In a recent thread on X, Vitalik Buterin urged a different view of ether: not as a token whose value grows from burning fees, but as a reliable store of value. This shift in emphasis affects not only the technical details of Ethereum but also how investors think about the cryptocurrency in their portfolio.
According to the network's co-founder, the EIP-1559 mechanism, which has burned a portion of fees since 2021, remains useful and should not be abolished. However, Buterin stresses that there is no need to be upset if the burn volume stays below 10% of the break-even level for a long time. In his view, ETH's value is born elsewhere — in decentralization and the properties of CROPS: censorship resistance, open-source code, privacy and security.
Optimizing for maximum fee burning, Buterin warns, pushes the network toward corporate logic: rising gas prices, shrinking validator revenues and the risk of centralization. In 2022, about 1,48 million ETH were burned; in 2026, only about 19 thousand ETH in the first months. Such a model does not provide a sustainable "floor" for the price, since most of the activity within the ecosystem depends on the value of ether itself.
Instead, focusing on the store-of-value role better matches Ethereum's strengths. In an era of AI turbulence, stability and an asset's ability to "survive" become especially valuable. For a holder, this means ETH should be seen not as a source of passive income from burning, but as a tool for preserving capital amid uncertainty.
This approach also changes personal financial decisions. Instead of racing for high fees, an investor can evaluate the network by its ability to preserve value under any external shocks. As the old saying goes, it is better to have an asset that simply stays in place than one that promises to burn for the illusion of growth.
Buterin does not abandon burning, but he removes from it the burden of being the sole driver of value. This returns ether to its original idea — a decentralized platform where the main thing is reliability and resilience, not the volume of destroyed tokens.
