RT Ignas | DeFi (@DefiIgnas)What's the upside for L2 tokens?Fee sharing?Even if they turned on fee sharing, it's not much:Arbitrum made $19.5m in fees in a year. Optimism $18.3m.zkSync just $1.3m and Starknet $600k.This Price(FDV)-to-Fees ratio puts Arbitrum at 137.8x, and Optimism at 205.7xStarknet - 4204xIn context, TSLA trades at 187x P/E ratio so Arbitrum might even look cheap.But Tesla is an exception. S&P500 trades at ~ 29x the earnings.This makes L2 tokens overvalued by a lot. Unless we expect their ...

L2 Token Valuation - L2 tokens may be overvalued unless adoption and fees increase significantly [2] - Arbitrum's Price(FDV)-to-Fees ratio is 1378x, Optimism's is 2057x, Starknet's is 4204x [1] - Arbitrum generated $195 million in fees in a year, Optimism $183 million, zkSync $13 million, and Starknet $600 thousand [1] Token Utility and Governance - Projects issue tokens to bootstrap adoption and raise capital [2][5] - Hoarding tokens provides voting power, but projects like @lobbyfinance make bribing relatively inexpensive [2] - One user spent 5 ETH (~$10 thousand) on Lobby to acquire 193 million ARB (~$65 million) voting power [2] L2 Landscape and Investment Strategy - The goal is to attract sticky liquidity and outcompete other L2s [3] - Liquidity may concentrate in the top 20% of L2s, implying a need to wait for clear winners [3] - New L2 launches with tokens, like $INK, may prolong the emergence of clear winners [3][4] - The L2 sector is described as a "cursed sector to invest" [4]