My take on why REV is flawed as a valuation metric for ETH:

1. REV is a vanity metric, like TVL

It’s useful to track, but the number alone doesn’t mean much. Take TVL as an example: 10M USDT from one whale is different from 1M users with $10 each, the latter is far more robust. Like TVL, REV doesn’t capture user diversity, retention, or app quality. It’s a shallow metric without context.

2. REV shouldn't be maximized long-term

REV is fundamentally a cost to users. As apps internalize MEV and fees approach zero (especially with app-specific sequencers), chains with high REV may simply be inefficient.

The most decentralized and credible global settlement layer should aim to secure the most valuable outcomes, not extract the most fees. It will be higher as a valuable economic zone, but REV is just one of many metrics.

3. ETH derives value from network confidence and trust (agree with @ryanberckmans)

Key pillars of ETH’s value:

> Deep liquidity and scalable social consensus

> The most secure base for rollups and modular apps

> ~$225B in app capital

> ~80% share of real-world assets

Other examples: Tron has more REV than Solana but 1/10 the market cap. BTC has almost no fees but is worth $2T. ETH may not be a pure SoV like BTC, but it’s a highly liquid, trusted, and programmable asset. Every rollup settling on Ethereum reinforces its value. Unless another L1 can replicate ETH’s economic weight and systemic trust, there’s no better foundation for an open crypto economy.

The ticker is ETH.

Other recommend read

1. From @ryanberckmans

https://t.co/7jRYuvGTDI

2. From @sassal0x