# Layer 2 crypto coins — market cap, protocol fees and revenue

> Layer 2 vs Bitcoin — Relative Strength & Breadth

Bottom line: Starknet ranks first for research priority in Layer 2 crypto at 71.8/100, and its native activity evidence clears the coverage gate. The theme's 13-week excess versus Bitcoin is -9.2% on 14% breadth, which is what decides whether that lead is isolated or broad. 12 of the 48 assets here carry enough native evidence to move past a tape-led label.

## Agent research brief

- What matters now: Layer 2 is -9.2% versus Bitcoin over 13 weeks. Only 14% of covered assets are above trend; leadership is narrow.
- Best research lead: Starknet ranks first at 71.8/100 with 96% total evidence and 92% native evidence.
- The contradiction: 12/48 assets clear the native-evidence gate; the rest should not be treated as fundamentally confirmed.
- What to do with it: Keep this as a research queue, not an entry list. The market gate reopens only when Bitcoin trend and sector breadth improve.

Data: price 2026-07-24; protocol 2026-07-24; chain users/transactions 2026-07-24; chain TVL 2026-07-24; market-cap snapshot 2026-07-04.

## 4-Factor Crypto Evidence Score

A within-theme research-priority score for the 48 assets in Layer 2, out of 100. The four displayed point contributions add exactly to the total, and the market regime changes the action label, never the arithmetic. Starknet is highest at 71.8/100 on 96% evidence. It ranks research attention, not portfolio action.

1. Starknet (STRK): 71.8/100 — Illiquid · research only; 29.8 + 27.4 + 12.0 + 2.6 = 71.8; evidence 96%; native evidence 92%
   Decision use: Tape and usage agree. Advance to token-accrual, catalyst and custody-risk diligence.
2. POL (ex-MATIC) (POL): 66.5/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 26.6 + 14.1 + 8.3 = 66.5; evidence 58%; native evidence 92%
   Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.
3. Arbitrum (ARB): 57.1/100 — Illiquid · research only; 19.3 + 15.4 + 15.7 + 6.7 = 57.1; evidence 88%; native evidence 92%
   Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.
4. Celo (CELO): 53.1/100 — Mixed · market gate closed; 14.8 + 17.4 + 11.9 + 9.0 = 53.1; evidence 87%; native evidence 74%
   Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.
5. Mantle (MNT): 46.1/100 — Illiquid · research only; 23.9 + 9.0 + 6.0 + 7.2 = 46.1; evidence 62%; native evidence 64%
   Decision use: Price leads usage. Wait for fees, users or TVL to confirm the move.
6. Linea (LINEA): 45.1/100 — Mixed · market gate closed; 7.6 + 9.3 + 16.0 + 12.2 = 45.1; evidence 96%; native evidence 92%
   Decision use: Cheap on network economics while activity contracts: investigate value-capture trap risk.
7. Optimism (OP): 41.6/100 — Lagging · market gate closed; 10.7 + 10.2 + 9.2 + 11.5 = 41.6; evidence 96%; native evidence 92%
   Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.
8. Taiko (TAIKO): 40.3/100 — Lagging · market gate closed; 16.4 + 3.2 + 12.5 + 8.2 = 40.3; evidence 90%; native evidence 80%
   Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.
9. ZKsync (ZK): 39.8/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 7.7 + 8.3 + 6.3 = 39.8; evidence 58%; native evidence 92%
   Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.
10. Metis (METIS): 33.1/100 — Illiquid · research only; 11.9 + 6.4 + 8.2 + 6.6 = 33.1; evidence 82%; native evidence 64%
   Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.
11. Manta Network (MANTA): 32.4/100 — Lagging · market gate closed; 16.9 + 2.3 + 2.7 + 10.5 = 32.4; evidence 96%; native evidence 92%
   Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.
12. Lisk (LSK): 24.6/100 — Illiquid · research only; 7.2 + 2.7 + 6.6 + 8.1 = 24.6; evidence 96%; native evidence 92%
   Decision use: Evidence is mixed. Keep normal research priority and wait for two pillars to agree.
13. Tokamak Network (TON): 63.1/100 — Illiquid · research only; 32.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 5.6 = 63.1; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
14. Prom (PROM): 56.5/100 — Illiquid · research only; 26.3 + 15.4 + 10.0 + 4.8 = 56.5; evidence 55%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
15. Hermez Network (HEZ): 54.3/100 — Illiquid · research only; 22.9 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.4 = 54.3; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
16. Capx AI (CAPX): 53.4/100 — Illiquid · research only; 21.1 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.3 = 53.4; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
17. MegaETH (MEGA): 51.7/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 9.2 = 51.7; evidence 12%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
18. ADI (ADI): 50/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 50.0; evidence 0%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
19. Citrea (CTR): 50/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 50.0; evidence 0%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
20. DeGate (DG): 50/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 50.0; evidence 0%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
21. Derive (DRV): 50/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 50.0; evidence 0%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
22. SOON (SOON): 50/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 50.0; evidence 0%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
23. Zora (ZORA): 50/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 50.0; evidence 0%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
24. Immutable (IMX): 48.9/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 14.6 + 10.0 + 6.8 = 48.9; evidence 17%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
25. AltLayer (ALT): 48.8/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.3 = 48.8; evidence 12%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
26. Blast (BLAST): 48.8/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 13.8 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 48.8; evidence 5%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
27. Stacks (STX): 48.6/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 15.1 + 10.0 + 6.0 = 48.6; evidence 17%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
28. Treasure (MAGIC): 48.4/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 5.9 = 48.4; evidence 12%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
29. OpenLedger (OPEN): 48.2/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 5.7 = 48.2; evidence 12%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
30. BOB (Build on Bitcoin) (BOB): 48.1/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 13.1 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 48.1; evidence 5%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
31. Corn (CORN): 47.6/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 17.5 + 12.6 + 10.0 + 7.5 = 47.6; evidence 5%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
32. Saakuru (SKR): 47/100 — Illiquid · research only; 17.5 + 14.3 + 10.0 + 5.2 = 47.0; evidence 17%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
33. Sophon (SOPH): 46.8/100 — Illiquid · research only; 18.9 + 12.8 + 10.0 + 5.1 = 46.8; evidence 55%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
34. Aevo (AEVO): 46.7/100 — Illiquid · research only; 13.6 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 8.1 = 46.7; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
35. CYBER (CYBER): 44.9/100 — Illiquid · research only; 16.8 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 3.1 = 44.9; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
36. Aztec (AZTEC): 43.5/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 9.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 9.0 = 43.5; evidence 43%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
37. Loopring (LRC): 43/100 — Illiquid · research only; 12.4 + 13.9 + 10.0 + 6.7 = 43.0; evidence 55%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
38. Orderly (ORDER): 42.7/100 — Illiquid · research only; 9.6 + 14.5 + 10.0 + 8.6 = 42.7; evidence 55%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
39. Metal DAO (MTL): 41.9/100 — Illiquid · research only; 10.2 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.7 = 41.9; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
40. Status (SNT): 41.9/100 — Illiquid · research only; 9.6 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.3 = 41.9; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
41. Cartesi (CTSI): 41.5/100 — Illiquid · research only; 8.7 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 7.8 = 41.5; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
42. PHALA (PHA): 40.2/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 5.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 9.7 = 40.2; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
43. BSquared Network (B2): 38.5/100 — Tape-led · on-chain proof incomplete; 7.0 + 13.0 + 10.0 + 8.5 = 38.5; evidence 55%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
44. COTI (COTI): 35.7/100 — Illiquid · research only; 1.9 + 17.1 + 10.0 + 6.7 = 35.7; evidence 55%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
45. Nervos Network (CKB): 35.4/100 — Illiquid · research only; 3.5 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.9 = 35.4; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
46. Lumia (LUMIA): 35/100 — Illiquid · research only; 3.4 + 15.0 + 10.0 + 6.6 = 35.0; evidence 50%; native evidence 0%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
47. Merlin Chain (MERL): 34.6/100 — Illiquid · research only; 4.2 + 13.3 + 10.0 + 7.1 = 34.6; evidence 55%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.
48. Islamic Coin (ISLM): 26.4/100 — Illiquid · research only; 1.7 + 12.5 + 10.0 + 2.2 = 26.4; evidence 55%; native evidence 10%
   Decision use: Treat this as a tape-led lead. Require native activity confirmation before upgrading research priority.

## Which projects are generating the most network fees?

What the numbers say: POL (ex-MATIC) leads Layer 2 crypto on Trailing 12-month fees at $23.2M, 21% ahead of Arbitrum. 3 of 12 assets with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 12 of the 48 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero.

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: fee growth turns negative across two complete calendar quarters or fee coverage falls below the stated threshold.

- POL (ex-MATIC) (POL): $23.2M
- Arbitrum (ARB): $19.2M
- Linea (LINEA): $3.2M
- Optimism (OP): $1.9M
- Starknet (STRK): $1.7M

## Which projects convert activity into protocol revenue?

What the numbers say: POL (ex-MATIC) leads Layer 2 crypto on Trailing 12-month revenue at $23.1M, 22% ahead of Arbitrum. 3 of 8 assets with comparable change data are growing, fastest at Starknet. Coverage is 10 of the 48 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero.

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: revenue growth turns negative or the revenue-to-fees take rate falls for two complete calendar quarters.

- POL (ex-MATIC) (POL): $23.1M
- Arbitrum (ARB): $19.0M
- Linea (LINEA): $3.1M
- Optimism (OP): $1.8M
- Starknet (STRK): $1.7M

## Where is capital actually committed on-chain?

What the numbers say: Arbitrum leads Layer 2 crypto on Quarter-end TVL at $1.2B, 22% ahead of POL (ex-MATIC). 2 of 27 assets with comparable change data are growing, fastest at Starknet. Coverage is 33 of the 48 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero.

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: TVL rises while fees and users fall; that pattern can be incentive-funded mercenary liquidity.

- Arbitrum (ARB): $1.2B
- POL (ex-MATIC) (POL): $977.4M
- Optimism (OP): $541.2M
- Starknet (STRK): $174.5M
- Mantle (MNT): $144.2M

## Which chains are gaining real users?

What the numbers say: POL (ex-MATIC) leads Layer 2 crypto on Average daily active addresses at 624,400 addresses, 33% ahead of Celo. 2 of 12 assets with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 13 of the 48 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero.

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: address growth reverses for two complete quarters or activity rises without corresponding fees.

- POL (ex-MATIC) (POL): 624,400
- Celo (CELO): 467,973
- Arbitrum (ARB): 158,741
- Starknet (STRK): 49,743
- Optimism (OP): 17,646

## Which chains are processing the most transactions?

What the numbers say: POL (ex-MATIC) leads Layer 2 crypto on Trailing 12-month transactions at 2,276,969,823 transactions, 146% ahead of Arbitrum. 5 of 12 assets with comparable change data are growing, fastest at Optimism. Coverage is 12 of the 48 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter.

Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture.

This conclusion weakens if: transaction growth turns negative while users and fees also deteriorate.

- POL (ex-MATIC) (POL): 2,276,969,823
- Arbitrum (ARB): 926,219,558
- Optimism (OP): 616,494,669
- Celo (CELO): 496,427,817
- Starknet (STRK): 107,499,920

## Every asset

- Starknet (STRK) — 90d -8.9%; RS-BTC +8.6%; score 71.8; activity chain + protocol + chain TVL
- POL (ex-MATIC) (POL) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 66.5; activity chain + protocol + chain TVL
- Arbitrum (ARB) — 90d 0.0%; RS-BTC +17%; score 57.1; activity chain + protocol + chain TVL
- Celo (CELO) — 90d -26%; RS-BTC -8.6%; score 53.1; activity chain + protocol + chain TVL
- Mantle (MNT) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 46.1; activity chain + protocol + chain TVL
- Linea (LINEA) — 90d -38%; RS-BTC -20%; score 45.1; activity chain + chain TVL
- Optimism (OP) — 90d -26%; RS-BTC -8.7%; score 41.6; activity chain + chain TVL
- Taiko (TAIKO) — 90d -33%; RS-BTC -16%; score 40.3; activity chain + protocol + chain TVL
- ZKsync (ZK) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 39.8; activity chain + protocol + chain TVL
- Metis (METIS) — 90d -25%; RS-BTC -7.7%; score 33.1; activity chain + protocol + chain TVL
- Manta Network (MANTA) — 90d -3.8%; RS-BTC +14%; score 32.4; activity chain + protocol + chain TVL
- Lisk (LSK) — 90d -37%; RS-BTC -19%; score 24.6; activity chain + protocol + chain TVL
- Tokamak Network (TON) — 90d +19%; RS-BTC +36%; score 63.1; activity tape only
- Prom (PROM) — 90d -12%; RS-BTC +5.9%; score 56.5; activity chain TVL
- Hermez Network (HEZ) — 90d -5.7%; RS-BTC +12%; score 54.3; activity tape only
- Capx AI (CAPX) — 90d -7.8%; RS-BTC +9.7%; score 53.4; activity protocol + chain TVL
- MegaETH (MEGA) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 51.7; activity chain + chain TVL
- ADI (ADI) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 50; activity chain TVL
- Citrea (CTR) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 50; activity protocol + chain TVL
- DeGate (DG) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 50; activity protocol
- Derive (DRV) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 50; activity tape only
- SOON (SOON) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 50; activity protocol + chain TVL
- Zora (ZORA) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 50; activity tape only
- Immutable (IMX) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 48.9; activity protocol + chain TVL
- AltLayer (ALT) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 48.8; activity tape only
- Blast (BLAST) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 48.8; activity chain TVL
- Stacks (STX) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 48.6; activity chain TVL
- Treasure (MAGIC) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 48.4; activity protocol
- OpenLedger (OPEN) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 48.2; activity protocol + chain TVL
- BOB (Build on Bitcoin) (BOB) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 48.1; activity protocol + chain TVL
- Corn (CORN) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 47.6; activity chain TVL
- Saakuru (SKR) — 90d —; RS-BTC —; score 47; activity chain TVL
- Sophon (SOPH) — 90d -14%; RS-BTC +3.1%; score 46.8; activity chain TVL
- Aevo (AEVO) — 90d -28%; RS-BTC -11%; score 46.7; activity tape only
- CYBER (CYBER) — 90d -25%; RS-BTC -7.7%; score 44.9; activity tape only
- Aztec (AZTEC) — 90d -40%; RS-BTC -22%; score 43.5; activity tape only
- Loopring (LRC) — 90d -27%; RS-BTC -10%; score 43; activity protocol
- Orderly (ORDER) — 90d -38%; RS-BTC -20%; score 42.7; activity protocol
- Metal DAO (MTL) — 90d -27%; RS-BTC -9.7%; score 41.9; activity tape only
- Status (SNT) — 90d -30%; RS-BTC -12%; score 41.9; activity tape only
- Cartesi (CTSI) — 90d -34%; RS-BTC -17%; score 41.5; activity tape only
- PHALA (PHA) — 90d -34%; RS-BTC -17%; score 40.2; activity tape only
- BSquared Network (B2) — 90d -36%; RS-BTC -19%; score 38.5; activity protocol + chain TVL
- COTI (COTI) — 90d -49%; RS-BTC -31%; score 35.7; activity chain TVL
- Nervos Network (CKB) — 90d -42%; RS-BTC -25%; score 35.4; activity tape only
- Lumia (LUMIA) — 90d -50%; RS-BTC -32%; score 35; activity tape only
- Merlin Chain (MERL) — 90d -52%; RS-BTC -35%; score 34.6; activity protocol + chain TVL
- Islamic Coin (ISLM) — 90d -55%; RS-BTC -38%; score 26.4; activity chain TVL

## Limitations

- Crypto network activity is not company earnings. Protocol revenue does not automatically accrue to token holders.
- Market-cap values are a dated universe snapshot, not point-in-time historical supply data.
- Current category labels are applied to historical prices; this creates survivorship and taxonomy hindsight.
- Funding rates, open interest, liquidations, exchange flows, unlock schedules, historical circulating supply and developer activity are not held and are not inferred.
- Equal weighting is used for sector history because true historical market-cap weights are unavailable.

## FAQs

### What is Layer 2 crypto?

Layer 2 crypto refers to cryptocurrency projects grouped by what they actually do rather than by market fashion. This page tracks 48 such coins by market cap, price and Bitcoin-relative strength, with protocol fees and revenue where a project publishes them. Readings are as of 2026-07-24.

### What is the total market cap of Layer 2 crypto coins?

The Layer 2 coins on this page are tracked against a universe of 894 of the top 1,000 crypto currency assets by market cap. Market-cap metadata is dated 2026-07-04, separately from the price series, and each coin's own figure is in the table on this page.

### Are Layer 2 crypto coins outperforming Bitcoin?

Layer 2 has returned -51.7% versus Bitcoin over 52 weeks and -9.2% over 13 weeks on an equal-weight current-member index. 4/29 covered assets are above their 200-day averages as of 2026-07-24.

### Which Layer 2 asset has the strongest research score?

Starknet ranks first at 71.8/100: 29.8 + 27.4 + 12.0 + 2.6 = 71.8. It is labelled “Illiquid · research only” with 96% overall evidence and 92% native-economics evidence.

### How is the Layer 2 4-factor score calculated?

The exact sum is Market leadership /35 + Network and economic traction /30 + Value capture /20 + Liquidity and downside risk /15. Missing data pulls only the affected factor toward neutral and lowers evidence; it is never silently reweighted.

### Why can a Layer 2 asset be labelled tape-led?

Tape-led means price and relative-strength evidence exists but less than half of the native traction and value-capture evidence is available. Such assets remain visible but rank below fully evidenced assets.

### Does protocol revenue accrue to the token?

Not necessarily. Protocol fees and revenue measure network economics; token-holder value depends on the protocol’s burn, buyback, staking, distribution and governance rules. This page never assumes accrual merely because revenue exists.

### Does crypto have a P/E or PEG ratio?

No comparable company-style P/E or PEG is used. Where coverage permits, the page shows network fee yield and protocol-revenue yield against a dated market-cap snapshot, with an explicit token-accrual caveat.

### How much history is shown for Layer 2?

The page shows five years of weekly price and relative-strength history and 20 complete calendar quarters of on-chain activity where available. Missing periods remain gaps.

### Why do the crypto data dates differ?

Prices and technical metrics run through 2026-07-24; protocol activity through 2026-07-24; chain users and transactions through 2026-07-24; chain TVL through 2026-07-24; market capitalisation is a separate snapshot dated 2026-07-04.

### Are stablecoins and wrapped tokens included in Layer 2?

No. Pegged, wrapped, liquid-staking receipt and tokenized-asset instruments are excluded because they do not have independent price discovery.

### Can one token appear in multiple raw crypto categories?

Yes, but public MLA pages assign each asset to exactly one functional theme using a specific-to-general first-match taxonomy. Layer 2 therefore has one canonical membership list.

### What would invalidate the current Layer 2 theme read?

The read weakens if the sector’s 13-week relative return versus Bitcoin falls below zero, fewer than one-third of covered assets remain above the 200-day average, and the leading asset’s native activity also contracts.

### Does this page include funding rates, open interest or token unlocks?

No. Those datasets are not held in the current research store, so the page names them as unavailable rather than inferring them from price.

### Which projects are generating the most network fees?

POL (ex-MATIC) leads Layer 2 crypto on Trailing 12-month fees at $23.2M, 21% ahead of Arbitrum. 3 of 12 assets with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 12 of the 48 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if fee growth turns negative across two complete calendar quarters or fee coverage falls below the stated threshold.

### Which projects convert activity into protocol revenue?

POL (ex-MATIC) leads Layer 2 crypto on Trailing 12-month revenue at $23.1M, 22% ahead of Arbitrum. 3 of 8 assets with comparable change data are growing, fastest at Starknet. Coverage is 10 of the 48 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if revenue growth turns negative or the revenue-to-fees take rate falls for two complete calendar quarters.

### Where is capital actually committed on-chain?

Arbitrum leads Layer 2 crypto on Quarter-end TVL at $1.2B, 22% ahead of POL (ex-MATIC). 2 of 27 assets with comparable change data are growing, fastest at Starknet. Coverage is 33 of the 48 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if TVL rises while fees and users fall; that pattern can be incentive-funded mercenary liquidity.

### Which chains are gaining real users?

POL (ex-MATIC) leads Layer 2 crypto on Average daily active addresses at 624,400 addresses, 33% ahead of Celo. 2 of 12 assets with comparable change data are growing. Coverage is 13 of the 48 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Where a project publishes nothing, the cell stays blank rather than being read as zero. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if address growth reverses for two complete quarters or activity rises without corresponding fees.

### Which chains are processing the most transactions?

POL (ex-MATIC) leads Layer 2 crypto on Trailing 12-month transactions at 2,276,969,823 transactions, 146% ahead of Arbitrum. 5 of 12 assets with comparable change data are growing, fastest at Optimism. Coverage is 12 of the 48 assets in this theme, through the Q2 2026 calendar quarter. Investor read: Use this as a network-economics research lead, not token-holder earnings. Verify whether the measured activity accrues to the token before treating scale as value capture. This conclusion weakens if transaction growth turns negative while users and fees also deteriorate.

### Which Layer 2 project has the largest fee base?

POL (ex-MATIC) leads covered trailing-12-month fees at $23.2M. Coverage is 12/48; this is network activity, not automatically token-holder income.

### Which are the biggest Layer 2 crypto coins by market cap?

Mantle is the largest Layer 2 crypto coin by market capitalisation at $1.5B, ahead of POL (ex-MATIC) at $785.9M and ADI at $723.8M. The 48 Layer 2 coins on this page carry $5.6B between them, with a market-cap figure on file for 48 of them. Market-cap metadata is dated 2026-07-04.