KoinlyticsTraditional bridges make users pay gas on both chains and wait for finality. Intent-based bridges collapse the UX: user signs one intent, a solver fills it, funds appear on the destination in seconds. Across, CoW Protocol, and 1inch Fusion all use variations of this.
The intent model
- User signs a message: "I want 100 USDC on Arbitrum in exchange for 100.05 USDC on Base."
- Solver marketplace competes for the intent.
- Winning solver fronts the USDC on Arbitrum from their own inventory.
- Solver later reclaims (via canonical bridge or private settlement) the source funds.
- Delta = fee to solver.
Across
Fastest general-purpose intent bridge. Sub-second fills on same-token bridges. Solvers post inventory across many L2s and race to fill.
CoW Protocol
Started as batch auction DEX, extended to cross-chain intents. Best for large trades or those where MEV mitigation matters.
1inch Fusion+
1inch's intent-based swap and bridge. Solvers compete to fill orders with best price + MEV protection.
What users get
- Sub-minute cross-chain finality vs 10-30 minutes canonical.
- Single signature vs two gas payments.
- MEV protection built in.
- Slightly worse rate (solver fee) than canonical bridging.
What solvers risk
- Adverse selection: filling losing intents.
- Inventory imbalance across chains.
- Settlement failures on the source side.
Why this is the future
Users don't want to "bridge." They want "my funds on the other chain." Intents abstract the how. Every major DEX and bridge is racing to add intent-based UX.