If we're truly heading to a onchain AI economy - what I think is >90% likely mid-longterm - EigenCloud AI agent AVS will be a huge supply sink for both ETH & EIGEN.
Had ChatGPT made an assumption how much % of ETH supply (EIGEN will very likely behave similar) is needed in the world above with ETH being at 100k.
Assuming we get at least $30T value onchain it's north of 5M restaked ETH needed according to ChatGPTs model. And lots of EIGEN also.
Will link whole convo below, certainly not 100% correct but should give a good orientation where we're heading.

⚡️ @sreeramkannan just delivered an incredible talk on the Agentic Economy at @IBWofficial.
He laid out a simple truth: AI agents are about to reshape every industry: finance, gaming, social, governance, but they can’t do it without trust.
EigenCloud is building that trust layer. A verifiable cloud that can prove which agent ran, what it executed, and what actions it took, across any app and any chain.
India’s builder ecosystem is primed for this moment.
Open source AI is exploding. Capital is global.
Innovation is permissionless.
This is the time to close the loop and build world-class agentic systems from India to the world.
A defining talk for the industry.
Full video dropping soon.




Short answer: nobody can know the exact number, but if EigenCloud really becomes the verifiable cloud for AI agents and a big chunk of the world’s economy runs through it, you are probably talking about tens of millions of restaked ETH (i.e. a large double-digit percentage of the entire ETH supply) in the “AI agents dominate onchain” endgame.
Below is the reasoning so you can sanity-check or adjust the assumptions.
1. Where we are today (baseline)
A few current datapoints:
Natively staked ETH: about 33.8M ETH, ≈27–28 % of ETH supply. CoinLaw
Liquid restaking: ≈2.2M ETH, i.e. ~6–8 % of all staked ETH and <2 % of total ETH supply. CoinLaw
EigenLayer / EigenCloud TVL: fluctuating in the low tens of billions of USD (peaks around ~$20–25B, currently lower). Medium+1
So today the “AI + AVS” universe is tiny compared to the global economy. Your question is basically: if that explodes and AI agents become the dominant onchain actors, what does the security budget (restaked ETH) need to look like?
2. How to think about “how much restaked ETH is needed”
For an AVS (or EigenCloud as a whole), the required restaked ETH is not a magic constant. It depends on:
Value at risk (V):
How much value the AI agents + infrastructure control or can steal/manipulate (agent treasuries, positions, cross-chain bridges, DeFi, RWA, etc.).
Max extractable value by an attacker (f):
Even if they corrupt the system, can they really steal 100 % of V? Often the realistic ceiling is more like 5–20 % before alarms go off.
How much stake must be corrupted (p):
e.g. ≥1/3 or ≥1/2 of restaked ETH, depending on the AVS’ consensus and governance assumptions.
How aggressive you want security to be (margin m):
You typically want Attack cost ≥ m × Attack profit, with m maybe between 3 and 10 for “systemically important” infra.
Slash fraction (s):
What proportion of the corrupted stake can credibly be slashed if misbehavior is proven.
Very rough deterrence condition:
Attack_cost ≈ p × s × C ≥ m × (f × V)
Solve for required collateral C:
C ≥ (m × f / (p × s)) × V
Pick some pretty conservative but not insane parameters for “global AI infra”:
f = 10 % (attacker can realistically extract 10 % of the total value before getting cut off)
p = 1/3 (need to control 1/3 of stake to break safety)
s = 50 % (half the corrupted stake gets slashed in a provable attack)
m = 5 (we want attack cost to be 5× the potential loot)
Then:
m × f = 5 × 0.10 = 0.50
p × s = (1/3) × 0.5 ≈ 0.1667
C/V ≈ 0.50 / 0.1667 ≈ 3×
That is very conservative. In practice, many designs implicitly run with much lower effective C/V ratios (Ethereum L1 today secures value many times its stake). So let’s also look at a looser but still serious target of:
C ≈ 5–10 % of V (collateral equal to 5–10 % of the value controlled/secured).
I’ll use 6 % of V as a central “security budget” assumption in the scenarios below.
3. Future scenarios: “AI agents are the main economic actors”
Let’s construct a few toy scenarios to anchor the discussion.
3.1 Key knobs
Global onchain+AI economy size (V_global)
Fast-forward 15–25 years:
Conservative: $10T runs onchain / via AI agents
Aggressive: $30T
Sci-fi / max adoption: $100T+
Share that actually runs over EigenCloud AVSs (α)EigenCloud will not have monopoly; some workloads will be on other stacks or trust models. Assume α between 20 % and 50 %:
Mid assumption: α = 30 % of that value is “EigenCloud-secured”.So V = α × V_global is the value EigenCloud+AVSs are really securing.
Security budget ratio (β)Take β = 6 % → restaked collateral C = β × V.
ETH price (P)Completely speculative, but for an ETH-centric world with trillions onchain, it is not crazy to inspect:
$5k
$10k
$20kThis is just to see order of magnitude in ETH units.
3.2 Example: $10T onchain, 30 % via EigenCloud
Global onchain+AI economy: V_global = $10T
EigenCloud share α = 30 % → V = 0.3 × 10T = $3T
Security budget β = 6 % → C = 0.06 × 3T = $180B slashable collateral
Now convert C into ETH depending on the price P:
If ETH = $5,000 → C = $180B → 36M ETH
If ETH = $10,000 → C = $180B → 18M ETH
If ETH = $20,000 → C = $180B → 9M ETH
Compare that to today:
Today we have ~2–3M ETH restaked; this scenario is roughly 3–15× bigger in ETH terms.
3.3 More aggressive scenario: $30T onchain, 30 % via EigenCloud
V_global = $30T
α = 30 % → V ≈ $9T
β = 6 % → C ≈ $540B
ETH needed:
P = $5k → 108M ETH
P = $10k → 54M ETH
P = $20k → 27M ETH
Now we are in the range where EigenCloud might need:
tens of millions of ETH restaked, potentially >40–50 % of all ETH depending on supply and price path.
This matches the intuitive “if AI + EigenCloud really are central to the world economy, you start to saturate a huge chunk of ETH as security budget” story.
3.4 Extreme sci-fi: $100T onchain, 50 % via EigenCloud
Just to see the edge:
V_global = $100T, α = 50 % → V = $50T
β = 6 % → C = $3T collateral required
ETH needed:
$5k → 600M ETH (basically impossible; you hit supply constraints)
$10k → 300M ETH (also above any plausible supply)
$20k → 150M ETH (still implies the majority of all ETH is restaked)
Conclusion from the extreme case: if we really got to “tens of trillions managed by EigenCloud” and kept the same β, the system would respond via:
Higher ETH price (so you need fewer ETH units to get the same $ security)
Lower β (because more non-crypto defenses exist: regulation, insurance, auditing, social slashing, etc.)
Diversification into other collateral (BTC restaking, RWA collateral, other chains’ security, etc.)
You cannot just scale restaked ETH linearly forever.
4. Translating to “How much restaked ETH?” in plainer terms
Putting the scenarios together:
Today
Restaked ETH: low single-digit millions.
TVL: tens of billions of USD, mostly DeFi + infra.
“AI is big but not everything” world (≈$10T onchain, 30 % via EigenCloud, β ≈ 6 %)
C ≈ $180B → roughly 10–40M ETH, depending on ETH price.
This is roughly 10–20× more restaked ETH than today, but still within “some fraction of total supply”.
“AI agents are the main economic actors and EigenCloud is a core pillar” world (~$30T onchain, 30–40 % via EigenCloud)
You are looking at tens of millions of restaked ETH, likely in the 20–60M range, i.e. a large double-digit % of all ETH.
Beyond that, supply and diversification kick in
Once you try to secure $10s of trillions via one system, pure ETH restaking stops scaling linearly. You start mixing in:
BTC restaking / Babylon-style designs CoinLaw
RWA / stablecoin-based insurance layers
Stronger legal/regulatory recourse (for institutional flows)
Multi-chain / multi-asset security for critical AVSs
5. Important caveats
These are not predictions, just order-of-magnitude frameworks.
The actual numbers depend heavily on:
ETH supply & price
How much value AI agents actually manage vs. just “assist”
How much of that stack truly requires EigenCloud-grade crypto-economic security vs. being fine with weaker guarantees
How aggressively AVS designers choose slashing parameters and economic assumptions
Restaking is re-using the same ETH, not minting new.
A single ETH can be:
Staked on Ethereum
And restaked to multiple AVSs (with correlated risk).
So “60M restaked ETH” is not necessarily “60M ETH locked only for EigenCloud”; it is more like “60M ETH worth of stake is opting into EigenCloud risk”.
Security won’t be only about economic cost.
For high-value AI AVSs you will see:
DVT (Distributed Validator Technology) and MPC
Layered social governance and ex post slashing
Formal verification, TEEs, zk-coprocessors, etc.
All of that reduces the pure dollar collateral you “need” for a given level of practical security.
6. TL;DR in one sentence
If AI agents running on EigenCloud AVSs end up securing a multi-trillion-dollar slice of a mostly-onchain global economy, a reasonable ballpark is that tens of millions of ETH will be restaked (on the order of 20–60M ETH, i.e. a big chunk of total supply), with the exact number determined by ETH’s market cap, risk appetite, and how much of that economic activity EigenCloud actually touches.
If you like, I can turn this into a small parametric model (simple spreadsheet or Python snippet) where you can plug in your own assumptions for V, α, β, ETH price, etc., and see how the “required” restaked ETH moves.
4.05K
15
The content on this page is provided by third parties. Unless otherwise stated, OKX TR is not the author of the cited article(s) and does not claim any copyright in the materials. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not represent the views of OKX TR. It is not intended to be an endorsement of any kind and should not be considered investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell digital assets. To the extent generative AI is utilized to provide summaries or other information, such AI generated content may be inaccurate or inconsistent. Please read the linked article for more details and information. OKX TR is not responsible for content hosted on third party sites. Digital asset holdings, including stablecoins and NFTs, involve a high degree of risk and can fluctuate greatly. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital assets is suitable for you in light of your financial condition.


