Quadratic epochs
HighestRound-based public-goods funding with quadratic matching over a defined epoch. Strongest signal: predictable cadence, transparent allocation, low capture risk.
Ethereum mainnet · live dataset · v0.1
Which validators send their yield back to public goods?
A live map of the validators that already redistribute staking rewards — and a slow argument for why this set should grow.
01 / By the numbers
The signal so far — across 20 tracked validators, last 12 months on mainnet.
Validators tracked
20
first cut
ETH staked
21.4M
~17% of network
ETH → public goods
8,420
last 12 months
Avg redistribution
3.1%
of yield, weighted
02 / Validators
Sorted by ETH redirected, last 12 months. Open the app to claim or dispute.
Top public goods contributors
A snapshot of the five strongest entries. The full sortable dataset of 20 validators lives on a dedicated page.
01
Golem Foundation
100k ETH staked · runs Octant
MechanismQuadratic epochs
Redistributed~3,200 ETH
A+
02
Ethereum Foundation
EF treasury validators · direct grants
MechanismDirect grants
Redistributed~2,100 ETH
A
03
Lido (Protocol Guild splits)
9.2M ETH · 1% to PG via DAO vote
MechanismDAO vote
Redistributed~1,650 ETH
B+
04
Rocket Pool
~900k ETH · GMC grants program
MechanismCommittee
Redistributed~340 ETH
B
05
Stakefish
~280k ETH · periodic ecosystem grants
MechanismDirect grants
Redistributed~180 ETH
B
03 / Mechanisms
Graded by legibility, cadence, and capture-resistance — not by absolute amount.
Four ways validator yield reaches the commons
A short taxonomy. We grade not by amount alone, but by how legible, recurring, and credibly neutral the redistribution is.
Direct grants
HighA foundation or protocol team allocates yield directly to recipients. Fast and flexible, but legibility depends entirely on disclosure quality.
DAO vote
MidToken-holder governance approves a recurring split (e.g. 1% of yield to Protocol Guild). Legitimate, but reintroduces token-weighted politics.
Committee / multisig
MidAn elected or appointed group of reviewers approves grants. Faster than full DAO votes, but capture risk scales with how the committee is seated.
In use byRocket Pool GMC
04 / Thesis
The argument behind the dataset, in one sentence.
The argument in one sentence
Validators are the only credibly neutral body that can fund Ethereum's commons without reintroducing the centralisation the Foundation is trying to dissolve.
Building on Deep Funding by Mehta & Lesaege and the post-EF public-goods framing of Mougayar, 2025.
05 / Open questions
Honest reading of the data leaves these on the table.
Four questions this dataset cannot answer alone
commonsyield maps what is, not what should be. These are the open governance questions that any honest reading of the data leaves on the table.
01 / 04
If validators become the funding body for public goods after the EF shrinks, what governance structure decides who gets recurring funding?
02 / 04
How do we distinguish performative redistribution from credible long-term commitment to a fixed share of every epoch?
03 / 04
Should staking pools be reported at the operator level, the pool level, or both — and who is the legitimate signer when a pool redistributes?
04 / 04
What legal and operational stack does a validator-funded grant program need so transfers reach off-chain teams without recreating a centralised steward?
06 / Claim your row
Run a validator that already redistributes? Get listed.
Run a validator that already redistributes? Claim your row.
Open the app to attest the link between your withdrawal address and your redistribution program. We publish your mechanism, cadence, and recipients in the public dataset. No token, no fee.
Read methodologyRead-only by default · no transactions
07 / About
How the dataset is built and how to contribute.