On-Chain Analysis · 1 June 2026 · 7 min read
MEV Extraction Patterns and Their Interpretation in a Trace
MEV transactions reorder, sandwich, or back-run user activity. A documentation file records the pattern rather than treating the user's transaction in isolation.

Maximal extractable value describes the profit a block producer or searcher can take by reordering, inserting, or censoring transactions within a block. Inside a documentation trace, MEV activity changes the price a user actually received compared with the price the user expected to receive.
Sandwich attacks are the most visible pattern. A searcher buys an asset immediately before a user's swap and sells immediately after, capturing the price impact the user caused. The file records all three transactions together rather than describing the user's swap in isolation.
Back-running is subtler. A searcher places a transaction immediately after the user's, capturing an arbitrage opportunity the user's transaction created without directly raising the user's execution price. The file records the back-run as context for the user's execution outcome.
Front-running involves the searcher pre-empting the user's intended transaction with a higher fee. The user's transaction may still execute, may fail, or may execute at a worse price, and the file records the user-facing outcome together with the front-runner's transaction as the cause.

Block-builder economics shape what is visible. Private order flow that bypasses the public mempool does not appear in mempool snapshots, so a trace built from mempool alone will under-count MEV. The file records the data source so a later reviewer can re-run the trace against newer data.
Some MEV is benign. Routine arbitrage that aligns prices across pools, without targeting a specific user, is part of normal market operation. The file distinguishes user-targeted patterns from background arbitrage rather than aggregating both into a single MEV-extracted figure.
Counterparty reviewers read MEV patterns as context for transaction outcomes. A file that discloses the MEV environment around a user's transaction is more credible than one that presents the user's execution price as the prevailing market price at that block.
Our scope is to structure on-chain evidence the client provides or authorises us to derive. We do not pursue MEV searchers, do not advise on protective transaction routing, and do not represent the client in any forum addressing losses attributed to extractive transaction ordering.
More in On-Chain Analysis
- Address Clustering and the Ownership Question It Cannot Answer
7 Feb 2026
- Cross-Chain Tracing: Bridges, Wrapped Assets and Documentation Gaps
11 Mar 2026
- Mixer and CoinJoin Output: Recording Contamination Without Overstating It
15 Apr 2026
- Stablecoin Issuer Blacklists and Their Footprint on a Trace
19 Jun 2026
- When Blockchain Records Do Not Prove Asset Ownership
12 Feb 2026
- Wallet Labels and Screenshots as Attribution Evidence
19 Feb 2026
- Signed Messages as Wallet Control Evidence
26 Feb 2026
- Missing Transaction IDs in Transfer Documentation
18 Mar 2026
- Wrapped Tokens and Evidential Equivalence in Reconstructions
27 May 2026
- Address Clustering and the Limits of On-Chain Attribution
7 Oct 2026