How should we view Vitalik's adjustment of its L2 strategy?

Author: YQ, Crypto KOL; Translator: @Jinse Finance xz

Since 2015, I have been deeply involved in the research of scaling technology. From sharding technology, Plasma, application chains to Rollups, I have personally witnessed the iteration of all technical routes. In 2021, I founded AltLayer, focusing on app Rollups and Rollup-as-a-Service solutions, and maintaining deep cooperation with all mainstream Rollup technology stacks and teams in the ecosystem. Therefore, when Vitalik proposed to fundamentally reconstruct our understanding of L2, I naturally paid close attention. His recently published article marks such a milestone moment.

What Vitalik did was not easy. Admitting that the core assumptions of 2020 failed to be achieved as expected—this candor is something most leaders lack. The Rollup-centric roadmap is based on the premise that "L2 will serve as a branded shard of Ethereum."

Vitalik's work was not easy. He acknowledged that the core assumptions of 2020 failed to be achieved as expected—this candor is something most leaders lack.

2、TrustSpectrumReconstruction

Vitalik's core theoretical contribution lies in redefining L2 as existing on a continuous spectrum, rather than a single category with uniform obligations. The metaphor of "branded sharding" once implied that all L2 should pursue second-stage decentralization and operate as an extension of Ethereum's value and security guarantees. The new framework acknowledges that different L2s serve different goals, and for projects with specific needs, Phase 0 or Phase 1 may be a reasonable endpoint.

3.Native Rollup precompilation proposal

4. Vision of Synchronous Composability

The post on ethresear.ch details the mechanism for achieving synchronous composability between L1 and L2. Currently, transferring assets or executing logic across the L1 and L2 boundaries requires waiting for a final confirmation period (7 days for Optimisitc Rollup and several hours for ZK Rollup) or relying on fast cross-chain bridges with counterparty risk.

5. Responses from L2 Teams

Within hours, various L2 teams responded, demonstrating a healthy strategic diversification. This is precisely the situation that Vitalik's Trust Spectrum Framework aims to achieve: different teams can pursue differentiated positioning without deliberately creating the illusion that "everyone is on the same path to the same destination."

A diversified response is a sign of a healthy market. Arbitrum positions itself as an independent ecosystem, Base focuses on applications and user experience, Linea closely follows Vitalik's native Rollup direction, and Optimism, while acknowledging challenges, emphasizes its own progress. These strategic choices are not right or wrong; they represent differentiated strategies for different market segments—and this is precisely the legitimacy granted by the Trust Spectrum framework.

7. Vitalik's Planned Path Forward

Vitalik's arguments are constructive, not merely diagnostic. He points out several specific directions for L2 that hope to maintain value amidst the continued scaling of L1. These are not hard and fast rules, but rather differentiated development suggestions for L2—they can leverage this to build their own advantages when the selling point of "cheaper Ethereum" is no longer sufficient.

8. Conclusion

Vitalik Buterin This article, published in February 2026, marks a strategic recalibration of Ethereum's L2 strategy. Its core insight is that L2 has evolved into an independent platform with legitimate economic benefits, rather than an obligatory "branded sharding" of Ethereum. Vitalik did not attempt to fight this trend, but rather advocated embracing reality by establishing a trust spectrum that recognizes diverse paths, providing native Rollup infrastructure to enhance L1-L2 integration for those who need it, and designing synchronous composability mechanisms for cross-layer interactions. The L2 ecosystem's response has demonstrated healthy diversity. Arbitrum emphasizes independence, Base focuses on applications, Linea aligns with the native Rollup direction, and Optimism continues to improve while acknowledging challenges. This diversity is precisely the expected outcome of the trust spectrum framework: different teams can follow different strategies without pretending everyone is on the same path. For Ethereum, this course correction maintains its credibility by acknowledging reality rather than defending outdated assumptions. Given the maturity of ZK-EVM technology, the related technical proposals are feasible. Strategic proposals, on the other hand, create space for the healthy evolution of the ecosystem. This embodies adaptive leadership in the technology field: recognizing environmental changes and proposing new paths forward, rather than clinging to old strategies after the market has made its choice. Having spent a decade in scaling research and four years running a Rollup infrastructure company, I've seen too many crypto leaders refuse to adapt when reality differs from expectations, and none of them have fared well. What Vitalik did was difficult—publicly acknowledging that the 2020 vision needed adjustment. But it was the right decision. Clinging to a narrative that can't keep up with the market benefits no one. The path forward is becoming clearer every day. This in itself is of great value.