According to the source, Solana co‑founder Anatoly Yakovenko called the claim that Ethereum L2s inherit Ethereum’s security erroneous in a public X post on Oct 27, 2025, highlighting a core debate in the modular vs monolithic roadmap, source: provided social media post (Oct 27, 2025). Ethereum’s documentation states that rollups derive security from Ethereum only when proofs are correctly verified on L1 and operators cannot bypass the proof system, clarifying that security depends on implementation details, source: Ethereum.org rollups documentation. Independent risk dashboards show many L2s still rely on upgrade admin keys, centralized sequencers, or incomplete proof systems, implying additional trust beyond L1 guarantees, source: L2Beat risk framework and project pages. Optimistic rollups enforce challenge windows that delay withdrawal finality and require fraud-proof availability, which materially affects bridge and exchange flow assumptions, source: Ethereum.org optimistic rollups documentation. ZK rollups depend on prover correctness and liveness; trusted upgrades or prover halts can deviate user security from pure L1 enforcement, source: Ethereum.org zk-rollups documentation and L2Beat project risk notes. For trading, position sizing across SOL, ETH, ARB, and OP can incorporate objective factors such as proof status, upgrade key control, sequencer decentralization, and data availability mode, which are enumerated and updated by L2Beat, source: L2Beat methodology and dashboards.