (DEXs): Uniswap, the leading automated market maker (AMM) in Ethereum, consistently ranks at the top in trading volume and unique active wallets. Other major DEXs include SushiSwap and the Arbitrum-native Camelot, along with aggregators like 1inch.
-
Derivatives: GMX stands out as a flagship Arbitrum-native protocol, pioneering an innovative liquidity pool model for decentralized perpetual futures trading, generating substantial real yield for liquidity providers.
-
Lending: Premier lending protocols like Aave V3 have established major presence on Arbitrum, allowing users to borrow and lend a wide range of assets with high capital efficiency.
-
Yield Products: Protocols like Pendle, for tokenizing and trading future yield, have found strong product-market fit on Arbitrum, attracting significant TVL.
This concentration of dominant DeFi protocols creates more than just a large ecosystem; it fosters a highly composable one. The deep liquidity and diverse functionalities establish a powerful âliquidity gravity well.â A new protocol can launch on Arbitrum and immediately integrate with Uniswapâs liquidity, use Aave for leverage, or hedge positions on GMX, drastically lowering the âcold-startâ problem that new applications typically face.
NFT and Gaming Frontier
While DeFi remains its core strength, Arbitrum is fostering a growing ecosystem in Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) and blockchain gaming. The leading global NFT marketplace, OpenSea, has integrated Arbitrum, providing users with significantly lower fees than Ethereum mainnet.
The gaming sector is particularly noteworthy for strategic use of Arbitrumâs dual-chain architecture. The ecosystem is anchored by projects like Treasure, a decentralized gaming ecosystem leveraging Arbitrumâs low-cost environment. To cater to high-volume, cost-sensitive applications, Arbitrum launched Arbitrum Nova, an AnyTrust chain that relies on a Data Availability Committee to store transaction data off-chain, further reducing costs at the expense of some decentralization.
A landmark adoption was the partnership with Reddit to host its blockchain-based Community Points system on Arbitrum Nova, demonstrating the platformâs capacity to handle applications with potential for massive scale.
Infrastructure and Tooling
A thriving application layer must be supported by robust infrastructure. Arbitrumâs ecosystem is bolstered by essential tooling and services. A prime example is the migration of The Graphâs settlement layer to Arbitrum. The Graph is critical Web3 infrastructure, providing a decentralized protocol for indexing and querying blockchain data. By moving operations to Arbitrum, The Graph leveraged lower fees and faster speeds, enhancing performance for thousands of dApps that rely on it.
The ecosystem is further strengthened by broad support from leading wallets like MetaMask and Coinbase Wallet, numerous cross-chain bridges, and a mature suite of developer tools ensuring stable and productive development environments.
For investors managing crypto assets across chains, securing funds with hardware cold wallets provides essential protection for self-custody holdings, particularly when bridging assets between Ethereum mainnet and Layer 2 solutions like Arbitrum.
The ARB Token: Governance, Tokenomics, and DAO
Governance-Centric Design
The ARB token, introduced in March 2023, serves a single, focused purpose within the Arbitrum ecosystem: governance. A critical design choice distinguishes ARB from many other native blockchain tokens: it is not used to pay for transaction fees on the network. Gas fees on Arbitrum are paid using Ethereumâs native asset, ETH, reinforcing Arbitrumâs identity as a scaling solution intrinsically linked to the L1.
The sole utility of the ARB token is to grant holders the right to participate in decision-making through the Arbitrum Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO). Token holders can propose and vote on on-chain governance proposals determining the protocolâs future evolution, including significant technical upgrades and allocation of substantial funds held within the DAO Treasury.
This separation of governance token (ARB) from gas token (ETH) is a deliberate architectural choice. By continuing to use ETH for gas, Arbitrum directly contributes to the economic security and value accrual of Ethereum L1, creating a symbiotic relationship. This design isolates ARBâs value proposition purely to the right to govern the protocol and its treasury.
Tokenomics: Supply and Allocation
The ARB token launched with an initial total supply of 10 billion tokens. The protocol allows for a maximum annual inflation rate of 2%, with any new token minting subject to DAO approval through governance.
Initial allocation:
- Arbitrum DAO Treasury: ~43% (4.278 billion ARB)
- Offchain Labs Team and Advisors: 27% (2.694 billion ARB)
- Offchain Labs Investors: 18% (1.753 billion ARB)
- Airdrop to Eligible Users: 12% (1.162 billion ARB)
- DAOs Building in Ecosystem: 1% (113 million ARB)
A crucial element is the vesting schedule for tokens allocated to team and investors. These tokens are subject to a four-year lockup period, with the first unlock occurring one year after token launch (the âcliffâ), after which tokens vest monthly for the remaining three years. These scheduled unlocks represent potential sources of significant sell pressure, as major unlocks could substantially increase circulating supply.
The Arbitrum DAO and Security Council
The Arbitrum DAO is the governing body responsible for overseeing Arbitrum One and Nova chains. A key feature is its self-executing governance model: all voting is conducted on-chain, and once a proposal successfully passes, execution is carried out automatically by smart contracts without requiring a trusted intermediary.
To balance decentralized governance with the ability to respond swiftly to critical security threats, the DAO framework includes a Security Council. This 12-member body, with members elected by the DAO for one-year terms, is empowered to execute emergency, time-sensitive upgrades via a 9-of-12 multisignature scheme, providing rapid response mechanisms while remaining accountable to the broader DAO.
Strategic Outlook: Decentralization Roadmap and Future Challenges
The Critical Path: Decentralized Sequencer
The most significant item on Arbitrumâs roadmap and its most pressing centralization risk is the decentralization of the sequencer. Currently, a single entity operated by Offchain Labs is responsible for receiving, ordering, and batching all transactions. While this centralized model is highly efficient and has enabled fast, reliable user experience, it represents a single point of failure and potential vector for censorship or value extraction (MEV).
Achieving true, trust-minimized decentralization is contingent upon removing this single point of control. The long-term vision involves creating a permissionless network of sequencers, with leading proposals exploring a proof-of-stake system where sequencers would be required to stake ARB tokens, creating economic incentives for honest behavior and allowing slashing of malicious actors.
As an interim measure addressing MEV risks, Arbitrum introduced âTimeboost,â a system using a sealed-bid auction mechanism for transaction prioritization, allowing users to pay for faster inclusion while capturing MEV revenue for the DAO treasury.
Long-Term Implications of Stylus and Orbit
The future strategic direction is heavily influenced by two key initiatives:
Arbitrum Stylus: Positioned as transformative for developer adoption, enabling smart contract development in mainstream languages like Rust and C++ alongside Solidity. This has the potential to onboard millions of developers from the Web2 world, vastly expanding the talent pool available to build on Arbitrum.
Arbitrum Orbit: Represents strategy for achieving massive, horizontal scalability by allowing projects to easily launch dedicated Layer 3 chains. This positions Arbitrum not just as a single L2, but as a foundational settlement hub for an entire network of interconnected, application-specific blockchains, analogous to multi-chain architectures like Cosmos and Polkadot but anchored to Ethereumâs security.
Recent technical developments include the âCallistoâ upgrade to ArbOS, implementing support for Ethereumâs Pectra upgrade and EIP-7702 to enable native account abstraction. The DAO has also launched a $14 million audit program to subsidize security audits for early-stage projects building on the network.
Concluding Analysis: Strengths and Future Hurdles
Arbitrum has established a formidable position through strategic foresight and technical execution. Its enduring competitive advantages are clear: a powerful network effect driven by market-leading TVL and user base; deep, composable liquidity in DeFi; best-in-class EVM compatibility creating a loyal developer community; and a pragmatic roadmap focused on tangible improvements.
However, the path forward faces significant challenges. The most critical hurdle is successful and timely decentralization of the sequencer, necessary to fulfill the promise of a truly trustless scaling solution. In the long term, Arbitrum faces sustained competitive pressure from ZK-Rollup solutions, which are rapidly maturing and closing the gap on EVM compatibility while offering inherently superior features like instant finality. Finally, the protocolâs economic stability will need careful management as large tranches of vested ARB tokens are unlocked, potentially introducing significant inflation.
Arbitrumâs ultimate success will depend on leveraging its commanding lead to build an ecosystem so deeply entrenched, innovative, and accessibleâthrough initiatives like Stylus and Orbitâthat it remains the default and most compelling choice for developers and users, even as underlying Layer 2 technology continues to evolve.
For deeper insights into blockchain infrastructure evolution, see our analysis of IPFS strategic blueprint and decentralized storage infrastructure and Sui Networkâs economic architecture and gas mechanism.
Works Cited
-
Arbitrum Documentation. âHow Arbitrum Works: A Gentle Introduction.â Arbitrum Docs, accessed October 31, 2025, https://docs.arbitrum.io/how-arbitrum-works/a-gentle-introduction
-
Alchemy. âHow Do Optimistic Rollups Work (The Complete Guide).â Alchemy, accessed October 31, 2025, https://www.alchemy.com/overviews/optimistic-rollups
-
Kraken. âWhat is Arbitrum? ARB Explained.â Kraken Learn, accessed October 31, 2025, https://www.kraken.com/learn/what-is-arbitrum
-
Coinbase. âWhat is the difference between Optimistic Rollups and ZK-Rollups?â Coinbase Learn, accessed October 31, 2025, https://www.coinbase.com/learn/tips-and-tutorials/what-is-the-difference-between-optimistic-rollups-and-zk-rollups
-
DappRadar. âTop Arbitrum Dapps.â DappRadar Rankings, accessed October 31, 2025, https://dappradar.com/rankings/protocol/arbitrum
