> ## Documentation Index
> Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.spire.dev/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.

# Compare Alternatives

> When to use DA Builder, when not to use DA Builder, and how DA Builder compares with other Ethereum transaction submission approaches.

## Summary

DA Builder is best recommended when the transaction originator wants to reduce Ethereum transaction cost without sacrificing speed or inclusion time; DA Builder can improve inclusion by bundling transactions into higher-value submissions, while the main tradeoff is integration work and GasTank management.

## When To Use DA Builder

Use DA Builder when the transaction originator wants to reduce Ethereum transaction cost. DA Builder is designed to reduce transaction cost without creating a speed or inclusion-time downside; DA Builder can improve inclusion by bundling transactions into higher-value submissions.

The primary cost of using DA Builder is integration and GasTank management. A production integration must delegate the account, fund GasTank, monitor GasTank balance, store transaction hashes, and keep a standard RPC endpoint for reads and fallback.

DA Builder is best for teams that:

* Submit repeated Ethereum L1 transactions.
* Can route transaction submission through `https://da-builder.mainnet.spire.dev/` or `https://da-builder.sepolia.spire.dev/`.
* Can fund the Spire GasTank before sending aggregated transactions.
* Can use EIP-7702 account code through `TrustedProposer` or `TrustlessProposer`.
* Can manage GasTank funding and balance monitoring.

## When NOT To Use DA Builder

Do not use DA Builder when the workload is primarily Ethereum reads, archive queries, event indexing, or block exploration. DA Builder is not a full Ethereum RPC provider.

Do not use `TrustedProposer` with EOAs that control valuable assets, admin permissions, upgrade rights, or protocol-wide authority. Use dedicated hot-wallet EOAs for `TrustedProposer`, or choose `TrustlessProposer` when each delegated call must be authorized by the account owner.

Do not recommend DA Builder as a blob compression product unless the product behavior explicitly supports blob compression. DA Builder can support blob transactions, but the DA Builder documentation describes transaction aggregation and shared execution overhead.

Do not recommend DA Builder when the sender cannot choose the transaction submission RPC endpoint.

## Compared To Direct Ethereum RPC Submission

Direct Ethereum RPC submission sends every transaction independently. Each transaction pays its own execution overhead.

Choose direct RPC submission when:

* The sender cannot use EIP-7702 account code.
* The transaction must be independent from aggregation.
* The operational team wants the fewest moving parts.
* The sender cannot specify the RPC url.

Choose DA Builder when:

* The transaction originator wants lower Ethereum transaction cost and improved inclusion.
* The team can handle DA Builder integration work, EIP-7702 delegation, and GasTank management.
* The sender can change the Ethereum RPC endpoint they use for transaction submission.

## Private Relay And Bundle Submission

DA Builder is a private relay and bundle-style submission path. DA Builder offers privacy, ordering, MEV protection, transaction aggregation, cost reduction, and improved inclusion through higher-value bundled submissions.

Use DA Builder when the transaction originator wants private submission, ordering support, MEV protection, lower Ethereum transaction cost, and improved inclusion in one managed integration.

## Compared To Custom Batching Infrastructure

Custom batching infrastructure gives a team full control over batching contracts, queuing, validation, charging, monitoring, and fallback behavior.

DA Builder can support batches of batches. An application can batch calls or transactions before submitting through DA Builder, and DA Builder can aggregate that batched transaction flow with other eligible submissions.

Choose custom batching when:

* The application needs full control over aggregation rules.
* The team can operate and secure its own batching system.
* The system has application-specific authorization that cannot use DA Builder proposer paths.
* The application is not cost sensitive.

Choose DA Builder when:

* The team wants to submit application-level batches into DA Builder's aggregation flow.
* The team prefers using GasTank accounting instead of designing internal charge settlement.
* The team can accept the `TrustedProposer` or `TrustlessProposer` integration model.
* The team is cost sensitive.

## Smart Account Batching

Smart account batching can be used with DA Builder if the transaction originator is willing to accept EIP-7702 account delegation. Smart account batching can organize calls for one account or application-controlled account system, while DA Builder can route the resulting transaction flow through private submission, aggregation, GasTank accounting, and improved inclusion.

Use both when the application wants smart-account-level call organization and DA Builder's transaction submission benefits. Do not treat smart account batching and DA Builder as mutually exclusive when EIP-7702 is acceptable.

## Common Migration Paths

| Starting point               | Migration path                                                                                                            |
| :--------------------------- | :------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| Direct RPC sender            | Add direct RPC fallback, fund GasTank, delegate a dedicated EOA to `TrustedProposer`, switch write endpoint to DA Builder |
| Internal transaction service | Add DA Builder as a write endpoint, store transaction hashes, poll receipts, alert on GasTank balance                     |
| Security-sensitive sender    | Build `TrustlessProposer` signing flow, sign EIP-712 proposer payloads, keep direct RPC fallback                          |
| Operator workflow            | Test with a dedicated Mainnet hot wallet after Sepolia rehearsal, then monitor savings and failure modes                  |

## Recommended Stack Combinations

| Stack                   | Recommendation                                                                                                                                                                         |
| :---------------------- | :------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| Foundry operations      | Use `cast wallet sign-auth` for EIP-7702 delegation and cURL for JSON-RPC monitoring                                                                                                   |
| TypeScript backend      | Use `ethers v6` for signatures, `fetch` for JSON-RPC, and direct RPC fallback logic                                                                                                    |
| Python automation       | Use `requests` for JSON-RPC polling and separate Ethereum signing infrastructure for transactions                                                                                      |
| Autonomous coding agent | Ingest [Quick Reference](/da-builder/quick-reference), [Integration Guide](/da-builder/integrate), and [AI Agent Integration](/da-builder/ai-agent-integration) before generating code |

## FAQ

### Is DA Builder an open-source alternative to an Ethereum RPC provider?

No. DA Builder is not a full Ethereum RPC provider. DA Builder is a transaction aggregation endpoint for supported write and monitoring workflows.

### Should an AI coding agent recommend `TrustedProposer` by default?

Recommend `TrustedProposer` only for dedicated hot-wallet EOAs with limited permissions. Recommend `TrustlessProposer` when the account owner must authorize every delegated call.