Do you think $ETH should be treated as a tech company, where if fees are down and revenue is down then $ETH is cooked?

Now trading at ~$233B FDV, I think fair value should reflect that $ETH is getting repriced as the world’s most trusted settlement layer for EVM finance.
The trigger for this shift is basically the roadmap narrative flipping.
For many years, when L2 was booming, the assumption was that L2s were the core carrier for scaling.
But the real-world version of fully decentralized L2s is just slower than everyone hoped, and L1 throughput is still expected to climb a lot over the next few years.
So the mental model becomes more L1-first again.
→ Cheaper base fees, more native capacity, more of the ecosystem’s finality gravity pulling back to mainnet.
How do we value ETH correctly under this new regime? Let’s run some numbers.
1/ Security layer = staking equilibrium
→ ETH price ≈ (annual real staking cash flow per ETH) / target real yield
If staking real yield stabilizes around 3–4% long term, and real staking cash flow per ETH trends higher as settlement demand grows, then ETH’s equilibrium price expands even without speculative growth.
Assume “real staking cash flow” (after costs, realistic MEV/fees/issuance mix, net of what you think is sustainable) is $80/ETH/year.
In a risk-off world, institutions might demand 4.5% real yield for something still volatile.
→ fair price ≈ 80 / 0.045 = $1,777
Same cash flow, but risk appetite improves and the required real yield compresses to 3.0%:
→ fair price ≈ 80 / 0.03 = $2,667
2/ Monetary demand
When stablecoins, RWAs, and tokenized funds settle on ETH, the demand is to hold ETH for:
– moving money, swapping tokens, bridging, doing stuff onchain
– base liquidity or routing asset when LPing, borrowing, margin trading, running perps
– collateral in lending, staking, L2 security, restaking
How much ETH needs to exist inside the system so all of that can function smoothly?
Case A: assume total ETH supply = 120M coins
– if $180B worth of ETH is locked as collateral → 180B / 120M = $1,500 per ETH
– if collateral demand rises to $300B → 300B / 120M = $2,500 per ETH
Case B: imagine Ethereum is processing huge value every year with total annual onchain settlement = $20T.
If each ETH dollar gets reused 20 times per year → 20T ÷ 20 = $1T monetary base.
If ETH only captures 25% of that $1T, divide by supply → 250B ÷ 120M = ~$2,083 per ETH.
If Ethereum becomes the most trusted settlement layer, lower costs can be a feature because they expand usage, while the premium shows up elsewhere. So revenue with P/S math is now just the floor.
Overall, the market is willing to pay for:
→ In risk-off, defensive mode, security + revenue floor dominate: $ETH ≈ $1,700–$2,400
→ In neutral base case, security + monetary attributes dominate: $ETH ≈ $2,200–$2,800
→ In risk-on expansion, security + platform option get paid: $ETH ≈ $3,200–$4,500
→ In euphoria, network effects take over, price detaches from fundamentals: $ETH > $4,500
All cases are fair enough?