Ethereum secures its network through proof-of-stake, a system in which participants lock up ETH to help validate transactions and are eligible to earn rewards in return. Staking is how that process works in practice, and it comes in several forms with meaningfully different tradeoffs between control, convenience, and risk.<\/p>\n
Ethereum originally secured its network the way Bitcoin still does, through proof-of-work mining, where computers compete to solve a computational puzzle. Ethereum has since moved to proof-of-stake<\/a>, a different consensus mechanism in which the right to propose and confirm blocks is tied to how much ETH<\/a> a participant has locked up, or staked, rather than how much computing power they control. This was one of the more significant protocol shifts in Ethereum’s history, changing both the network’s energy profile and its underlying security model.<\/p>\n A validator<\/a> is the role responsible for proposing new blocks and confirming that other validators’ blocks follow the network’s rules. To become a validator, a participant deposits a fixed amount of ETH as a stake, then runs software that keeps them online and responsive to the network. In exchange for performing this work honestly and reliably, validators are eligible to earn rewards, paid in ETH, for their participation.<\/p>\n The word eligible matters here. Rewards are not a fixed interest rate; they depend on how the protocol distributes issuance across the total amount of ETH staked network-wide, on general network activity, and on a validator’s own uptime and correctness. This is not financial advice, and nothing about staking rewards is guaranteed.<\/p>\n The shift to proof-of-stake was not only about opening staking rewards to more participants; it changed how the network defends itself against attack. Under proof-of-work, security comes from the cost of physical computing hardware and electricity, an external cost with no direct link to the asset being secured. Under proof-of-stake, security comes from validators risking a financial asset, ETH itself, which can be partially destroyed through slashing if they act dishonestly. This ties a validator’s incentives directly to the health of the network they help secure: acting against the network’s interests can cost the validator part of their own stake.<\/p>\n Supporters point to this as a more direct and energy-efficient security model. Critics note that it also means influence is, in principle, correlated with existing ETH holdings rather than computing investment. Both observations are part of an honest picture of the tradeoff, not an argument for either side.<\/p>\nWhat a Validator Actually Does<\/h2>\n
Why Ethereum Moved Away From Mining<\/h2>\n
Solo, Pooled, and Liquid Staking<\/h2>\n