Effectiveness rating
In order to come up with a unified validator effectiveness score, we combine proposer and attester effectiveness in a weighted average. We attribute the following weights to each, guided by the longer term expectation of rewards distribution between the two duties:
- Proposer effectiveness: 1/8
- Attester effectiveness: 7/8
Attributions of proposer slots are much rarer than attestation duties, but bear a significantly higher reward if performed correctly. On average, over a long time period, a validator’s ETH rewards will be split between proposer and attester rewards at a ratio of 1:7. We have selected the respective probability weights to reflect that distribution.
Given the above, we calculate validator effectiveness as:
validator_effectiveness == [1/8 * proposer_effectiveness] + [7/8 * attester_effectiveness
Due to a bug in the implementation of Phase 0, the ratio of proposer-to-attester rewards ended up being 1:31 instead of 1:7. This has been corrected in the latest upgrade (Altair). Rated v0 is maintaining the original spec in computing validator effectiveness.
As discussed in the proposer-effectiveness-post-mergesection of the documentation, post-Merge, proposal duties carry a lot more weight overall; not only because there is now a significant proportion of the overall yield that comes from successful proposals, but because missed proposals also mean delaying transaction processing for real users and billions of USD in value (
EL), apart from not helping the chain progress (CL). What we have observed thus far is that on-balance, execution to consensus layer rewards come at a 1:4 ratio. We expect that ratio to become even more balanced over time for the following reasons:
- 1.More active validators on the Beacon Chain crowd out
CLAPR% - 2.More adoption of MEV Relays and out-of-protocol PBS boost overall
ELAPR% - 3.We are going off of 30-days of post-Merge data, in a period where demand for blockspace on Ethereum is below long term averages.
Given the above we propose the following amendment to the weights of the components of effectiveness rating post-Merge:
- Proposer effectiveness: 1/8 → 3/8
- Attester effectiveness: 7/8 → 5/8
Such that:
validator_effectiveness == [3/8 * proposer_effectiveness] + [5/8 * attester_effectiveness
Note: If a validator has not been assigned any proposer duties, we only take their attester effectiveness into consideration in calculating their overall effectiveness, such that
validator_effectiveness == attester_effectiveness.We do this so that we avoid artificially inflating the overall rating.Last modified 1mo ago