Exiting the mempool: How are intent-based transactions transforming DeFi?

Revolution is happening in the DeFi ecosystem. Once again, transactions based on intent that move away from the traditional mempool model are bringing significant changes to the space. This new paradigm supports more confident trading by allowing users to specify their intentions and controlling the execution environment, rather than relying on the current state of the mempool.

The traditional mempool model and its limitations

While blockchain technology offers a robust architecture, it can feel vulnerable in other ways, such as susceptibility to bugs. In traditional systems, the mempool (the pool of pending transactions) accepts specific instructions from users and queues them for processing.

In this “imperative” model, you must give direct commands to the blockchain: “Send my ERC-20 tokens, swap them on Uniswap for at least 2000 USDC, pay a gas fee of 50 gwei, and send the output to my wallet,” for example. But when mempool parameters change or prices fluctuate unpredictably, your trade can fail or be executed at an unfavorable rate, risking errors.

Additionally, the classic mempool architecture is vulnerable to front-running and sandwich attacks (multiple MEV—maximal extractable value—attacks). While we can understand what’s happening, systems that lack adaptive mechanisms may be caught off guard by these exploits.

Intent-based architecture: mempoolless trading

Intent-based transactions break free from the traditional mempool approach, enabling more efficient execution. You simply state, “I have 1 ETH and want to swap it for at least 2000 USDC,” and the system finds the optimal way to fulfill that intent.

In this architecture, as the mempool fills up, the set of intents is transferred into a connected system that manages execution. This system is called a “solver”—a third-party agent specialized in finding optimal execution strategies for each intent. They compete to identify the best execution path and carry it out.

For example, if you want to swap 1 ETH for at least 2000 USDC, the solvers will:

• Compare liquidity across Uniswap, Curve, and other sources
• Find the best price
• Possibly pay upfront to prioritize your transaction
• Execute the trade and preserve the rate

Thus, the goal of the mempool is replaced with a more strategic, systemic approach.

Solver network and execution mechanism

Intent-based systems operate through a specialized cycle involving four stages:

Stage 1: Define and sign the intent

The user clearly states their goal, such as “Swap token A for token B at the minimum price,” or “Buy X amount at the overall market price.” The intent exits the mempool, and a verified signature confirms its authenticity.

Stage 2: Publish intent to solvers

The intent is broadcast to the solver network. These agents analyze the intent and determine the best execution method—focusing on optimal routing rather than just mempool inclusion.

Stage 3: The best solver executes

The top-performing solver executes the intent:

• It can batch multiple instructions
• It may pool liquidity from various sources
• It can use its own inventory if needed

Stage 4: Settlement and accounting

The solver pays upfront for the execution, and the trade is settled through the system. Unlike the classic mempool approach, the execution is not just a simple transaction broadcast.

Advantages: from improved UX to MEV protection

The intent-based model offers several compelling benefits:

Enhanced user experience (UX)

Technical complexities are abstracted away, allowing users to focus solely on their desired outcome. When mempool data is less relevant and transaction fees are optimized, trades become more predictable—making the system more user-friendly. In some cases, “fee-less” trading becomes possible, where solvers pay gas costs (e.g., in ETH) and users only pay the swap amount.

Protection against MEV (maximal extractable value)

Front-running, sandwich attacks, and other MEV exploits are mitigated. Intent-based systems delegate execution to solvers who optimize for fairness and security. If the execution continues to meet the user’s conditions, the trade remains protected.

Capital efficiency

Connected solver networks can identify the best prices without the inefficiencies of mempool-based bidding. They:

• Access liquidity both on-chain and off-chain
• Pool multiple sources to improve execution
• Reduce overall network impact

Practical examples of intent-based DeFi protocols

Several protocols are adopting this model to improve efficiency:

CoW Protocol (Coincidence of Wants)

Uses an auction-based system to match intents. Users declare “wants” and the system pairs compatible intents, reducing MEV exposure and mempool reliance.

UniswapX

A relayer network that leverages liquidity from multiple sources. It offers mempool-free swaps via a Dutch auction mechanism, lowering transaction costs.

1inch Fusion

Provides professional traders with transaction execution options. Its architecture protects against mempool attacks and optimizes transaction fees.

Across Protocol

Supports fast, cross-chain swaps by utilizing intent-based mechanisms. It avoids mempool-related issues and executes trades efficiently.

Centralization and trust considerations: key risks

However, the intent model is not without risks. Several important concerns include:

Centralization risk

Currently, executing as a solver is challenging. If only a few large entities dominate this role, the system could become centralized. Compared to the traditional “democratic” mempool architecture, this introduces potential points of control.

Trust and transparency

Users must trust that solvers operate fairly. Since some operations occur off-chain, it can be difficult to verify what is happening in the mempool or during execution, raising transparency issues.

Reliability and performance

If solvers do not execute intents accurately or promptly, users may face failed trades or slippage. Balancing flexibility and robustness remains an ongoing challenge.

The future of intent-based DeFi

Intent-based architecture represents a significant evolution for DeFi. Moving away from mempool reliance opens new possibilities:

• Efficiency gains: Future improvements could see faster, cheaper trades with less network congestion
• Mainstream adoption: Lower technical barriers may bring more users into DeFi
• Protocol innovation: Protocols might open their order books to solvers, increasing competition and liquidity

Intent-based transactions embody a shift from “how” to “what”—from executing predefined instructions to expressing desired outcomes. The era of “just trade” is giving way to “trade what you want.”

Further reading

• DeFi деген эмне?
• Ликвиддүүлүк пулдары боюнча түшүндүрмө
• MEV жана оруулар жөнүндө
• Блокчейн архитектурасы жана мемпул

Disclaimer: This material is provided as-is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute financial, legal, or professional advice. Use it at your own risk, and do not interpret it as an endorsement of any product or service.