[TL;DR]

• Trust is rebounding, but threats are evolving. While 69% of on-chain users feel safe, phishing victims rose from 14% to 21%, and 62% still operate multiple wallets per chain—fragmentation persists.
• There’s a gap between chain specialization and real-world use. Ethereum is settling, Solana is for high-frequency activity, and Base is an innovation sandbox. Although 54% use crypto for payments, only 12% are satisfied—experience gaps are clear.
• Technical fixes are emerging and the outlook is optimistic. Gas abstraction, WaaS, and cross-chain standards (ERC-7683) are easing fees and complexity. 67% are optimistic about on-chain tech, with payments (37%) and AI (35%) emerging as leading use cases.
  ‍

1. On-Chain UX: How Far Have We Come?

The “2025 On-Chain UX Status Report” by Reown and Nansen surveyed 1,035 crypto users in the U.S. and U.K., covering wallet usage, actual on-chain activity, and future outlook. This year’s headline: overall confidence is up—yet new challenges surfaced alongside it.

1.1 Trust Is Recovering

In 2025, perceptions are shifting. 69% say they feel safe managing assets on-chain—up from roughly half a year ago. Generalized unease is fading as users gain confidence in self-custody.

But not all problems are solved. Phishing victims actually increased, from 14% to 21%. More users feel safe, yet more are getting hurt. Whether this reflects more sophisticated attacks or risk normalization is unclear. Phishing sites are more polished, malicious dApps are promoted atop search results, and attacker innovation outpaces user education.

Perceptions of regulation vary by age. Among those 55+, 25% view regulation negatively; only 10% do so among 18–34-year-olds. Younger users tend to see rules as prerequisites for growth, while early adopters fear the loss of liberty and decentralization.

A key driver is institutional entry. After U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF approvals, TradFi participation accelerated. BlackRock’s ETF became one of the most successful U.S. ETF launches; by year-end ETFs held over 3% of BTC supply. The market is shifting from experimental to regulated, with lower volatility—but also less of the early wild dynamism.
‍

1.2 Still a Fragmented Experience

Most on-chain participants run multiple wallets. In the last 3 months, 62% used 2+ wallets—up 16% YoY. 48% cite chain-specific support, 44% cite security. Users split wallets across Ethereum mainnet, Solana, and various L2s. Even if you try to consolidate, unsupported chains or wallet-specific dApp quirks get in the way.

This isn’t by choice. Over 80% say cross-chain interoperability matters, with 47% saying “very important.” Yet moving from Ethereum to Solana or Base to BNB still requires switching wallets, bridges, time, and fees. Unlike Web2’s single-account access, Web3 often requires per-service accounts.

Newer users try more wallets. Under 6 months, no single wallet dominates; after 2+ years, many settle on exchange wallets like Binance or Coinbase. Exploration precedes consolidation into familiar brands.

Mobile remains dominant, but interest in hardware wallets is rebounding, from 7% to 10%—14% among social-lite users. As time and asset size grow—and with rising phishing—cold wallets are reassessed as safer despite some friction.
‍

1.3 What Do People Actually Do?

Trading remains the most active behavior. 56% traded in the last 3 months; 24% list it as their favorite activity. 45% participated in DeFi or staking, yet only 8% call it a favorite. For most, on-chain equals “investing space,” not “usage space.”

A notable mismatch: 54% use crypto for payments, but only 12% prefer it. People use it, yet don’t love it. Gas variability, confirmation delays, and FX math remain rough. Unless payment UX beats cards, adoption will stall.

Stablecoin holders doubled in a year, from 20% to 37%. Telegram shipped 50M TON wallets; PayPal’s PYUSD expanded merchant reach; Stripe re-enabled crypto payouts across 30+ countries. For cross-border value transfer, stables shine: minutes, not days; cents, not dollars; minimal volatility.

Bitcoin remains the most held asset (64%). Ownership rises with age (55% among 18–34, 74% among 55+). Solana is the opposite (46% young vs. 17% older). Older cohorts favor “digital gold” and long-term holds; younger users gravitate to new chains/tokens and the memecoin scene.
‍

1.4 Expectations for the Future

67% are optimistic about on-chain tech. Collectors (82%), farmers (81%), social-lites and gamers (79%) are especially bullish; only 7% are pessimistic. Translating to NPS, that’s +15 points YoY.

But behavior lags belief. People say payments and social will lead, yet most spend time trading. Future use cases: payments 37%, AI 35%, social/entertainment 25%—but current activity is trading-heavy.

Regulation is viewed surprisingly positively. 86% think it accelerates adoption; 49% say it’s essential. U.S. stablecoin bills and Europe’s MiCA reduce uncertainty. With policy signaling turning friendlier, clarity is prized over ambiguity by both institutions and consumers.

Looking 3–5 years out, payments lead (27%), followed by integration into existing social/entertainment platforms (25%). DeFi/NFT-centric futures draw only 11%. Users want crypto “in the background,” with benefits foregrounded: NFT profiles on Instagram, creator tipping on YouTube, and Uber rides paid in stables—without thinking about chains or gas.
‍

2. Not a Chain War—A Specialization Map

2.1 Finding Their Lanes

It’s not winner-takes-all. Chains are specializing around strengths: Ethereum as a settlement layer; Solana for high-frequency flows; Base as an experimentation ground; BNB Chain with exchange-ecosystem gravity.

By TVL, Ethereum still dominates (~$117.4B), followed by Solana (~$21.3B), BNB (~$7.9B), and Bitcoin (~$6.6B). But fees tell another story: Solana’s fees rose 3,000% YoY, Tron 660%, Bitcoin 40%, while Ethereum and BNB fell 18%. Ethereum handles larger, less frequent value; average tx from BNB → ETH is 7–14× bigger. Solana thrives on frequent small tx. Among L2s, Base’s fees grew 464%, outpacing Arbitrum (−55%), Linea (−15%), Optimism (−51%), zkSync (−84%).

Usage mirrors this split: Ethereum leading with 43% self-reported usage, Solana 39%. Farmers prefer Solana (69%), collectors prefer Ethereum (57%). BNB sits at 26% due to the exchange flywheel.
‍

2.2 Bitcoin’s Re-Ascent

Bitcoin is expanding beyond “store of value.” In 2024, 42% of BTC developers focused on scaling, with L2s like Lightning improving throughput. Institutions are changing the ecosystem’s profile: e.g., Clearstream services, ETFs holding >3% supply by year-end—cementing BTC as an institutional asset class.

Users reflect this: 64% hold BTC, skewing older. Yet governance participation is low (6% participated in last 3 months). BTC governance remains largely off-chain with core devs/miners; retail has few entry points.
‍

2.3 Solana’s Surge

2024 was Solana’s breakout: fees +3,000% YoY; TVL +127%. Q4 spiked on the memecoin wave. Top entities by interactions include Pump.fun (launchpad), Jito (MEV infra), and DEXs like Raydium/Jupiter/Meteora/Orca.

Solana’s edge is cheap, fast, high-frequency flows (minting, memecoins, gaming). Its wallets are youngest by age (median 51 days vs. ETH 123, BNB 77, Base 69), suggesting new wallets spun up just for Solana use cases. Activity frequency is similar (median 2–4 tx/90 days) but with much smaller values.

Sustainability is debated: if the memecoin tide ebbs, will usage fall? Q1→Q4 saw a 3× rise in memecoin-related projects across WalletConnect telemetry.
‍

2.4 L2s: Rise—and Limits

L2s answer Ethereum scalability. Base stands out (fees +464% YoY), buoyed by Coinbase distribution and experimentation around ERC-4337, cross-chain rails (Across, Orbiter), and active NFT platforms.

Yet only ~10% say an L2 is their primary chain. Interop matters to 80%+, but friction around bridging/liquidity fragmentation keeps many on L1s or alternate L1s. As users cluster on Base, others saw declining fees (Arbitrum −55%, Optimism −51%), revealing winners and stragglers.
‍

2.5 The Interoperability Challenge

Interoperability tops user demand. 47% “very important,” 33% “somewhat.” Gamers (69%), collectors (59%), farmers (58%) are especially insistent.

But 48% say they need multiple wallets to reach other chains; 18% cite interop gaps as a primary barrier. Bridges carry time, fees, and risk—multiple exploits in 2024 reinforced anxiety.

Solutions are emerging: ERC-7683 (cross-chain intents), specialized bridges (Across, Orbiter, Stargate), and aggregators (LI.FI, Socket, Odos). Wallets broaden support (e.g., Trust Wallet’s 100+ chains), and dev tooling like Reown’s AppKit simplifies multi-chain connects.

Still, fundamental differences in consensus, security models, and execution hinder “true” interop. Most bridges lock on one side and mint on the other, raising security and liquidity fragmentation issues. Direct state sharing remains early.
‍

3. Real-World Pain: Fees, Security, Complexity

3.1 The Persistent Fee Barrier

Fees are the top hurdle. 39% flag high tx costs; 30% want lower fees first; 45% prioritize low fees when choosing a wallet. Unpredictability compounds pain: bursts on Ethereum push costs to tens of dollars—untenable for small transactions.

L2s ease costs; Solana was built for them. But bridging in/out also costs.
Gas abstraction is rising: projects sponsor gas, and ERC-4337 lets users transact without native gas tokens, or pay with other tokens, or bundle txs—though adoption remains early and awareness is low (29% understand smart accounts).
‍

3.2 Evolving Security Threats

Confidence is up, threats are up: phishing victims climbed to 21%. New vectors spread via social channels, ads for fake dApps, and even spoofed extensions.

Blind signing is a core flaw. Most wallets display opaque call data, not human-readable effects. Ledger’s Clear Signing displays “Send 100 USDC to 0x1234…” or “Swap ETH → USDC on Uniswap,” reducing trap clicks.

56% want stronger wallet/dApp security. Users value pre-tx simulations and threat monitoring (e.g., Hypernative). Some wallets integrate these, but coverage is uneven.

Institutions adopt multisig and MPC; consumers benefit from social recovery (e.g., Argent), trading seed-phrase fragility for recoverability—albeit with guardian-selection trade-offs.
‍

3.3 Complexity in UX

Onboarding improved (those calling it “hard/poorly explained” fell from 26.1% to 17.6%), but 25% of newcomers still struggle, and 33% are hesitant to try new products.

Beyond UI, the concepts are foreign: seed phrases, gas, slippage, approvals. Social wallets, WaaS, and smart accounts hide this: email/SSO login, seedless recovery, and gas sponsored in the background. 38% use social wallets regularly (52% among 18–34).
‍

3.4 The Practicality Gap

Payments show the sharpest mismatch: 54% use, 12% prefer. Volatile gas, confirms, FX steps—cards often win.

Stablecoins help: holder share up to 37%, with wider merchant rails (TON, PYUSD, Stripe). Cross-border is the killer app, but acceptance remains limited, FX contexts persist, and tax reporting frictions deter everyday use.

Governance is also under-adopted: only 6% voted recently; 3% prefer it. Off-chain governance models and low incentives keep participation thin.
‍

4. Solutions Are Landing

4.1 Gas Abstraction & Account Innovation

Gas abstraction removes the biggest friction. Users transact without holding native gas; projects sponsor fees; txs can be bundled.

ERC-4337 enables programmable smart accounts: alternate gas tokens, sponsorship, batching. Base shows early traction (170+ active smart wallets), but only 29% understand smart accounts; education and clearer UX are needed.

Social wallets + WaaS operationalize this: SSO onboarding, seedless recovery, background gas—especially popular among younger cohorts.
‍

4.2 Integrated Wallet Solutions

Multi-chain wallets reduce fragmentation. Trust Wallet supports 100+ chains with built-in bridges and route optimization. Dev tooling like Reown’s AppKit integrates 280+ wallets and 40+ chains with onramp/swap/bridge, letting dApps ship full on-chain experiences with minimal infra lift.

WaaS lets brands ship their own wallets while outsourcing key management, tx processing, and security—speeding time-to-market and leveraging provider-scale security, ideal for payments, gaming, and social platforms.

Context-specific wallet strategy is effective: mobile hot wallets for day-to-day, hardware for cold storage. Hardware preference rose 7% → 10% as users prioritize safety.
‍

4.3 Cross-Chain Infrastructure

Aggregators (LI.FI, Socket, Odos) unify bridges and pick optimal routes by cost/speed/safety.
Specialized bridges (Across, Orbiter, Stargate) improve latency and UX with different mechanisms (optimistic relays, L2 specialization, unified liquidity).
Standards like ERC-7683 (cross-chain intents) promise consistent, intent-driven execution across heterogeneous systems—reducing integration burden and smoothing UX.

Security remains the elephant in the room: most bridges lock-and-mint with centralized/multisig trust assumptions. Truly trust-minimized interop is still a frontier.
‍

4.4 Better Security Tooling

Clear Signing addresses blind signing.
Real-time threat monitoring and tx simulation catch malicious approvals before they execute.
Multisig/MPC deliver institutional-grade controls; social recovery balances safety and convenience for consumers.
‍

5. Why the Optimism Is Justified

5.1 Optimism Leads

67% are optimistic, +15 NPS points YoY; pessimists are only 7%. Active cohorts are most bullish, reflecting hands-on conviction.

Drivers: clearer rules, institutional money, real use cases (ETFs, stablecoin expansion, merchant support). The narrative is shifting from speculation to utility.

Newcomers are more cautious (50% optimistic; 38% neutral), blocked by early hurdles (setup, gas, phishing). Optimism rises with experience. Younger users are more positive than older cohorts—familiarity breeds comfort.
‍

5.2 Regulation as a Precondition

86% say regulation accelerates adoption; 49% call it essential. U.S. stablecoin/market-structure bills and MiCA in the EU reduce risk. While older users worry about ethos erosion, younger users see trust gains.

As industry voices note, we’re exiting the ambiguity era: banking access in the U.S., codified frameworks in the EU. Imperfect, but clarity itself is catalytic.
‍

5.3 Payments and AI Will Lead

Top future use cases: payments (37%), AI (35%), social/entertainment integration (25%); only 11% expect DeFi/NFT dominance. Users want crypto embedded into everyday life—benefits without mental overhead.

Stablecoins anchor payments (holders doubled), empowering cross-border payroll, remittances, and retail. On the AI side, blockchains offer verifiable provenance, consensus-based attestations, and programmable ownership to ground synthetic media and agent economies.
‍

5.4 Mind the Gap

People expect payments/social to lead, yet spend time trading (56% recently traded; 24% prefer it). Payments must deliver not just parity but clear advantages over cards.

Governance remains niche (6% voted), reflecting complexity and weak incentives.
‍

5.5 From Optimism to Reality

To justify optimism, we must close concrete gaps: fees (39% cite), security (18% cite; phishing rising), interop (80% want; ~10% primarily use L2s). Education + UX must advance together: only 29% understand smart accounts; 39% want better security to use social wallets more.

As Reown’s Jess Holgrave frames it, “meet users where they are.” Users don’t want entirely new behaviors; they want familiar patterns with fewer steps. Contextual wallets, safety nets that feel like airbags, and practical education will matter more than novel primitives.

Onboarding the next billion demands a paradigm shift: Web2-grade UX with Web3 benefits. The technical base exists—now it’s about execution and adoption.