Economics Of Choosing A Leader/Validator

Based on my reading of Leader Rotation | Solana Docs, it seems that the leader is chosen directly based on the proportion of staked SOL. This might cause clustering of delegated stakes towards larger validators because of the economical benefits for the delegator.

For example, a validator with .000001 of all staked Solana might never be chosen in many epochs, so delegating my stake to such a small validator would be a bad idea. By way of the Law of Large Numbers, I’ll eventually get a proportional return, but in many epochs, I’ll see no returns. Waiting to get some return from a small validator would be like winning the lottery.

However having many smaller validators is better for the Solana system as a whole, since large validators can halt the system. Perhaps instead of choosing the leader based on direct proportion, extra weight should be given to smaller validators. This would incentivize all delegators to spread their stake more evenly among the validators.


Staking rewards are a factor of vote credits, not block production. Block rewards go to the validator not the delegator

Ah. I see. So at every correct block production, every validator that votes for that block pass a block lockout gets a reward proportional to the amount of stakes that are delegated to the validator. There are no reward benefits for being a leader. Does the leader also get to validate their own block to get a portion of the staking rewards?