Lightning Cost of Routing
Capacity-weighted average and median routing fee rates across the Lightning Network over time. Functions as Bitcoin's native 'cost of capital' - the price node operators charge to provide liquidity.
What is it?
Lightning node operators set fees to route payments through their channels. These fees consist of a fixed base and a proportional rate (in parts per million - ppm). This chart shows the evolution of average and median fees weighted by channel capacity. It is Bitcoin's equivalent of an 'interest rate': the price liquidity providers charge for making their capital available to the network. Rising fees mark that liquidity is in higher demand; falling fees indicate excess capacity.
How to read
Two lines: the weighted average (influenced by large channels) and the median (representative of the typical channel). A growing gap between the two indicates that large and small nodes are diverging in their pricing. The median is more stable and representative of the actual routing cost for a typical payment.
Key zones
The median typically oscillates around tens to a few hundred ppm, with the weighted mean systematically higher due to high-fee large nodes. Medians above 200 ppm indicate a liquidity squeeze. Medians below 50 ppm indicate excess capacity and intense competition between routers.
What to observe
Long-term trends are more reliable than daily fluctuations. A sustainedly rising median is an indication of growing adoption. A rising average with stable median may indicate that a few large nodes are raising their fees without the broader network following.
Historical context
Lightning routing fees generally declined between 2019 and 2023 as competition increased. Reversal phases emerge when volume grows faster than capacity or during institutional adoption waves. Router 'pricing power' has historically increased during periods of high L1 congestion. 📌 Methodological note 2026-05-18: from this date, Trinity uses a different methodological source for this metric (daily `/statistics/latest` snapshot accumulated in Postgres, rather than a historical time-series with different weighting). This introduces a visible level shift on the chart at that date - the mean/median ratio and absolute amplitude may change one-time. Recent values remain reliable for trend analysis; pre/post-2026-05-18 absolute comparisons must account for this methodological discontinuity.
Expert notes
Data comes from the Lightning Network gossip protocol (channel_update messages). Only public channels are included - private channels (estimated at 30-50% of the network) are not represented. Capacity weighting prevents the thousands of micro-channels from dominating the average. Displayed fees are announced fees, not actually charged fees (which depend on the routed amount).
Common mistakes to avoid
Announced fees are not actually paid fees - routing uses the cheapest path, so effective fees are often well below the average. A node with high fees but no traffic does not really contribute to routing cost. Do not confuse Lightning routing fees (micro-fractions of a cent) with on-chain transaction fees (which can reach several dollars).
Programmatic access
REST API
curl -sS \
'https://api.trinityinsights.io/api/v1/onchain/ln-fee-rate-evolution/history?days=90' \
-H 'X-API-Key: $TRINITY_API_KEY'MCP server
{
"tool": "get_chart_value",
"metric_id": "ln-fee-rate-evolution",
"timeframe": "1y"
}Required tier: free. See the pricing grid for the tier list and the MCP documentation for multi-client configuration.
Related metrics
Institutional disclaimer
Trinity Insights is an educational and analytical tool. The metric above does not constitute investment advice. Trinity Insights is not a Crypto-Asset Service Provider (CASP) registered under MiCA Regulation (EU) 2023/1114. See the full disclaimer.