KoinlyticsTraditional DeFi UX: user picks a contract, picks a function, calls it. Intent-based UX: user signs a desired outcome ("I want 100 USDC on Base for at most 100.05 USDC of USDT on Arbitrum"), a solver figures out how to achieve it.
What an intent looks like
A structured message signed by the user. Contains: source and destination tokens, min/max amounts, deadline, permissible venues. Signed via EIP-712.
Solvers
Automated actors (usually MEV-adjacent teams) that compete for user intents. They own inventory across chains and DEXs. They fill your intent, front the funds if needed, and reclaim from the source side later. Their profit = user's max spend - actual execution cost.
Live intent architectures
- CoW Protocol. Batched auctions for swaps + bridging.
- 1inch Fusion. Same idea, single-swap focus.
- Across. Fast bridging via intent + solver.
- UniswapX. Uniswap Labs' intent-based swap layer.
- Anoma. Full-stack intent-centric blockchain (still early).
What users get
- Better prices via solver competition.
- MEV protection (private mempool, solvers absorb frontrunning risk).
- Cross-chain without knowing bridges exist.
- Simpler UX: sign once.
What solvers risk
- Adverse selection (winning bids that turn out unprofitable).
- Chain finality (fronting funds before source is confirmed).
- Inventory imbalance.
Where it's headed
Most future user-facing DeFi will be intent-based. The user signs "I want yield on stables at 8%." A solver figures out whether that means Aave, Morpho, Pendle, or a combination. This is the abstraction layer DeFi UX has been missing.