Wallets v2

Add this to Editor’s Note:

This updated edition includes new wallets for which we could identify reliable onchain data or dashboards, or whose teams actively engaged with us to share valuable context—huge thanks to those who contributed. If your project isn’t included, feel free to reach out—we’re always happy to collaborate and expand future coverage.

EOA wallets - improved dataset and methodology

In this v2, we introduce an improved dataset and methodology to enhance accuracy and transparency. Key updates include:

• Address Filtering: We removed mislabeled or ambiguous addresses and added newly verified router addresses—particularly for OKX.
• Deduplication: In the transfer event subquery, we now deduplicate multiple “to” = routerAddress transfer events occurring within the same transaction hash. This ensures we count only one event per transaction to prevent inflated swap counts or volumes.
• Chain-Specific Address Matching: Rather than treating a router address as universal across chains, we now match each address with the corresponding blockchain/s where the address could be verified. This allows for greater precision in attribution. As a result, we've introduced a new category, ‘Unknown’, which includes address-chain pairs we couldn’t confidently verify. These may reflect either unlabeled but valid router addresses, or unrelated contracts altogether.
  
  

Measuring In-Wallet Swap Activity

To summarize, our methodology consists of two complementary subqueries:

1. Transfer Event Analysis (“to” = routerAddress). Captures explicit token transfers from users to router addresses, reflecting the input side of a swap.
2. Transaction-Level Matching (tx_to = routerAddress). Captures swaps where no direct “to” = router event exists. Here, we select transfers where the transaction’s tx_to is the router, “tx_from” is the user but “to” is not the router, to avoid overlapping with the previous query.

By combining both views, we construct a more complete estimate of in-wallet swap activity across EOA wallets.

For Rabby and Coinbase Wallet—which don’t use routers—we used an alternate approach: we track their known fee-collecting EOAs and back-calculate the swap volume based on fees collected.

Acknowledgements

We’re grateful to the wallet teams and analysts who reached out with thoughtful feedback and helped surface key issues. Their insights were instrumental in refining our methodology and improving the dataset. As always, we welcome collaboration—if you’re a wallet provider and would like to contribute data or be featured in future editions, we’d love to hear from you.

The most prominent shift in EOA wallet activity over the past months is the explosive growth of Binance Wallet, which became the dominant source of both transfer count and swap volume starting in March 2025. Even after applying deduplication filters and refining our methodology, this trend remains significant and persistent.

By the last week of May, Binance Wallet swap volume reached an all-time weekly high of $27 billion, with over 44 million swaps executed. This surge dwarfs historical patterns and stands out even in a field of fast-growing wallets.

A couple of factors have been cited to explain this acceleration:

• Binance Alpha, a token discovery and pre-listing access program, initially launched in December 2024 and may have contributed to a longer-term baseline of activity. However, this does not fully explain the March–May spike: Alpha’s initial version was limited to Binance Wallet users, and the larger-scale rollout (Alpha 2.0) in May 2025 actually made the feature available to all Binance platform users, including those outside the wallet ecosystem. This likely had a greater impact on Binance Exchange activity than on wallet-level metrics.
• A more immediate and likely factor is Binance’s 0-fee swaps campaign, which began on March 17, 2025, and offers zero trading fees for swaps executed through the Swap, Bridge, and Quick Buy features in the wallet (excluding third-party dApps). This initiative directly incentivizes high-frequency activity and aligns more precisely with the observed growth pattern.

‍

OKX, Bitget, Coinbase, and Rabby

While Binance dominates recent growth, OKX Wallet remains the second-largest driver of in-wallet swaps and volumes across chains. Despite a temporary decline in activity around February—partially due to OKX suspending its swap aggregator for security reasons—the wallet has rebounded strongly in May.

Bitget Wallet, which saw a dramatic rise in Q2 2024, has entered a quieter phase, but has seen a new growth in activity levels in recent months. Meanwhile, Coinbase Wallet and Rabby, whose swap activity is inferred through fee collection, are notable beneficiaries of the improved data infrastructure in this report version.

MetaMask: From EOA Default to Full-Stack Wallet Infrastructure

Since emerging as the default EOA wallet in the 2021 cycle, MetaMask has remained a foundational player in the wallet landscape. While recent years have seen the rise of new competitors, MetaMask still commands a 15–20% share of transfers and volume, maintaining its relevance through a combination of ubiquity, extensibility, and continuous innovation. Rather than remaining a pure EOA product, MetaMask has evolved into a broader wallet platform, spanning multiple layers of the stack:

• MetaMask Portfolio for multi-chain asset management
• MetaMask Snaps to enable custom plugin-like features

In the latest move in this direction, on June 2nd 2025 Consensys announced the acquisition of Web3Auth, a leading provider of embedded wallet infrastructure and social authentication. With this move, MetaMask will integrate Web3Auth’s multi-factor auth and social login stack, allowing users to create and recover wallets with familiar methods like email and device-based authentication, removing the seed phrase hurdle for the next wave of users.

For developers, the acquisition unlocks embedded wallet SDKs, account abstraction tools, and tighter integration with MetaMask’s infrastructure stack, including Infura and the Delegation Toolkit. Together, these changes support a hybrid wallet model: retaining EOA compatibility while gradually integrating programmable and abstracted wallet logic beneath the surface.

This direction mirrors a broader theme throughout the report: wallets are no longer just keys and interfaces. They are programmable infrastructure, increasingly modular, and deeply integrated across chains and app layers. MetaMask’s evolution reflects this shift—from browser extension to full-stack platform, from seed phrase to social login, from EOA to abstracted execution.

Chain-Level Dynamics

The Binance Wallet boom has also reshaped the chain distribution of swap and transfer activity. While BNB Chain unsurprisingly mirrors this rise and currently leads in total transfers and swaps, filtering out BNB reveals a more nuanced picture:

• Ethereum still leads by volume, accounting for nearly 70% of non-BNB swap value.
• Base has emerged as the leader in transfer count, reflecting its growing role as a low-cost environment for wallet-native activity.
• Polygon, Arbitrum, and other Layer 2 networks continue to contribute meaningfully across both metrics, reflecting the broader trend toward multichain distribution.

‍

‍

Phantom PSOL

Dashboard: Phantom Staked SOL (PSOL)

…

Phantom’s trajectory exemplifies one of the central themes of this report: the convergence between wallets and applications. What began as a streamlined self-custody wallet for Solana is increasingly positioning itself as a full-featured, vertically integrated DeFi and social platform.

The recent launch of PSOL, Phantom’s native liquid staking token, is a prime example. In under two weeks, PSOL has surpassed $15M in market cap with over 17K holders, signaling early traction.

DEX data reflects active retail participation: nearly 700 trades, $7.3M+ in volume, and an average trade size of $790. Notably, while Orca holds a sizable $1.8M stake (12.8% of supply), over 58% of PSOL is held by addresses with less than 0.5% of supply—indicating broad distribution. By issuing its own LST, Phantom is no longer just facilitating DeFi access—it’s embedding deeper into Solana’s staking and liquidity layers, expanding its role in the ecosystem’s financial infrastructure.

At the same time, Phantom is reimagining wallet UX around onchain social discovery. Its new feed feature, now in beta, surfaces real-time onchain activity. Users can follow, react, and curate their experience by tracking wallets and tokens directly within the app. Combined with tools like customizable privacy controls and token-based notification streams, this marks a shift from transactional interface to social platform.

Together, these moves highlight how Phantom is evolving from a gateway into Solana to a full-stack crypto application in its own right—handling staking, swapping, social interactions, and portfolio curation under one roof.

‍

Abstract wallet: Native Smart Wallets for a Native AA Chain

Dashboard: Abstract Global Wallet and Abstract Global Wallet

Abstract Global Wallet (AGW) is the smart account wallet for the Abstract blockchain — a chain built from the ground up with native account abstraction. Unlike Ethereum’s parallel system (EOAs + ERC-4337), Abstract is built with native support for account abstraction at the protocol level. While EOAs still function seamlessly on Abstract, the network’s mempool and transaction flow are optimized to support smart account transactions natively—eliminating the need for third-party bundlers or relayers. This design makes it significantly easier to build and scale AA wallets out of the box, enabling:

• Seamless deployment of smart contract wallets
• Unified transaction flow for all account types
• Native paymaster support for gas sponsorship and flexible payment logic

AGW offers a cross-application wallet experience within the Abstract ecosystem. Users onboard with familiar credentials like email, passkeys, or social logins. Behind the scenes, an EOA is generated using Privy Embedded Wallets and linked to a smart contract wallet — enabling seamless interaction with any Abstract dApp.

Once the EOA is created, a smart contract account is deployed with modular architecture for adding recovery flows, paymasters, and additional signers (including passkey-generated ones). Users can flexibly manage signers, supporting multi-device access and custom recovery options.

To further streamline UX and avoid wallet fragmentation, AGW supports session keys. This allows users to authorize specific apps to auto-sign transactions for a period of time—eliminating repetitive confirmation prompts while maintaining security. It’s already been used to power over 1M+ approvals, 14M+ transactions, and $200M+ in volume across dApps like Myriad, Gacha and Multiplier.

The overall result is a cohesive user experience — like a Web2 universal login, but fully onchain.

Growth Metrics and Onchain Activity

AGW adoption has been remarkable, with over 2.5 million wallets created to date. Activity surged in May 2025, with a single-day record of 41K AGWs created. Even during quieter periods, nearly 2,000 new AGWs are created daily, underscoring the strong momentum in Abstract's app layer.

‍

Out of these, over 726k AGWs have been active, participating in transactions across a growing set of dApps.

AGW vs Non-AGW Transactions

Smart accounts dominate Abstract’s transactional landscape. Until April 2025, AGWs consistently accounted for over 70% of all transactions. Although this share has recently dipped to just above 50%, AGWs remain the leading transaction originators. The decline likely reflects increasing diversity in apps and usage patterns, for example with OpenSea's growing activity since mid-May. As a non-native app, OpenSea may not onboard users through AGW, skewing recent ratios.

‍

Still, across most top apps—Myriad, Gacha, Dojo3, Multiplier, Reservoir, Bigcoin, and ORBR In the Moment Collectibles—the majority of transactions are initiated by AGWs, with non-AGW participation mostly limited to system-level contracts or onboarding flows.

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/5156676/8492799"/>

‍

A Wallet Experience Baked into the Chain

AGW showcases what’s possible when account abstraction is not a retrofit, but a core feature of the protocol. Its modular, chain-native design enables smoother onboarding, granular permissions, and UX innovations like session keys.

As more blockchains embrace smart accounts, AGW provides a reference implementation for what fully-integrated, onchain-first wallet infrastructure can become.

Meteor Wallet: A Multichain Window into Near Ecosystem Activity

Dashboard: Analytics

Meteor Wallet stands out as a leading interface for the NEAR ecosystem, while also offering robust multichain support. Though compatible with multiple chains, its activity and integrations on NEAR remain especially prominent. With the rollout of Meteor V2 and the launch of its mobile app beta in early 2025, the wallet is evolving into a faster, more unified experience across platforms.

Like several wallets featured in this report, Meteor offers a rich set of DeFi-native features, including a built-in swap interface and seamless dApp access via its in-wallet browser. Meteor also leverages unique capabilities of the NEAR blockchain, such as intent-based execution, which now powersa 100% of its cross-chain bridging.

Consistent Usage with Volatile Flows
Over the past 90 days, Meteor averaged 25K daily active wallets and 45K daily transactions, with activity covering both swapping and bridging.

Swap volume fluctuated significantly day-to-day, ranging from ~$20K to over $150K, with a weekly average above $200K.

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/5207726/8567197"/>

‍

Swaps are dominated by pairs involving USDC, NEAR, and USDT, with NEAR and USDC consistently appearing as the most common “to” tokens. The top pairs are:

• USDC → NEAR with $600k in the past 90 days
• NEAR → USDC with $338k.

This reflects both the liquidity structure of the Near ecosystem and user behavior centered on local currency conversions. Meteor’s integration with NEAR-native tokens (e.g., wrap.near, meta-pool.near, usdt.tether-token.near) further shows its alignment with local DeFi protocols, rather than serving as a generalized multi-chain swap tool.

Cross-Chain Bridging: Near as a Hub

Bridge activity saw an average of ~$50K weekly, with occasional spikes tied to specific chain flows.

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/5207638/8567071"/>

‍

This volatility suggests a wallet catering not just to steady DeFi users, but also to episodic flows tied to specific events, asset movements, or bridging needs.Bridge data over the past 90 days shows 77% of bridge activity originates from Near, with the rest primarily from Solana (14%) and Arbitrum (7%). On the receiving side, Solana dominates at 40%, followed by Near (24%), Ethereum (23%), and Arbitrum (9%).

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/5209616/8569866"/> and <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/5209666/8569955"/>

‍

The top bridge flows by token volume include:

• Near → Solana: $395K
• Near → Ethereum: $231K
• Solana → Near: $143K
  
  

These patterns position Meteor as a regional hub for liquidity routing, especially between Near and Solana, and reinforce the idea of wallets as cross-chain traffic coordinators.

Interface Upgrades Reflect Strategic Shifts
In early 2025, Meteor launched its V2 architecture and a mobile app beta, with goals of speeding up development across platforms and eventually consolidating the experience into one unified codebase. New features include biometric auth, improved send flows, an in-app browser, and better token and transaction discovery tools.

‍

EIP-7702: Smart Accounts Without Migration

Dashboard: EIP-7702 — A tool by Wintermute Research for tracking adoption metrics of EIP-7702

The launch of EIP-7702 with Ethereum’s Pectra upgrade on May 7th, 2025, marks a pivotal moment in the evolution of wallet infrastructure. Unlike ERC-4337, which requires deploying a new smart contract wallet, EIP-7702 allows users to temporarily delegate smart account functionality to their existing EOAs—without sacrificing compatibility.

Crucially, these accounts remain EOAs after upgrade, meaning users can interact with dApps as usual, while gaining access to programmable features such as:

• Gas sponsorship
• Passkey authentication
• Transaction batching
• Onchain permissions via delegation lists

This hybrid model dramatically lowers onboarding friction and makes account abstraction accessible to a broader user base.

One Month In: Rapid EIP-7702 Adoption—And New Challenges

Since going live on Ethereum Mainnet on May 7th, EIP-7702 has seen strong early adoption.

According to data from Wintermute, in the first 30 days on Ethereum:

• 53,000+ unique delegations (excluding 238,000 flagged as “crime-related”)
• 21,000 unique EOAs authorized at least once
• 299 unique delegate contracts deployed
• 19,000+ transactions executed under delegation

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/5123205/8447544"/>

‍

Among non-malicious activity, the majority of delegations fall into two categories:

• Retail wallets (e.g., MetaMask, OKX): 32,000 authorizations (64%)
• Infrastructure services (e.g., WhiteBIT): 15,000 authorizations (30%)

MetaMask leads among wallet providers with ~15,000 delegations (5% of total), followed by Ambire (10,000; 3.5%) and OKX (6,000; 2.3%).

Overall, infrastructure provider WhiteBIT leads overall with over 5,000 authorizations (5.2%).

On Ethereum Mainnet, 7702-enabled EOAs have initiated 12,600 total transactions. The most common destination contracts highlight real usage:

• Uniswap: ~6,000 interactions (52%)
• Li.Fi: ~4,600 (41%)
• Euler: ~220 (2%)

Source embed: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/5211069/8572087"/>

‍

Multichain Adoption: A Skewed Picture

Looking beyond Ethereum, Base leads with 2.7M total delegations, followed by Optimism (1.8M) and BNB Chain (1.4M). However, 90%+ of these delegations fall under a single behavior pattern now labeled “CrimeEnjoyor”—a mass-deployed malicious contract implementation used to sweep ETH from compromised wallets.

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/5098802/8412835"/>

‍

The CrimeEnjoyor Problem: When Flexibility Becomes a Vector

EIP-7702 makes smart account features more accessible, but it also introduces new risks. Wintermute’s data shows that over 90% of all delegations to date have been made to contracts sharing the same malicious logic—a sweeper contract designed to extract ETH from wallets with already-leaked private keys.

Importantly, these wallets were not hacked through EIP-7702. They were compromised beforehand, and 7702 merely streamlined the theft by automating value extraction.

Once delegated, these malicious contracts use a receive() function to instantly forward any incoming ETH to the attacker’s address—no transaction signing required. This enables fully autonomous draining at scale from any wallet that receives funds.

To improve transparency and mitigate future risk, the Dune community:

• Reversed and verified the malicious bytecode (now labeled as CrimeEnjoyor)
  
  
• Added crime tags and public warnings
  
  
• Highlighted clear behavioral patterns across chains
  
  

This episode reinforces a critical point: new account standards like 7702 expand what’s possible—but also raise the stakes. Without contract verification, labeling, and education, new primitives can blur the line between powerful UX and attack vector.

Biconomy: A Data-Rich Case Study in Smart Account Modularity and Metric Complexity

‍

Dashboard: Biconomy Smart Account Dashboard

Biconomy offers one of the clearest windows into the evolving smart account landscape. With over 1.7 million smart accounts deployed across multiple versions, it represents one of the most active and diverse factories in the ecosystem. The data, from deployment volumes and active accounts to chain-specific adoption and total value processed, offers valuable insight into broader themes discussed throughout this report: account modularity, use case specialization, and also the challenge of selecting the right metrics to describe usage.

Account Deployment

Biconomy’s account deployment spans three major versions:

• V1: 762,000+ accounts (largely dormant)
• V2: 890,000+ accounts (active across multiple chains)
• Nexus: 73,000+ accounts (launched April 2025)

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/4904175/8128743"/>

‍

The launch of Nexus marked a new phase of adoption. In April and May 2025 alone, over 50,000 Nexus accounts were deployed, driven by integrations with apps like Blast (via its mobile wallet) and Magic Newton.

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/4910293/8129636"/>

‍

While Polygon accounts for the majority of smart accounts overall, most of the recent accounts were deployed on Base, with Polygon ranking second—consistent with broader trends showing Base as an emerging leader in smart account adoption.

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/4910764/8129762"/>

‍

UserOps and Active Accounts: Usage Diverges by Version and Chain

Alongside deployment growth, active accounts now exceed 715K, with a 41% activity ratio across all deployed accounts. May saw a notable increase, mostly driven by Nexus (47K out of 63K), indicating strong early engagement with the newest account architecture.

<iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/4452711/7451061"/>

‍

Most active users were on Base, which counted 49K active accounts, followed by Polygon with 11K.

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/4452619/7451000"/>

‍

UserOps also rose in May, offering another lens into actual account activity. Interestingly, while Nexus led in new deployments and active accounts, V2 accounts generated the majority of May's UserOps—296K out of 346K total—suggesting continued usage from existing integrations.

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/4452711/7451068"/>

‍

In terms of chains, Polygon led with 180K UserOps in May, followed by Base with 94K, reflecting how usage is distributed differently from deployment and active accounts figures.

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/4452619/7450975"/>

‍

Measuring Activity: TVL vs TVP

Biconomy reports both TVL (Total Value Locked) and TVP (Total Value Processed)—two distinct metrics that highlight different aspects of account usage:

• TVL captures the amount of capital held within smart accounts at a given time.
• TVP tracks the total value that has moved through accounts—i.e., how much has been used, swapped, bridged, or transacted.

Across all chains and account versions, by end of May Biconomy has processed over $500 million in TVP. The vast majority of this activity comes from V2 accounts ($487M), with V1 accounts contributing $9M and the newly launched Nexus accounts still early at $4K.

A closer look reveals striking variation by chain: Blast accounts alone account for over $360M in TVP, despite representing a small share of total deployments and holding negligible TVL. Other notable contributors include Polygon ($124M), and Base and Arbitrum, which each processed around $5M.

Source: <iframe src="https://dune.com/embeds/4878597/8078461"/>

‍

TVL, while lower in magnitude, offers insight into stored capital, with about $1.2M on Polygon, $30K on Arbitrum and ~$18K on Blast.

The Blast integration illustrates where TVP becomes the more relevant metric: users fund their Blast mobile wallets and immediately use those funds within the app—resulting in high value flow (TVP) but low TVL.

By contrast, in the case of Newton, the new wallet by Magic Labs, users may deposit funds and hold them for future activity. In these scenarios, TVL captures dormant capital, while TVP might understate engagement if transactions are infrequent or deferred via intent logic.

This variability illustrates why no single metric can fully capture smart account utility. TVL works well for custody-driven accounts but can understate active use in systems where throughput and transaction coordination are more relevant. TVP helps surface these flows but may overlook intent-based or delayed engagement.

Fragmentation, Modularity, and the Search for Better Metrics
Biconomy’s evolving architecture reflects broader protocol trends. Nexus is modular by design, fully compatible with ERC-4337, and built to support emerging features like intent-based execution and EIP-4407. It also forms the foundation for Biconomy’s upcoming Supertransactions framework—a peer-to-peer system enabling cross-chain actions in a single signature. This shift points to a future where execution becomes abstracted from the wallet interface.

In the end, Biconomy’s data reveals a smart account ecosystem defined by versioning, chain diversity, and varying user behaviors. No single metric—be it TVL, TVP, or active accounts—can capture this complexity alone. But together, they highlight a key transformation: wallets are no longer static tools for access—they're programmable coordination layers shaped by architecture, use case, and intent.

Uniswap Wallet & UniswapX: From Interface to Execution Layer

Dashboard: Uniswap X

Dashboard: Uniswap X: Orders filled

Most wallets began by managing keys, then gradually layered on swap features. Uniswap Wallet inverts that path: it extends from one of crypto’s most successful DEXs into wallet infrastructure. This origin story defines its architecture. Rather than embedding a swap router into a generic wallet, Uniswap Wallet is built around UniswapX, its native intent-based protocol that enables modular, gasless, MEV-resistant trading.

Launched in 2023, UniswapX introduced a new paradigm: users sign off-chain Dutch auction-style orders ("intents"), which are then competed over and filled by third-party fillers on-chain. The result is improved pricing, zero gas or revert costs for users, and enhanced resistance to frontrunning—without compromising liquidity access.

Activity Trends: Cycles on the Demand Side, Growth on the Supply Side

Usage metrics from the UniswapX ecosystem reveal a clear distinction between demand and supply dynamics.

On the demand side, activity has followed a more cyclical pattern. Weekly orders filled surged during key periods—June 2024, January 2025, and again in May 2025—followed by intermittent slowdowns. Despite this volatility, weekly orders have consistently remained above 30,000 in recent months.

The number of unique swappers shows a similar pattern: peaking at 22,000 in December 2024, dipping through Q1 2025, and recently rebounding to over 15,000 weekly users.

By contrast, unique fillers—the agents that execute trades—have grown steadily and consistently, reaching an all-time high of 73 in February 2025.

This divergence suggests a healthy maturation of the filler ecosystem, with increasing supply-side participation regardless of short-term shifts in user activity and demand.

Overall Ethereum, the first chain to support UniswapX, led early adoption, but Base has since overtaken it in terms of volume. Meanwhile, Arbitrum stands out for its high share of unique fillers, even with a smaller slice of total swap volume.

According to Flashbots, total swap volume via UniswapX has surpassed $21B. Interestingly, while order count peaked in early January 2025, volume dipped during that same week—likely a sign of smaller retail users entering the protocol. 

UniswapX’s share of overall Uniswap swap activity has also increased steadily and now averages around 30%.

A Wallet Optimized for Coordination, Not Just Access

Uniswap Wallet marks a notable departure from the traditional wallet paradigm. Available across mobile and browser, and supporting Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, and more, it’s deeply integrated with both the Uniswap Protocol (v2, v3, and the upcoming v4) and UniswapX. This deep integration allows Uniswap Wallet users to seamlessly tap into a network of liquidity sources—on-chain and off-chain—via auction engines and third-party fillers competing to fulfill swap intents.

As intent-based architectures mature across the ecosystem, Uniswap Wallet offers a glimpse into what wallets may soon become: not just key managers or aggregators, but programmable coordination hubs that abstract execution entirely. In this model, wallets don’t just initiate transactions—they orchestrate them.

‍

Infra

Dynamic Wallet Infrastructure

Dashboard: https://dune.com/dynamic_xyz/wallets-report/25c9a8af-9aeb-4276-a0f5-92aa80cce96a

One of the clearest trends emerging from the wallet landscape is that developers are no longer building for a single wallet—they’re building for a wallet layer. Rather than choosing between embedded or external access, hybrid infrastructures are becoming the default. Embedded wallets streamline onboarding for new users, while EOAs remain vital for experienced users, interoperability, and cross-app continuity.

Dynamic reflects this shift by providing flexible and modular wallet infrastructure that prioritizes user-friendly onboarding. Specifically, it enables apps to support both embedded wallets and external EOAs through a single SDK, offering flexible, user-friendly onboarding across high-throughput chains like EVM and Solana.

Adoption data from apps using Dynamic highlights this dual-track trend: while EOA-based access remains foundational and these wallets represent most of the wallets connected via Dynamic, embedded wallets have been growing more than 3x faster than EOAs.

In early 2024, fewer than 1 in 5 apps on Dynamic provisioned embedded wallets. As of May 2025, that figure has doubled to 40%, signaling growing developer preference for seamless onboarding.

The balance between external EOAs and embedded wallets varies notably across ecosystems. On EVM, MetaMask maintains a dominant position, accounting for nearly 50% of wallet connections among apps using Dynamic. It’s followed by OKX and Dynamic’s embedded wallets, each with around 18% share, while Rabby holds a solid ~7%. 

On Solana, Phantom leads with approximately 40% of usage, although embedded wallets are quickly catching up, now making up a full third of connections. Notably, Magic Eden Wallet has also emerged as a strong contender, capturing around 12% of the share.

Beyond user-facing wallets, Dynamic also supports emerging backend use cases—like developer-controlled wallets for stablecoin payouts, onchain agent flows, and treasury operations. As ecosystems like Sei explore unified “global wallets” that anchor identity across dApps, Dynamic illustrates how wallet infrastructure is evolving from frontend UX to programmable backend rails.

Overall, data from Dynamic reinforce a key point: wallet usage is fragmented and becoming more so. No single wallet dominates across chains, user types, or application categories. Developers are no longer building for "the wallet," but for a wallet layer—an abstraction that includes EOAs, embedded accounts, and even programmable server-side wallets used for automation, payouts, and onchain agents.

As the definition of “wallet” continues to expand, so too does its role. It’s not just a front-end anymore. Wallets are becoming composable infrastructure—modular by design, programmable by default, and deeply integrated into the app experience.

‍