Article written by: Charlie.hl

Article translation: Block unicorn

In the battle between ecology and products, who will be the winner in 2025?

The battle of 2025 will be a battle of choice for the next generation of blockchains, whether they will prioritize ecosystem or product. Which priority will produce the most successful blockchains (as measured by market cap, fees generated, and number of unique users)? This question is playing out in real time, as future top layer 1 (L1) and layer 2 (L2) chains are betting their fates on opposing strategies. On one side are ecosystem-first chains represented by Monad, MegaETH, and Berachain, and on the other are product-first chains represented by Hyperliquid. In this article, I’ll dive into this distinction and these opposing chain philosophies that will shape the blockchain development landscape in 2025.

Competitors: Ecosystem First

Monad, MegaETH, and Berachain are the main proponents of the ecosystem-first philosophy, which aims to build a thriving network of interdependent applications and stakeholders before focusing on building individual products. These chains attempt to attract developers to move away from existing chains and each other by providing developer spaces, grants, and more chain-specific developer benefits such as growth or partner support.

Over the past year or so, Monad’s BD/Growth team like @intern and @internbrah have brought a ton of attention to Monad, attracting hundreds of thousands of Discord members and Twitter followers, and many Monad-based projects have raised funding at sky-high valuations as they claim the promise of being the first and dominant [insert DeFi primitive] on Monad. The phrase “build on Monad” has echoed across the crypto Twitter timeline as Monad’s BD has fought to win over top project builders from its competing chains. Monad even has a @monad_eco page to make this point even more explicit: ecosystem is a top priority.

MegaETH's approach to ecosystem building is slightly different, but its priorities are equally clear. The chain's labs team plays a unique interventionist role in its ecosystem. Rather than trying to convince existing projects to launch on its chain, they focus primarily on nurturing grassroots projects from its accelerator, MegaMafia. These applications are tailored for MegaETH and unique to its ecosystem, but do not necessarily have the reputation and visibility of existing DeFi projects. Instead of waiting for natural development, MegaETH proactively "shaped" several core projects: perpetual contract DEX, spot DEX, lending protocol, etc. This carefully planned approach aims to ensure the coherence and interconnectedness of the ecosystem, and MegaETH is betting that these early investments will bring growth as more teams join. For MegaETH, the MegaMafia ecosystem and its success are crucial.

Then there is Berachain, which seeks to combine ecosystem innovation with technological innovation. Its unique Proof of Liquidity (PoL) consensus mechanism incentivizes liquidity provision for Berachain native applications such as BEX (Bera native decentralized exchange) and BEND (Bera native lending protocol). By embedding liquidity incentives into the core architecture of the chain, Berachain hopes to create a virtuous cycle of ecosystem growth related to its infrastructure. Here, the product itself is the growth of the ecosystem, which can also be seen from early initiatives such as Boyco. For the Berachain team, winning the competition for the ecosystem is a top priority.

Each of these chains is citing ecosystem development as the foundation for growth, and while their products are far from empty talk, it is clear that in the early stages their focus is on the network itself.

The opposite: Product first

In stark contrast, Hyperliquid has turned the idea of ecosystem supremacy on its head. Instead of calling on developers to build on its L1, Hyperliquid focused on delivering a killer product: the most successful perpetual contract decentralized exchange (perps DEX) in the history of cryptocurrency. Only after consolidating its position in the perpetual contract space did Hyperliquid begin to launch L1, aiming to enhance its flagship product and provide a network tailored for traders.

Hyperliquid’s strategy represents a fundamental shift in L1 launch strategy. Rather than catering to application developers, it focuses on end users — in this case, traders. The idea is simple: if you build a product that users love, developers and applications will naturally follow liquidity and activity. This strategy avoids the pitfall of over-hyping an ecosystem without a proven product.

This focus has led many to question where the Hyperliquid ecosystem is, as the Labs team is apparently not making an open call for developers or applications at this time. Instead, Hyperliquid's Labs entity remains focused on product direction and appears to be taking the approach of letting applications follow liquidity and users rather than the other way around. Hyperliquid is essentially quickly copying Uniswap's roadmap of creating the most successful DEX first and then building a chain (Unichain) and ecosystem to support it a few years later.

Philosophical differences

At its core, the ecosystem vs. product debate reflects a philosophical divide in blockchain development. An ecosystem-first approach relies on developer network effects: by fostering a thriving community of developers and projects, it aims to create a self-sustaining growth cycle. A product-first approach flips this logic on its head, betting that a great product will first attract users and liquidity, and the ecosystem will naturally follow.

The market will ultimately decide which strategy prevails. If ecosystem-first projects like Monad, MegaETH, and Berachain can translate their community momentum into lasting adoption, they could define the direction in which the L1/L2 ecosystem evolves. Conversely, if Hyperliquid continues to win users by focusing on providing the best trading experience, it could force the industry to rethink how it defines a successful launch strategy. By putting product first, Hyperliquid is essentially putting community first, as great products lead to widespread usage, which leads to more valuable community ownership, which could create the ultimate flywheel of adoption in 2025. This article is primarily an objective analysis, but I’d bet that when we look back at this article in December 2025, Hyperliquid will be dominant in all three of the above metrics, and the lead will be very clear.

As we head into 2025, one thing is certain: the battle between ecosystems and products will shape the landscape of L1/L2 development in the year ahead.

If you think the article is good, you can star Block unicorn and add it to your desktop.

The information provided in this article is for general guidance and information purposes only and the contents of this article should not be considered investment, business, legal or tax advice under any circumstances. We cannot be held responsible for individual decisions made based on this article and we strongly recommend that you conduct your own research before taking any action. Although every effort has been made to ensure that all information provided here is accurate and up-to-date, omissions or errors may occur.

In the battle between ecology and products, who will be the winner in 2025?