Ethereum Layer 2 networks are separate execution environments built to scale Ethereum. Users transact on the Layer 2, while the network relies on Ethereum in its security and settlement architecture rather than requiring every user action to execute directly on Ethereum Mainnet.
A Layer 2 still appears as a separate network in a wallet. ETH and tokens held on Mainnet do not automatically become available on Base, Arbitrum, Optimism or another L2 simply because the wallet address looks the same.
Mainnet and Layer 2 networks are connected, but they are not one shared balance. The practical difference for a user is where the transaction executes, where the asset is currently located and what route is required to move it between networks.
| Detail | Ethereum Mainnet | Ethereum Layer 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Execution | Transactions execute directly on Ethereum | User transactions execute on the L2 |
| Network selection | Ethereum Mainnet in the wallet | Separate L2 network in the wallet |
| Fees | Paid for Mainnet execution | Paid according to the L2's fee model, often lower than Mainnet |
| Asset location | Balance exists on Ethereum | Balance exists on that specific L2 |
| Moving between networks | No bridge needed inside Mainnet | Bridge or supported cross-network route is normally required |
This separation matters most when receiving funds. A deposit service that supports ETH on Arbitrum does not automatically support ETH on every other L2, even when the same account address can be displayed across EVM networks.
The Ethereum ecosystem includes several established and developing Layer 2 networks. The right network depends on the application, wallet, asset, bridge path and maturity level you need rather than a universal ranking.
| Network | Rollup family | Practical selection note |
|---|---|---|
| Base | Optimistic rollup / OP Stack | Broad general-purpose ecosystem; check app and token support before bridging |
| Arbitrum One | Optimistic rollup | General-purpose DeFi and application ecosystem; separate Arbitrum balance in wallet |
| OP Mainnet | Optimistic rollup | General-purpose L2 in the Optimism ecosystem |
| Starknet | ZK rollup | Uses a different account/technology model from standard EVM networks |
| ZKsync | ZK rollup | Ethereum scaling network using validity-proof technology |
| Scroll | ZK rollup | EVM-oriented ZK rollup; verify current wallet and bridge support |
| Linea | ZK rollup | EVM-oriented ZK network; verify current app and bridge support |
Network lists and maturity change over time. Use the current network documentation and wallet support rather than choosing only from an old fee or TVL comparison.
The main rollup families differ in how they prove that offchain execution is valid. For most users, the practical effect is not the cryptography itself but the network's withdrawal model, maturity, wallet support and application ecosystem.
| Model | Basic idea | User-facing implication |
|---|---|---|
| Optimistic rollup | Transactions are treated as valid unless a challenge/fraud-proof mechanism proves otherwise | Withdrawal and finality architecture can differ from ZK networks |
| ZK rollup | Validity proofs are generated to demonstrate correct state transitions | Proof-based settlement can support a different withdrawal/finality model |
Neither category is automatically the best choice for every task. A user who needs one specific dapp or token should start with that destination requirement and then evaluate the network behind it.
The best network is the one that supports the action you actually need. Cost matters, but a low fee is irrelevant if the destination application, token or withdrawal route is unavailable.
If wallet support is the main question, see the Ethereum wallet comparison.
ETH can be moved between Ethereum Mainnet and supported Layer 2 networks through a bridge or another supported cross-network route. The source and destination are separate networks, so the wallet balance changes on one network and later appears on the other after the bridge process completes.
The basic flow is to choose the destination L2, open a verified bridge, connect the wallet on the source network, review the amount and costs, sign the transaction and then switch the wallet to the destination network to verify the resulting balance.
The full process and safety checks are covered in how to bridge ETH between Ethereum and Layer 2.
Layer 2 networks can improve cost and throughput, but they add network-specific components and assumptions that users should understand. Risk is not identical across every L2, and maturity can change as a network decentralizes or upgrades.
| Risk area | What to check |
|---|---|
| Sequencer/operator dependence | Whether transaction ordering or network operation depends on centralized or partially centralized components |
| Bridge/smart-contract risk | Contracts that custody or move assets between networks can introduce additional attack surfaces |
| Network maturity | Newer networks may have different upgrade controls, proofs or emergency mechanisms |
| Asset confusion | The same token symbol can exist as native, canonical or bridged versions |
| Liquidity fragmentation | An asset can have deep liquidity on one network and limited routes on another |
| Wallet/app support | A network can be technically live while the destination service does not support deposits or withdrawals on it |
For deeper network-specific risk research, use the network's own documentation and independent L2 risk analysis rather than assuming all rollups share the same trust model.
It is a separate execution network designed to scale Ethereum while relying on Ethereum in its security and settlement architecture.
Yes. They are separate L2 networks with their own balances and transaction histories even when the same wallet account can be used across them.
Many Ethereum L2s use ETH as the gas asset, but users should confirm the current network rules before transferring funds.
Many EVM-compatible L2s can display the same account address, but the balances remain network-specific. The address similarity does not make the networks interchangeable.
Usually a bridge or another supported cross-network route is required when funds are currently on Ethereum Mainnet and need to move to a separate L2.
There is no universal best L2. Choose based on the application, asset support, wallet compatibility, bridge path, maturity and costs relevant to your use case.