Ethereum: who orders transactions?

Control profile

Transaction ordering

None — permissionless proposer set

Escape hatch

n/a — settlement layer, no exit dependency

Upgrade authority

Social consensus + hard fork. No key can change state or seize funds.

Liveness record

No chain halt since the Merge. Finality ~13 minutes. The standing concern is client concentration: Geth held ~50.1% execution-layer share as of Q4 2025, and a supermajority client bug is the one scenario that could finalise a wrong chain. Institutional operators moved toward multi-client stacks through 2026 in response.

Ketju control assessment

The baseline against which every other chain is measured, and the only venue where a sovereignty-first mandate is fully honoured. No sequencer, no upgrade key, no operator who can be compelled. The cost is gas — a client with a small position pays materially more here than on an L2, and that trade-off has to be stated plainly rather than solved by quietly routing them to Base.

Observable review triggers

• Any single execution client exceeding 66% share
• Any single consensus client exceeding 66% share
• Finality failure lasting more than 1 hour

These triggers make the assessment monitorable. They are not predictions; each identifies a fact that would change or reopen the current control assessment.

Advisor implementation questions

1. Does the client’s thesis require censorship resistance, or primarily low-cost settlement?
2. Can the client exit without cooperation from the normal transaction-ordering party?
3. Who can upgrade bridges or contracts, and what delay applies?
4. Does the asset introduce an issuer weaker than the chain grade?
5. What evidence will show a halt, censorship event, or governance change?