Looking back at the last market cycle, the most prevalent strategy was essentially PVP (player versus player). People moved from one chain to another, seeking any platform with activity and narrative to engage in PVP. As we enter 2025, these chains have transitioned into a phase of competition for existing users—from the “hundred-chain war” attempting to dethrone Ethereum a few years ago, to now, where most chains are dismissed as “unused,” and the survivors strive to secure their own niches. It’s not only the small players engaging in PVP; the chains themselves are in a PVP battle. Despite their efforts to replicate Solana’s popularity, they can’t recreate its meme-driven success. Just as each region nurtures its own people, each public chain might be destined for a single purpose. Every surviving chain has already been secretly assigned its role. Recently, a March report on L1/L2 data insights by the international news and research firm Syndica (@Syndica_io) has quantified this sense of predestination:

• 72% of Solana’s transactions involve decentralized exchanges (DEX), aligning with its reputation.
• Base sees 51% of its transactions in token transfers,
• while nearly 40% of Ethereum’s transactions are for cross-chain activities (as shown by the purple bar in the chart).

Delphi Digital’s research director @ceterispar1bus captured the essence of these findings:

• Solana is for transactions,
• Base is for Coinbase’s USDC accounting,
• Ethereum is for cross-chain asset transfers.

As the industry stands today, projects are no longer about pure technical competition but about finding their “anchor”—a purpose that fits naturally.

Identity Tags, More Than Just Fate

At first glance, the purpose of public blockchains seems to be chosen by users and markets; however, upon closer inspection, it appears more like a result defined by inherent resources and backgrounds. Here’s a summary of the roles of three public blockchains: Solana is a hub for transactions, Base has become Coinbase’s “accountant,” and Ethereum is tied up with bridges, accelerating asset outflows. Behind the current state of each chain are both technical and non-technical driving forces.

Let’s start with Solana. In 2025, Solana’s ecosystem remains the most vibrant hub for Meme trading. Its decentralized exchange (DEX) trading volume has consistently led the market for two months, far ahead in market share. Since October 2024, Solana has been creating over 500,000 MEME coins monthly, as if hosting an endless “dog-beating party.” Enthusiasts are eager to explore angles, while traders monitor pools and trends. Those familiar with Meme coins often describe Solana as a “big casino.” Solana’s high throughput (12 times that of Base) and low transaction costs (mostly under $0.01) are the foundation of its trading hub. According to the Syndica report, Solana excels in small transactions (under $100), ideal for high-frequency Meme coin trading. The practical and perceived importance of decentralization might not be as significant. More critical is the initial advantage in resources. From 2019 to 2023, Solana gained support from investors like a16z and Multicoin Capital, attracting DeFi and Meme coin developers through grants and incubators. Solana’s Breakpoint conference often sparks Meme coin inspiration. Recall when Toly donned a green cartoon dragon outfit at the conference two years ago, igniting interest in the Meme SillyDragon? Founders crafting their image, sometimes hinting at Meme connections, has become commonplace. (See: “Vitalik’s Cat, Toly’s Dragon: When Memes Target Founders’ Pets“) Community culture also nurtures its Meme landscape, using social media (like X) and Meme coin contests. Solana has become a haven for “grassroots players,” with PEPE, BONK, and POPCAT thriving through positive feedback. Users associate Solana with transactions, attracting diverse developers, making Pumpfun’s emergence seem natural.

Let’s talk about Base.

Now, let’s discuss Base. Base also has Meme elements, and during the recent AI Agent craze, standout tokens emerged in its ecosystem. However, this seems more like a spillover of Solana’s capital and easy PVP arbitrage. March data indicates that 51% of Base’s transactions are token transfers, rooted in the interest relationship between Coinbase and Circle. In 2018, Coinbase and Circle founded the Centre Consortium, responsible for USDC issuance and management. As joint initiators, they promote USDC’s adoption and set operational standards through Centre. Base, being closely tied to Coinbase, has become the preferred USDC transfer channel. Furthermore, Circle’s recent IPO filing reveals a profit-sharing arrangement with Coinbase, where Coinbase receives 50% of the residual income from USDC reserves. This means Coinbase benefits from each USDC transaction or promotion. (See: “Circle’s IPO Push, Coinbase’s 50% Profit: The Stablecoin Win-Win Game“) Base’s low cost and high efficiency suit this “accounting” role—whether for internal fund transfers at Coinbase or user USDC transactions, Base efficiently records and manages these on-chain activities, such as transfer records, liquidity management, and settlement operations. This “accounting” not only reduces Coinbase’s operational costs but also generates revenue through USDC profit sharing. In terms of ecosystem culture, Base caters to institutions and compliant users, with most of Coinbase’s 100+ million users being “serious players,” and developers naturally avoid using Base for a “dog-beating party.” From its inception, Base was strategically designated as USDC’s “accountant” by Coinbase and Circle, firmly tied to their partnership interests.

Finally, when it comes to Ethereum, it’s an old topic that’s often disappointing. Almost 40% of its transactions involve cross-chain bridges, turning it into a “transit hub” for other blockchains. The price of ETH feels like it’s being roasted, gradually losing its value. Despite Ethereum’s leadership in DeFi, holding over 60% of the total value locked (TVL) according to Syndica data, negative sentiments are spreading within the community. Ethereum’s fate as a “bridge” is technically driven by high gas fees. During favorable market conditions, regular users are overwhelmed and resort to transferring assets to lower-cost chains via cross-chain bridges; when the market is down, there’s even less to engage with. Additionally, Ethereum’s mainnet throughput is limited, significantly lagging behind Solana’s high performance, and its low transaction efficiency further increases the demand for cross-chain solutions. The deeper issue lies in its historical role. As the first smart contract platform, Ethereum amassed the most assets and dApps, naturally becoming a hub for cross-chain bridges. The ecological path dependence keeps DeFi projects and funds concentrated on Ethereum, but high costs push users away, making bridging a “necessary choice.” Meanwhile, the rise of Layer 2 solutions diverts users, the Ethereum Foundation undergoes multiple adjustments, Vitalik’s appearances with women are criticized as distractions, and the coin’s price drops, making even breathing seem wrong… The dream was to be the “world computer,” but the reality is more like an “ATM.” Its destiny seems locked by network effects and market changes, transforming from DeFi king to asset transit hub. Ethereum’s path to breaking free might be tougher than Solana’s or Base’s.

Embracing Fate, Seeking Anchors

Public chain competition in 2025 has shifted from the frenzy of a hundred-chain war to the calmness of a stock game. The survival strategy for public chains boils down to “embracing fate, seeking anchors.” Transactions can be an anchor, stablecoin circulation can be an anchor, even cross-chain activity can be. But solidifying these “anchors” means compressing the imaginative space of public chains. Can Solana shed its “Meme casino” label? Can Base break out of its “accountant” mold? Can Ethereum escape being a “transit hub”? These questions remain unanswered. Ironically, most enthusiasts don’t care about these issues. They flock to whichever chain is trending for quick gains and arbitrage opportunities. The public chain battle is merely a backdrop for those eager to cash out and dream of thousand-fold returns. Perhaps only the arrival of the next cycle will reveal the true answer—who can attract new growth, who can find new “anchors.” The future of the industry, the future of public chains, is still uncertain.

Disclaimer：

1. This article is reprinted from [TechFlow]. All copyrights belong to the original author [TechFlow]. If there are objections to this reprint, please contact the Gate Learn team, and they will handle it promptly.

2. Liability Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not constitute any investment advice.

3. Translations of the article into other languages are done by the Gate Learn team. Unless mentioned Gate.io, copying, distributing, or plagiarizing the translated articles is prohibited.