Looking at the data from l2beat, it was found that Mantle, which focuses on providing native on-chain yields for ETH assets, has reached a total TVL of $1.82 billion, surpassing Blast to become the fourth largest layer 2 by locked value. Could it be considered among the "Four Kings" of layer 2? Many may wonder how Mantle has managed to rise through the combination of mETH + cmETH + Cook. Next, I will systematically outline this:

- The Dual Interaction of mETH: L1 Native Yields + L2 Unified Interoperability

1) L1 Native Yields

Mantle is a layer 2 chain directly built on the OP Stack Codebase. At its launch, the overall Ethereum layer 2 ecosystem suffered from a lack of "native yields." Therefore, Mantle and Blast adopted a similar Tokenomics economic model design, with the core idea being to allow users to deposit ETH in layer 2 to generate native yields on the Ethereum mainnet. For example, users can deposit ETH into LiDO to enjoy around 4% APY from POS staking.

As a result, Mantle launched the Ethereum liquid staking protocol mETH on the Ethereum mainnet, which has currently accumulated 483,000 ETH, ranking behind stETH, wBETH, and rETH.

The native yields that Mantle layer 2 focuses on partly come from the POS staking rewards of mETH. Importantly, mETH, as a key protocol of LSP, will also be integrated into other LRS protocols such as Eigenlayer, puffer, Renzo, and Kelp, benefiting from their mining rewards, including points and ecological governance. In addition to on-chain yields, Mantle has partnered with Bybit to connect C-end users with B-end AMM market makers' funding needs, generating off-chain yields from borrowed funds.

In summary, the goal of the mETH protocol is to connect as many diversified yield sources as possible to provide lasting Pump for its layer 2 Tokenomics. For instance, its liquidity protocol will also cover alt-layer 1s like Bearchain and Fuel. The logic is not hard to understand; aside from the stable yields from Ethereum POS, the yields from LRT platforms are dynamic, unstable, and lack sustainability. To effectively convey the story of feeding mainnet yields to layer 2, mETH must expand the possibilities of diversified yields.

2) L2 Unified Interoperability

In addition to the native yield properties of the underlying mETH, Mantle has introduced another core feature to its layer 2 chain: a liquidity center for interoperable operations. Recently, Vitalik and various layer 2 project teams have been working together to drive the liquidity integration of Ethereum layer 2, indicating that the current fragmented liquidity situation in Ethereum layer 2 has become a core challenge in the Rollup-Centric strategy.

In fact, from its inception, Mantle has integrated "interoperability" as part of its underlying technical framework. Specifically:

Mantle employs atomic cross-chain logic provided by LayerZero, deploying a master contract to control total supply and deploying sub-contracts on various layer 2s to control local supply and cross-chain minting instructions. If a user wants to cross-chain ETH from Arbitrum to Optimism, they can first stake ETH on the Mantle chain, where the master contract mints mETH to increase supply. Meanwhile, LayerZero's relay nodes will synchronize messages to the sub-contract on Optimism, which will mint mETH corresponding to the user's deposit address upon receiving the instructions.

The existence of mETH assets is based on the interoperability of layer 2, especially when there are large amounts of idle ETH funds on other layer 2s. With the underlying feature of atomic cross-chain without loss, users will naturally prefer to aggregate their ETH assets onto Mantle's mETH to earn yields. Using Omni Contract to achieve atomic cross-chain, it attracts users to pool funds with APY yields as the anchor.

mETH has been meticulously designed from upstream funding sources to downstream business closed-loop logic.

- cmETH + Cook: Activating the Operation of the L2 DeFi Economy

The question arises: what considerations led to the emergence of cmETH? If there were only mETH, the market might perceive Mantle as a leading player rallying other L2s to launch a "vampire" attack on the Ethereum mainnet.

Clearly, this is not feasible; the destiny of layer 2 must still be to provide blood transfusions to the mainnet. Therefore, L2 must possess self-sustaining capabilities. cmETH is the key for mETH to achieve self-sustainability.

Users can convert mETH into cmETH to participate in DeFi projects on L2, Restaking, to earn yields generated by the L2 DeFi ecosystem. Although cmETH carries an additional layer of re-staking risk compared to mETH, it also enjoys more aggressive incentives and mining yield expectations from L2. For example, Mantle launched the Methamorphosis event, where users can re-stake mETH to receive Powder equity certificates, allowing them to obtain future governance tokens $COOK.

Many may wonder, with $MNT already in existence, why $COOK? This relates to the dual-token model designed by Mantle. MNT is the native token of the Mantle layer 2 network, used to pay network gas fees, for ecological governance, and to maintain the security of its POS network. Its goal is to sustain the economic operation of the Mantle chain.

On the other hand, $COOK is intended to cover the unified rights and governance of mETH on the mainnet and the unified layer of interoperable operations in layer 2. It is a governance token exclusive to the mETH protocol, primarily used for liquidity mining rewards and community incentives. According to the overall planning of mETH and cmETH, it may eventually flow into the overall layer 2 liquidity system while also enjoying yield possibilities across the entire layer 2 ecosystem.

That's all.

The previously renowned Blast attracted much attention not only due to its massive capital absorption capabilities but also because there was hope that its funds could inject a catfish effect into layer 2, providing a breakthrough point for the existing dilemmas in the layer 2 economy. Similarly, Mantle, with its large capital volume and excellent token model design, aims to bring a "variable" to the layer 2 industry. It seems that the definition of the "Four Kings" of layer 2 has been more focused on the "technical" dimension, while the current situation shows that Starknet and zkSync, which have excellent technical foundations, are falling behind, while Base and Mantle, excelling in operations and TVL, are overtaking.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。