Across Explained: The Complete Guide

What is Across?

Across (Across is a fast, intent-based cross-chain bridge where relayers fill user transfers in ~1.2 seconds average, secured by UMA's optimistic oracle — $34B+ moved across 26M+ transfers with zero exploits) is a fast, low-cost cross-chain bridge for moving assets between Ethereum, its Layer 2s, and Solana — it has moved $34B+ across 26M+ transfers and has never been exploited. Instead of locking your funds and waiting, you declare an intent — "I want 100 USDC on Arbitrum" — and a network of 40+ relayers competes to fill it, typically in ~1.2 seconds, from their own capital, getting reimbursed later. Last verified: 2026-05-27.

Most bridges use lock-and-mint: they lock your asset on the source chain and mint a wrapped version on the destination, often slowly and from a large pooled honeypot — the kind that produced crypto's biggest hacks. Across takes a different approach. Its intent-based architecture lets relayers front you canonical assets on the destination chain immediately, then settle asynchronously via UMA's optimistic oracle. You get speed and competitive pricing; relayers take on short-term capital risk for a fee. Integrated into Uniswap, MetaMask, and Coinbase native flows, Across now spans 25+ chains from Ethereum and its L2s through to Solana, BNB Chain, and newer networks like Monad and MegaETH.

The Across short answer

1. You declare an intent; relayers fill it. "I want X on chain Y" — a relayer fronts it, average 1.2 seconds, for a fee.
2. Fast because someone else waits. The relayer takes the cross-chain wait and capital risk, not you.
3. UMA secures the settlement. ~One-hour optimistic challenge window with bond slashing and DVM vote for disputes; no trusted central operator.
4. Lower honeypot risk. No single mega-pool to drain — $34B+ moved, zero exploits.
5. ACX accrues fees; Across is going corporate. Stake ACX for a fee share; April 2026 vote approved DAO → US C-corp (AcrossCo).

🔴 Live: Incentives, ACX, & The AcrossCo Transition

Last updated 2026-05-27 — we refresh this section as campaigns change. Confirm live programs at across.to.

ACX is already live and trading — this isn't an airdrop farm. The live opportunities are ACX staking (a share of protocol fees), LP and referral rewards, and a structural decision point: the April 2026 governance vote approved a DAO-to-US-C-corp conversion under which ACX holders can swap tokens for equity or redeem for USDC.

What's live right now

• ACX staking. Stake ACX at across.to/rewards/staking/acx to earn a portion of protocol fees — a value-accrual mechanism for holders. Reward-locking multipliers apply for longer commitments.
• LP rewards. Deposit into relayer liquidity pools to earn a share of bridge fees plus (historically) ACX incentives. The protocol generated ~$63,730 in fees in the 30 days prior to late May 2026; cumulative fees since inception are $18.56M.
• Referral rewards. Tiered ACX referral program has run alongside LP incentives; check the app for current terms.
• The AcrossCo transition. "The Bridge Across" proposal passed after voting ran March 31–April 7, 2026. ACX holders can swap to equity in AcrossCo (the new US C-corp) at a 1:1 token-to-share ratio — directly if holding >5M ACX, or through a no-fee SPV structure for holders with 250k–5M ACX. Alternatively, the USDC buyout option is $0.04375 per ACX (a 25% premium to the prior 30-day average price). The buyout window opens within three months of the vote passing and stays open for six months.

How to participate, step by step

1. Use the bridge genuinely — real cross-chain transfers are the core activity.
2. Provide liquidity to relayer pools for LP rewards, accepting bridge/smart-contract risk.
3. Stake ACX to earn a share of protocol fees.
4. Decide on the AcrossCo conversion — equity swap, USDC buyout, or hold — before the window closes.

Caveat: The DAO-to-C-corp move changes governance and value accrual in ways still unfolding. The equity SPV is restricted to ~100 US accredited investors and ~500 non-US investors; smaller holders may be limited to the USDC buyout. Weigh lockups and the evolving structure before committing ACX.

For more, see our best crypto bridges guide.

How intent-based bridging works

You declare a desired outcome; relayers compete to front you the funds on the destination chain instantly, then are reimbursed from your source funds through UMA-secured settlement — average fill time 1.2 seconds. Last verified: 2026-05-27.

The key shift is who waits. In a normal bridge, you wait for the slow cross-chain process. With Across, the relayer takes the waiting and capital risk — they pay you now and get reimbursed later — so you experience near-instant finality. Competition among relayers keeps fees low. UMA's optimistic settlement means no single trusted operator controls funds, and bad proposers lose their bond.

Worked example: a bridge transfer

You want to move 5,000 USDC from Ethereum to Base:

1. You submit the intent on Across and deposit your 5,000 USDC into the Ethereum SpokePool contract.
2. A relayer immediately sends you ~5,000 USDC (minus a small fee) on Base from its own inventory — you have spendable, canonical USDC in roughly one to a few seconds, not minutes or hours.
3. A dataworker later aggregates your transfer with others into a bundle and submits it to UMA's oracle for verification. The ~one-hour challenge window opens.
4. If unchallenged, the bundle is accepted and the HubPool reimburses the relayer from the pooled LP capital on Ethereum.
5. Your cost is the relayer fee — roughly 0.074% (7.4 bps) for a $5,000 transfer, or ~$3.70 — plus gas on both ends, shown in the quote before you confirm.

Contrast a slow lock-and-mint bridge: you'd wait for confirmations and receive a wrapped token. Across gives you the canonical asset, fast, because the relayer fronts it and absorbs the wait.

Why the intent model reduces honeypot risk

Lock-and-mint bridges concentrate huge sums in one locked contract/multisig — the "honeypot" behind crypto's worst hacks; Across's relayer model distributes that risk across relayer inventories rather than one giant pool. Last verified: 2026-05-27.

Bridges have been crypto's worst hack category — the Ronin ($600M) and Wormhole ($320M) exploits drained single locked pools or multisigs holding everyone's bridged funds. That concentration is the honeypot: break one contract or compromise enough multisig keys, and you take it all.

Across's intent model changes the shape of the risk. Relayers front their own inventory to fill your transfer, and settlement is verified via UMA's optimistic oracle — there isn't a single mega-pool locking all user funds waiting to be drained the same way. The result: $34B+ moved and zero exploits. This structural improvement is why intent-based bridging has become the industry's preferred design — Uniswap integrated Across directly into its interface for native cross-chain swaps.

But it's not zero-risk: smart-contract bugs, oracle/dispute edge cases, relayer-liquidity gaps in extreme conditions, and the high-value attack surface remain. Safer architecture, not invincible.

ACX, staking, LPing, and the AcrossCo move

ACX (1B max supply) earns stakers a share of protocol fees and LPs earn fees plus ACX rewards; in April 2026 governance approved moving Across from a DAO to US C-corp AcrossCo, with ACX holders offered a 1:1 equity swap or $0.04375 USDC buyout. Last verified: 2026-05-27.

ACX began as the Across DAO's governance token. Two ways it works for holders:

• Staking — a portion of protocol fees is distributed to ACX stakers (value accrual via the protocol's Fee Switch). Cumulative protocol fees since inception: $18.56M across all chains.
• Liquidity provision — deposit into the pools relayers draw on to fill intents, earning a share of fees plus (historically) ACX reward incentives with reward-locking multipliers for longer commitment. Lower-effort than running a relayer, but it carries bridge/smart-contract risk.

The bigger 2026 development is structural. "The Bridge Across" proposal ran for a governance vote from March 31 to April 7, 2026, and passed, moving the protocol from a pure-DAO model to AcrossCo, a traditional US C-corporation. The stated rationale: the DAO/token structure "has materially impacted our ability to close partnerships and integrations" with institutional and enterprise partners who require enforceable contracts. The protocol secured $41M in funding in March 2025 (investors including Paradigm and Coinbase Ventures, total raised $51M) and is betting the corporate structure better positions it for institutional bridging volumes.

ACX holder choices under the transition:

The equity SPV is capped at ~100 US accredited investors and ~500 non-US investors. Smaller holders are most likely to use the USDC buyout window, which opens within three months of the vote passing and remains open for six months.

How to bridge with Across

Open the official site, choose your chains and asset, review the fee and time quote, confirm, and receive on the destination chain — average 1.2 seconds. Last verified: 2026-05-27.

1. Open across.to and connect a wallet — verify the official domain.
2. Choose chains and asset (25+ chains including Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Optimism, Polygon, Solana, zkSync, BNB Chain, Linea, Blast, Monad, MegaETH, and more).
3. Review the quote — fee (roughly 0.074% for mid-size transfers) and estimated time.
4. Confirm and receive on the destination chain, typically within seconds.
5. Stake ACX (optional) for a share of fees, or LP for fee + ACX rewards.

For how Across compares, see our best crypto bridges guide.

Across vs lock-and-mint vs canonical bridges

Across's intent/relayer model gives fast, canonical-asset transfers with reduced honeypot risk; lock-and-mint bridges are slower and mint wrapped IOUs; native/canonical bridges are safest but often slow. Last verified: 2026-05-27.

The practical takeaway: for fast, cheap, canonical transfers between Ethereum and L2s (or Solana), an intent bridge like Across is usually the best experience. For the absolute lowest trust assumptions and you don't mind waiting, a chain's native/canonical bridge (e.g. an L2's official withdrawal) is the conservative choice — our best crypto bridges guide compares the field.

Risks and what to avoid

Bridges are the highest-value attack target in crypto. Across reduces honeypot risk with its intent model and has a clean exploit record, but smart-contract, oracle/dispute, and relayer-liquidity risks remain. Last verified: 2026-05-27.

• Bridge attack surface. Any bridge is a prime target. Verify the official site and bridge only what you need, when you need it.
• Smart-contract risk. Audited and battle-tested with $34B+ processed, but non-zero.
• Relayer liquidity gaps. In extreme conditions, relayer capital or competition can thin out, affecting speed or cost — large transfers may fill slower.
• Settlement/dispute edge cases. The ~one-hour UMA optimistic-oracle challenge window handles disputes, but unusual scenarios can introduce delay.
• Phishing. Fake bridge front-ends are a common scam — always confirm the URL is across.to.
• C-corp transition risk. The AcrossCo move changes governance and value accrual in ways still unfolding; ACX staking mechanics and fee-share terms may change.

Safety checklist

1. Verify the URL is across.to — fake bridge sites are a top phishing vector.
2. Double-check the destination chain and address before confirming — bridge mistakes are often irreversible.
3. Review the quote (fee + time) and be patient with very large transfers.
4. Bridge only what you need, when you need it — don't leave funds mid-bridge or treat it as storage.
5. If LPing/staking ACX, weigh the evolving AcrossCo structure and any lockup terms.
6. Start with a small test transfer on an unfamiliar route.

Glossary

• Intent — a stated desired outcome ("X asset on Y chain") that relayers fulfill.
• Relayer / solver — a bonded party that fronts you funds on the destination and is reimbursed later.
• SpokePool — the source-chain contract that holds your deposit until relayers are reimbursed.
• HubPool — the Ethereum contract that reimburses relayers from pooled LP capital after UMA verification.
• Dataworker — aggregates fulfilled intents into bundles and submits them to UMA for settlement.
• Lock-and-mint — the older bridge model (lock on source, mint wrapped IOU on destination).
• Canonical asset — the real native token (vs a wrapped bridge IOU).
• Honeypot — a single locked pool of bridged funds; the target in major bridge hacks.
• UMA optimistic oracle — Across's dispute-based settlement: ~one-hour challenge window, DVM vote if disputed, bond slashing for bad actors.
• ACX — Across's token; stake for fee share, LP for rewards.
• AcrossCo — the US C-corporation formed by the April 2026 governance vote.
• The Bridge Across — the March/April 2026 proposal moving Across to AcrossCo.

Looking ahead

Across's 2026 pivot is institutional: the AcrossCo C-corp transition signals a push toward enterprise partnerships and regulated flows, and intent-based bridging is the architecture the industry is converging on — Uniswap's native integration of Across is the clearest signal. Watch three signals: bridge volume and how Across holds its ~26% share of sub-$10K fast-bridge volume as solvers commoditize, whether the AcrossCo structure delivers clearer value accrual and closes the institutional partnerships it targets, and how the ACX-to-equity conversion plays out for token holders. Those decide whether Across leads the next phase of interoperability or gets absorbed into broader cross-chain standards.

For context, see our best crypto bridges and best Ethereum L2s guides.