layer 1 vs layer 2

What Are Layer 1 and Layer 2 Networks?

A Layer 1 network refers to the main blockchain, which is responsible for custodianship of assets and final settlement of transactions. A Layer 2 network is built on top of the main chain, processing transactions in its own environment first before submitting the results back to Layer 1.

You can think of Layer 1 and Layer 2 like a “court and an arbitration center.” The Layer 1 network acts as the authoritative and cautious court that makes final judgments, while the Layer 2 network functions as an efficient arbitration center that handles the majority of cases quickly, only submitting essential results to Layer 1. This approach preserves security and trust while significantly improving performance and user experience.

Common examples of Layer 1 networks include Ethereum, Bitcoin, and Solana. Popular Layer 2 networks include Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, zkSync, and StarkNet. These layers are typically connected via “bridges,” allowing assets to move between different layers.

Why Do Layer 1 and Layer 2 Networks Coexist?

It is challenging for a single blockchain layer to simultaneously achieve high security, strong decentralization, and fast throughput. Layer 1 networks prioritize openness and security, while Layer 2 networks focus on increasing scalability and reducing transaction fees. By working together, they meet diverse user needs.

As user numbers grow, transaction packaging costs on Layer 1 rise and confirmation times become longer. Offloading bulk transactions to Layer 2 reduces congestion on Layer 1, making simple transfers, blockchain gaming interactions, and NFT minting smoother—while still relying on Layer 1 for ultimate security guarantees.

How Do Layer 1 and Layer 2 Networks Work?

Layer 1 networks use consensus mechanisms to maintain ledgers and confirm transactions. The consensus mechanism defines how participants agree on a unified ledger; participants on Layer 1 collectively decide which transactions are valid to be written into blocks.

A common approach for Layer 2 is Rollups. Rollups bundle many transactions into a single summary, then submit this summary and necessary proofs to the Layer 1 network. As a result, Layer 1 does not need to process every transaction individually—only to verify the summary and its proof.

Optimistic Rollups assume submitted results are correct but provide a “challenge window,” during which anyone can dispute results and provide evidence of errors. Zero-Knowledge (ZK) Rollups submit mathematical proofs along with results to prove that “this batch of computation is correct,” enabling fast verification by Layer 1.

Data availability refers to whether original transaction data can be retrieved when needed. Most Layer 2 solutions post necessary data to Layer 1 or a dedicated data layer, enabling anyone to independently reconstruct and audit transactions, thus maintaining transparency and verifiability.

Comparing Fees and Speed: Layer 1 vs. Layer 2

In general, Layer 1 networks have higher fees and slower confirmations, while Layer 2 networks offer lower fees and faster confirmations. This is because Layer 2 compresses multiple transactions into less data for submission to Layer 1 and executes them efficiently in its own environment.

For everyday users, simple transfers or DEX swaps on Layer 2 usually cost just a few cents—significantly less than on Layer 1, especially when Layer 1 is congested. Confirmation times on Layer 2 are typically a few seconds to tens of seconds; on Layer 1, confirmation may take longer for higher certainty.

When depositing or withdrawing from an exchange like Gate, you’ll notice these differences: choosing “ETH Layer 1” generally incurs higher on-chain fees, while selecting “Arbitrum” or other Layer 2 options is more cost-effective and faster—ideal for frequent operations.

Security Differences Between Layer 1 and Layer 2

Layer 1’s security comes from its own validators or miners maintaining consensus; anyone can independently verify blocks and transactions. The security of a Layer 2 network relies on submitting results and proofs back to Layer 1—either via challenge windows or zero-knowledge proofs—thereby inheriting the security properties of the base layer.

The risks differ: Optimistic Rollups have withdrawal waiting periods (usually several days) to allow time for challenges and corrections. ZK Rollups depend on the correctness and security of their proof systems. If a Layer 2 “sequencer” (the component ordering and batching transactions) temporarily fails, block production or user experience may be affected—but asset security is still ultimately protected by Layer 1.

It’s important to distinguish between “sidechains” and “Layer 2 networks.” Sidechains have their own security models and validators and connect to Layer 1 via bridges without posting data or proofs back to the base chain. Thus, they are not strictly considered true Layer 2 networks, as their security assumptions differ.

How to Choose Between Layer 1 and Layer 2 Networks on Gate

When depositing or withdrawing funds on Gate, the platform allows you to select the network—which will affect your fees, transaction speed, and risk profile.

Step one: Confirm that your target wallet supports the chosen network. For instance, if you want to send ETH to a wallet on Arbitrum, ensure your wallet supports Arbitrum; otherwise, your funds could be lost.

Step two: On Gate’s withdrawal interface, select the appropriate network. For example, “ETH-ERC20” means using the Ethereum mainnet (Layer 1), while “ETH-Arbitrum” means using a Layer 2 network. The interface will display corresponding fees and estimated arrival times.

Step three: Double-check that your token matches the selected network. Some tokens have different contract addresses on different networks—always confirm that your recipient’s network and token type align.

Step four: Do a small test transfer first. Send a small amount to confirm that the process and address are correct before transferring larger sums—this helps mitigate risk.

What Should You Watch Out For When Bridging Between Layers or Chains?

Moving funds across layers or chains is usually done via an “official bridge” or third-party bridge service.

Step one: When moving from a Layer 1 to a Layer 2 network, it’s safest to use the official bridge for that specific Layer 2. The bridge locks assets on the base layer and mints corresponding representations on the secondary layer.

Step two: When moving funds from a Layer 2 back to a Layer 1 network, Optimistic Rollups may require waiting for the challenge period to finish; ZK Rollups are typically faster but require gas fees on both sides.

Step three: Check the reputation and security of any bridge you use. Choose bridges that have undergone extensive audits, have been operating for a significant time, and have active communities—avoid newly launched or unaudited bridges.

Risk warning: Depositing or withdrawing via the wrong network can result in unrecoverable loss; smart contract vulnerabilities may be exploited; temporary failures of sequencers or bridges may delay fund arrival. Always save transaction hashes and contact customer support if needed.

Notable Projects Using Layer 1 and Layer 2 Networks

Layer 1 representatives: Ethereum focuses on an open ecosystem with smart contracts; Bitcoin specializes in value storage and transfers; Solana emphasizes high-throughput single-chain architecture.

Layer 2 representatives: Arbitrum and Optimism use Optimistic Rollups suitable for general-purpose applications; Base is operated by ecosystem partners aiming for large-scale adoption; zkSync and StarkNet implement zero-knowledge proofs for faster finality and stronger cryptographic security.

Note that Polygon PoS has historically functioned more like a sidechain (with independent security) rather than a strict Layer 2 solution; Polygon zkEVM, in contrast, submits data and proofs to Ethereum as a true Layer 2. Understanding these distinctions can help you evaluate security assumptions and appropriate use cases.

Evolving Trends in Layer 1 vs. Layer 2

Over the past year, more applications have migrated high-frequency interactions onto Layer 2 networks. During periods of congestion, users increasingly prefer environments with lower fees and faster confirmations. Tooling and infrastructure for Layer 2 are maturing rapidly, reducing costs for deployment and migration.

On the security and data front, more projects are prioritizing posting necessary data to either the base layer or public data layers for external auditing and independent reconstruction—improving transparency. User experience continues to advance with shorter confirmation times, lower fees, better mobile/wallet integration, and clearer bridging paths.

Key Takeaways: Comparing Layer 1 vs. Layer 2 Networks

Layer 1 handles asset custody and final settlement with an emphasis on public validation and security; Layer 2 provides scalability enhancements by processing batches of transactions in lightweight environments before submitting results to the base chain. In terms of fees and speed, Layer 2 usually offers advantages; for security, it inherits guarantees from Layer 1 through challenge windows or zero-knowledge proofs. When using these networks, always verify that your target network matches your token type; select the appropriate network on Gate; test with small amounts first; account for possible wait times and smart contract risks when bridging funds. As the ecosystem matures, more high-frequency use cases will shift to Layer 2 while Layer 1 continues as the foundational anchor for trusted settlement and security.

FAQ

Which is better for beginners: Layer 1 or Layer 2?

It depends on your use case and budget. A Layer 1 network (such as Ethereum mainnet) offers the highest security but comes with higher gas fees—better suited for large transactions. A Layer 2 network (like Arbitrum or Optimism) provides faster speeds with lower costs—ideal for frequent small transactions or DeFi activities. New users are advised to start with a Layer 2 network for ease of use before exploring direct interactions with a Layer 1 network.

How long does it take to transfer from a Layer 1 to a Layer 2 network?

Bridging times vary by network. Optimistic networks (such as Optimism) typically require a seven-day challenge period before withdrawals are finalized on the base chain, while Arbitrum may use different mechanisms for faster processing. For convenience, use official bridging tools or process deposits/withdrawals directly via Gate—where routing and speed are optimized automatically.

Is my asset safe on a Layer 2 network?

The safety of assets on a Layer 2 network depends on its underlying technical solution. Leading networks like Arbitrum and Optimism have undergone thorough audits—making them relatively secure—but they still carry slightly higher risk compared to base layer networks. Do not store more funds than you can afford to lose on any single platform, including L2s, and check official security updates regularly.

Why are some DeFi projects only available on Layer 1 but not on Layer 2?

Some projects choose to operate solely on base layer networks due to their prioritization of maximum security or because they handle large volumes of user funds (where L2 risks may be comparatively higher). However, as L2 technology matures and user adoption increases, more projects are deploying across both layers—resulting in an increasingly multi-chain ecosystem. On Gate you can see which projects support which networks.

How do I determine which network is best for participating in a project?

First consider project liquidity and user activity—high liquidity indicates greater capital presence on that network. Next compare transaction fees—small trades are often more economical on L2s. Finally assess your own security needs—use L1s for larger amounts when safety is paramount. On Gate you can compare project data across supported networks to make optimal decisions.