BlockchainsUpdated

Bridged TVL by chain: how much of a chain's capital came from somewhere else

L2Beat's value secured per chain, restricted to what arrived from elsewhere: canonical (locked in the chain's own escrow on its host chain) plus external (a third-party bridge). The complement is native, minted here. The weekly columns move with the whole balance, and the one to read is the move against the cohort median.

TL;DR. As of , Base leads bridged TVL at $7.33B (latest value) across 39 ranked chains. Source: OpenChainBench, https://openchainbench.com/benchmarks/chain-bridged-tvl.

Read this carefully

Bridged TVL is value secured by the chain's bridge, not value locked in its DeFi protocols; a chain can rank high on one and low on the other. The split is L2Beat's: canonical is escrowed on the host chain by the chain's own contracts, external came through a third-party bridge, native was minted here. Rows are the chains L2Beat tracks in its scaling summary; a settled L1 has no row by construction, not by omission. Size is not quality: a large balance says capital came, not that it stayed.

A chain's headline TVL says how much capital sits in its DeFi protocols. It does not say where that capital came from, and the difference matters: value bridged in is value someone moved on purpose, while value minted natively can be a token the chain issued to itself. L2Beat separates the two for every chain in its scaling summary, and this benchmark publishes that split alongside the weekly move. The weekly move is the part worth reading carefully. When the whole market rises, every chain's raw change is positive and a ranking on it ranks the market rather than the chains. The excess column subtracts the cohort median from each chain's move, which is what separates a chain that gained ground from one that merely floated up with everything else. The cohort median, its size and how much of it L2Beat currently has under review are published as their own Prometheus series, so the subtraction can be re-derived from the source rather than believed.

Methodology

The chain-kpis harness reads l2beat.com/api/scaling/summary once every 15 minutes. One request covers the whole cohort; each project entry carries tvs.breakdown with total, native, canonical and external in USD, and a 7-day change. The harness publishes chain_bridged_tvl_usd as canonical + external, chain_value_secured_usd split by origin, chain_tvs_usd as the total, chain_tvs_change_7d_pct as the raw weekly move and chain_tvs_change_7d_excess_pct as that move minus the median of every live project above a $200M size floor. The median and the cohort size are published as chain_tvs_cohort_median_7d_pct, chain_tvs_cohort_size, chain_tvs_cohort_layer3 and chain_tvs_cohort_under_review, so the subtraction can be re-derived from the series rather than taken on trust. Rows are the chains in the OCB registry that L2Beat tracks in its scaling summary, whatever category it files them under; settled L1s carry no id because a chain with no host chain has no bridged balance to report.

  • Source: L2Beat /api/scaling/summary, one unauthenticated request per tick covering every tracked project. Poll cadence 15 minutes, matched to the DefiLlama cadence in the same harness. Neither is the instant it is read at: DefiLlama publishes one daily TVL aggregate, and L2Beat computes an hourly series that normally runs one to two hours behind, so the page reports the last point each source finished rather than the moment of the request.
  • Bridged TVL = canonical + external from tvs.breakdown, in USD. Canonical is value escrowed on the host chain by the chain's own contracts; external arrived through a third-party bridge; native was minted on the chain itself and is excluded.
  • The three origins reconstruct the total, so bridged TVL is exactly the value secured that is not native, and a chain whose value is entirely canonical reads 100 percent bridged. A row whose origins miss its total by more than 0.1 percent is not published at all: if the upstream field names change, every one of them binds to zero, and a $0 bridged TVL at full health would be a wrong number that looks measured.
  • Weekly move: L2Beat's own change7d on total value secured, converted from a ratio to a percentage. The excess subtracts the median change across every live project above $200M of value secured.
  • The $200M floor exists because the median is a yardstick. L2Beat tracks about a hundred projects and most of them are small, so without a floor the many dust chains outnumber the rest and their moves, which are incentive programs rather than capital rotation, own the middle of the sorted list.
  • Cohort composition: every live project above the floor votes, layer 3s and projects L2Beat currently has under review included. They are counted, not filtered, because dropping them would make the yardstick a judgement rather than a measurement; chain_tvs_cohort_size, _layer3 and _under_review publish the composition. Below five projects no median is published and the excess series is cleared rather than frozen.
  • Rows: every chain in the OCB registry that carries an L2Beat project id, each verified against a live read of the endpoint. Several ids differ from the OCB slug (polygon-pos, zksync2, roninnetwork, worldchain, mantapacific, galxegravity, nova, polygonzkevm, bobanetwork, immutablezkevm).
  • Membership: a row is a chain in the OCB chain registry that L2Beat tracks in its scaling summary, whatever category L2Beat files it under (42 of L2Beat's roughly 100 projects on 2026-09-25, Plume mapped that day); L2Beat projects outside the registry are not rows. Settled L1s carry no id because a chain with no host chain has no bridged balance to report.
  • A project L2Beat has archived, one reporting a zero total, and one whose origins do not reconstruct that total all publish nothing: the chain's gauges are deleted rather than carried forward, so the row reads unresponsive within the hour, and chain_kpis_health{source="l2beat"} drops to 0 for that chain. That health series is the success column, so a row that stopped reporting also stops reading 100 percent.
  • Freshness reads L2Beat's own chart.syncedUntil, not the Prometheus scrape and not the time of our fetch. The first is always seconds old because the harness re-exports carried-forward gauges; the second stays green when L2Beat answers 200 with stale numbers. A row whose weekly move is missing keeps its balance and loses only its two weekly columns, rather than publishing a flat week that never happened.
  • Every aggregate column reads the latest value rather than a window statistic, so the board and the origin panels always describe the same instant. p50, p90, p99 and the mean are equal by construction; the sample count is the number of Prometheus scrapes in the 24h window (about 2,880 at a 30 second scrape), not a count of measurements, since the underlying value refreshes every 15 minutes.
  • L2Beat's figures are a third-party measurement, credited as the source. OCB does not re-derive the escrow balances; this bench republishes the split and computes the cohort-relative move on top of it.

Results: 39 chains ranked by Bridged TVL (latest value)

Bridged TVL by chain: how much of a chain's capital came from somewhere else: Bridged TVL per chain (latest value).
№ChainsLatestBridged share7d change7d vs peersSuccess
1BaseOptimistic Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack$7.33B57.7%-10.0%1.13%98.96% (n=2880)
2Arbitrum OneOptimistic Rollup on Ethereum, Arbitrum$6.74B80.2%-9.75%1.39%98.96% (n=2880)
3HyperliquidOther on Arbitrum One$5.88B100.0%-8.10%3.04%98.96% (n=2880)
4Polygon PoSOther on Ethereum$3.41B94.9%-7.51%3.63%98.96% (n=2880)
5Robinhood ChainOther on Ethereum, Arbitrum$1.55B82.0%-12.3%-1.13%98.96% (n=2880)
6OptimismOptimistic Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack$1.05B83.5%-14.9%-3.74%98.96% (n=2880)
7MantleZK Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack$1.02B97.8%-14.5%-3.35%98.96% (n=2880)
8InkOptimistic Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack$458.10M100.0%25.5%36.7%98.96% (n=2880)
9LineaZK Rollup on Ethereum$260.40M99.6%-18.0%-6.83%98.96% (n=2880)
10StarknetZK Rollup on Ethereum, SN Stack$255.36M90.0%-15.5%-4.37%98.96% (n=2880)
11World ChainOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$243.01M100.0%-22.4%-11.3%98.96% (n=2880)
12X LayerOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$204.88M100.0%8.25%19.4%98.96% (n=2880)
13GnosisOther on Ethereum$200.71M93.4%-18.5%-7.32%98.96% (n=2880)
14FraxtalOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$149.65M100.0%-1.90%9.25%98.96% (n=2880)
15MorphOptimistic Rollup on Ethereum$131.10M100.0%-10.2%0.90%98.96% (n=2880)
16RoninOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$107.06M71.3%-18.3%-7.11%98.96% (n=2880)
17zkSync EraZK Rollup on Ethereum, ZK Stack$98.73M53.8%-16.4%-5.24%98.96% (n=2880)
18UnichainOptimistic Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack$81.53M100.0%-12.3%-1.13%98.96% (n=2880)
19PlumeOther on Ethereum$55.12M100.0%-10.1%1.07%98.96% (n=2880)
20Manta PacificOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$53.83M73.5%-13.2%-2.08%98.96% (n=2880)
21BOBOptimistic Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack$48.58M68.2%-5.34%5.81%98.96% (n=2880)
22MegaETHOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$29.27M36.5%-8.85%2.29%98.96% (n=2880)
23ScrollZK Rollup on Ethereum$27.59M89.1%-14.3%-3.17%98.96% (n=2880)
24MetisOther on Ethereum, OVM$20.89M100.0%-11.9%-0.75%98.96% (n=2880)
25Immutable zkEVMOther on Ethereum$18.17M99.9%-17.4%-6.29%98.96% (n=2880)
26CeloOptimium on Ethereum, OP Stack$17.72M6.81%-4.41%6.74%98.96% (n=2880)
27AbstractZK Rollup on Ethereum, ZK Stack$13.21M99.7%-21.4%-10.2%98.96% (n=2880)
28SoneiumOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$13.20M93.8%-14.2%-3.01%98.96% (n=2880)
29TaikoZK Rollup on Ethereum, Taiko$9.86M100.0%-18.1%-6.94%98.96% (n=2880)
30ApeChainOther on Arbitrum One, Arbitrum$9.76M100.0%-24.4%-13.2%98.96% (n=2880)
31ZircuitOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$8.89M100.0%-14.5%-3.39%98.96% (n=2880)
32Polygon zkEVMOther on Ethereum, Agglayer CDK$7.76M100.0%-12.8%-1.68%98.96% (n=2880)
33Arbitrum NovaOptimistic Rollup on Ethereum, Arbitrum$7.59M100.0%-19.8%-8.62%98.96% (n=2880)
34ModeOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$4.87M88.1%-18.7%-7.55%98.96% (n=2880)
35Boba NetworkOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$4.76M100.0%-14.0%-2.85%98.96% (n=2880)
36ZoraOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$3.52M100.0%-21.1%-9.92%98.96% (n=2880)
37Reya NetworkOther on Ethereum, Arbitrum$3.16M100.0%-2.40%8.74%98.96% (n=2880)
38CyberOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$1.95M100.0%-27.6%-16.4%98.96% (n=2880)
39HemiOther on Ethereum, OP Stack$496.5K100.0%-37.1%-25.9%98.96% (n=2880)

Bridged TVL by chain

Latest value per chain, ranked highest first.

Base bridged TVL

$7.33B latest value · 99.0% success rate · Optimistic Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack.

Optimism bridged TVL

$1.05B latest value · 99.0% success rate · Optimistic Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack.

Mantle bridged TVL

$1.02B latest value · 99.0% success rate · ZK Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack.

Ink bridged TVL

$458.10M latest value · 99.0% success rate · Optimistic Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack.

Linea bridged TVL

$260.40M latest value · 99.0% success rate · ZK Rollup on Ethereum.

Morph bridged TVL

$131.10M latest value · 99.0% success rate · Optimistic Rollup on Ethereum.

Ronin bridged TVL

$107.06M latest value · 99.0% success rate · Other on Ethereum, OP Stack.

Unichain bridged TVL

$81.53M latest value · 99.0% success rate · Optimistic Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack.

BOB bridged TVL

$48.58M latest value · 99.0% success rate · Optimistic Rollup on Ethereum, OP Stack.

Metis bridged TVL

$20.89M latest value · 99.0% success rate · Other on Ethereum, OVM.

Celo bridged TVL

$17.72M latest value · 99.0% success rate · Optimium on Ethereum, OP Stack.

Taiko bridged TVL

$9.86M latest value · 99.0% success rate · ZK Rollup on Ethereum, Taiko.

Mode bridged TVL

$4.87M latest value · 99.0% success rate · Other on Ethereum, OP Stack.

Zora bridged TVL

$3.52M latest value · 99.0% success rate · Other on Ethereum, OP Stack.

Cyber bridged TVL

$1.95M latest value · 99.0% success rate · Other on Ethereum, OP Stack.

Hemi bridged TVL

$496.5K latest value · 99.0% success rate · Other on Ethereum, OP Stack.

Frequently asked

What is the difference between bridged TVL and the TVL on DefiLlama?

DefiLlama publishes two figures a reader may confuse with this one: its chain TVL counts what DeFi protocols on the chain hold, and its own Bridged TVL page counts all tokens held on a chain. This board republishes L2Beat's value secured instead, canonical plus external with native excluded. The three answer different questions, so one chain can show three different numbers, and only the L2Beat one is on this page.

What does a bridged share of 100 percent mean?

That every dollar the chain secures was escrowed on its host chain and nothing was minted locally. It is a statement about where the capital came from, not about its safety: canonical escrow is the chain's own bridge, the one whose security L2Beat rates separately.

Why rank on bridged TVL rather than on the weekly change?

Because a size ranking is stable and a weekly ranking is not. In a broad up week every chain rises, so a change ranking mostly reorders the market's own move. The weekly columns are on the page, and the one to read is the excess against the cohort median.

Where are Ethereum, Solana and BNB?

They are not in L2Beat's scaling summary, which is the source for this board. A chain with no host chain has nothing escrowed elsewhere, so there is no bridged balance to report. Note the rule is not 'only rollups': Polygon PoS, Gnosis and Hyperliquid run their own consensus and are tracked. Those L1s are ranked on the other Blockchains benchmarks linked at the foot of this page.

Does a high bridged share mean the chain is risky?

No, and the tab does not rank it as better or worse. It says the capital came from elsewhere, which is what a scaling chain is designed for. It becomes a risk reading only next to the bridge's own security rating, which is L2Beat's subject rather than this bench's.

Source code github.com/ChainBench/OpenChainBench/tree/main/harnesses/chain-kpis