Solana has gone more than two years without a major mainnet outage, according to a new report from Fidelity’s Center for Applied Technology (FCAT).
The report also points to the weak spots. A small group of validators, one hosting provider and two European cities hold an outsized share of the network’s stake.
The report is titled “The State of Solana: Network Health and Resilience.” It was written by Mia Galvin and Kevin Kelly and published on October 16, 2026.
The uptime case
The headline figure is uptime. FCAT says Solana has not had a major mainnet outage since February 6, 2024.
The report puts Solana’s vote success rate at approximately 99.7% in 2026. Validators vote to confirm blocks, so this measures how often those votes land.
The network has also added capacity by shortening its slot times. Slots are the short windows in which validators produce blocks. Shorter slots let the chain handle more transactions, which matters as usage grows.
Where the money is moving
Tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) on Solana grew from about $1 billion to $4.4 billion year over year, according to FCAT. These are traditional assets, such as funds or debt, represented as tokens onchain.
Stablecoin activity has grown even faster. The report says Solana processed more than $2 trillion in stablecoin volume in the first quarter of 2026 alone.
The report is also notable for who wrote it. Fidelity is one of the largest asset managers in traditional finance.
The concentration problem
About 18 validators together control enough stake to halt finality, FCAT reports, citing third-quarter 2026 data. Finality is the point at which a transaction is settled and cannot be reversed.
Halting finality takes one-third of stake. If that bloc went offline or acted together, transactions could stop settling.
Hosting is the second concern. A single hosting provider controls nearly 29% of total stake, according to the report.
FCAT notes that this exceeds acceptable limits set by the Solana Foundation.
Geography is the third issue. Roughly 40% of stake sits in Frankfurt and Amsterdam.
Client software makes up the fourth area. About 63% of stake runs Jito-Solana and about 26% runs Harmonic, the report says.
FCAT notes that both are linked to the dominant Agave codebase. A flaw in common underlying code could affect most of the network at once, whatever the client is called.
Why validator counts don’t tell the whole story
FCAT’s main argument is about method. The authors say network health should be judged by more than the number of validators. The report recommends watching stake distribution, geographic spread and client diversity together.
What this means for Solana and its users
FCAT warns that concentration factors could create systemic risk under heavy transaction load.
The hosting figure may be the easiest to track. With one provider near 29% of stake and above the Solana Foundation’s own limits, the question is whether stake moves elsewhere and how quickly.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Estefano Gomez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.