Author of the original text: Stacy Muur

Original text compiled by: TechFlow

Within just 30 days, 89 projects across 9 blockchains completed over 2 million Gas-free transactions, saving up to $117,000 in Gas fees.

This wave of Gas-free transactions indicates that solutions like the Paymaster (payment protocol) in ERC-4337 smart wallets, which cover user fees, can quickly boost on-chain activity.

Paymaster-driven usage may mask real user demand

The surge in transaction volume does not necessarily reflect genuine user interest, especially when a small number of wallets (such as traders, bots) repeatedly call contracts.

For example, one-time airdrops, free minting, or claim events can lead to a sudden spike in wallet numbers, but subsequent usage may be minimal.

Currently, projects related to Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs), games, and tokens are attracting a large number of new wallets, but many are used for one-time operations (such as minting or claiming rewards) without sustained user engagement.

On the other hand, some applications have shown deeper levels of repeat usage, often due to more engaging game loops, regular DeFi operations, or infrastructure-level services.

These findings suggest that ERC-4337 smart wallets are reshaping on-chain activity. While Gas fee sponsorship effectively attracts users, only applications with compelling features that drive repeat usage can truly retain them.

@0x Kofi has created an authoritative dashboard tracking this growth, supported by @base:

https://www.gogasless.io/leaderboard/all

Key Data

• 89 unique applications/protocols

• Approximately 724,000 active smart wallets

• Approximately $117,000 in Gas fees abstracted

• Approximately 2.08 million Gas-free transactions

The Bigger Picture of ERC-4337 Evolution

The rapid growth of Gas-free transactions is part of a larger trend. In 2024, user operations (UserOps) executed through ERC-4337 accounts will exceed 10.3 million, more than 10 times the 830,000 in 2023. Of these, 87% of the transactions will be paid for by Paymasters, providing a Gas-free experience.

The interesting trajectory of this evolution can be seen in the monthly Paymaster Gas spending chart:

• Early Adoption Phase (2023): Spending was low before mid-2023, with Optimism being an early adopter.

• Growth Phase (Late 2023): By October 2023, monthly spending steadily grew to around $400,000.

• Peak Activity (April 2024): Spending spiked to around $700,000, primarily driven by Base.

• Recent Trends (Late 2024 to Early 2025): Reached new highs of around $630,000 in November-December 2024, but dropped significantly to around $150,000 by February 2025.

Applications and users have paid over $3.4 million in UserOps fees through Paymasters, with major providers including @biconomy, @pimlicoHQ, @coinbase, and @Alchemy. While the market has contracted, and total spending trended downward in Q1 2025, @base ($391,000), @ethereum ($121,000), and @BNBCHAIN (around $112,000) remain the dominant players.

Data source: https://www.bundlebear.com/

Developer: @0x Kofi

Blockchain Activity Ranking

• Base (43.2%): Entertainment and social hub, dominating the gaming sector (76.8%).

• Polygon (21.4%): Community interaction layer, focused on NFTs (50.7%) and Telegram wallets (42.3%).

• Optimism (8.5%): Emphasizes security, with a focus on infrastructure restoration.

• Celo (7.4%): Niche expert, concentrating on prediction markets.

• BSC (4.2%): Value transfer layer, with the highest Gas costs, focused on token trading.

Key Insights from the Data

Before delving into the data, two key metrics need to be understood:

1️⃣ Tx/Wallet (Transactions per Wallet) - Measures the average number of transactions per wallet. Low values (e.g., 1.0) indicate one-time usage, such as minting NFTs or claiming airdrops. High values (e.g., 25) suggest repeat engagement, such as active trading, game play, or bot operations.

2️⃣ Cost/Tx (Cost per Transaction) - Represents the average cost per transaction. In a Gas-free system, this reflects the fee abstracted per transaction, rather than what the user actually pays.

1. NFT Projects: Large Wallet Counts Often Mean One-Time Accounts

• Piggybox: Approximately 1 transaction/wallet, around $0.004/transaction.

• Somon Badge: Approximately 1.4 transactions/wallet, around $0.007/transaction.

Interpretation: The 1:1 wallet-to-transaction ratio of Piggybox strongly suggests it is primarily driven by minting or claim activities. Piggybox is an NFT received by users when registering for EARN'M, which may include an airdropped EARNM token lottery box.

One-Time Spikes: Many wallets perform only a single transaction (initial minting or claim) and are not used further, resulting in an almost perfect 1:1 ratio.

Leaderboard Distortion: Due to the large number of new wallets participating in minting, Piggybox ranks highly in wallet count/transaction volume leaderboards. But if one-time wallets are filtered out, its ranking may drop out of the top five, and its user retention would be very low.

2. Token Trading: A Few Projects Dominate

• Data Analysis: While token trading volume (868,000 transactions) appears to dominate, the leaderboard includes 26 token projects, far more than other categories. However, only two tokens ($BVRP and $USDC) account for over 667,000 transactions, the vast majority of the trading volume.

• $BVRP: Approximately 25 transactions per wallet, $0.012 per transaction.

• $USDC: Approximately 4.6 transactions per wallet, $0.21 per transaction.

• Interpretation:

• This concentration of trading volume indicates that not all token projects are equally active, but rather a few leading projects are driving the overall growth in transaction volume.

• $BVRP exhibits extremely high transaction activity relative to wallet count, which may suggest high user engagement on its platform, with frequent and potentially automated or repetitive operations.

3. Games: One "Breakout Hit" and Differences in Wallet/Transaction Ratios

• Data Analysis:

  

• @SuperChampsHQ: Approximately 1.49 transactions per wallet, $0.017 per transaction.

• @BLOCKLORDS: Approximately 42 transactions per wallet, $0.009 per transaction.

• @miracleplay_cn: Approximately 14 transactions per wallet, $0.012 per transaction.

• Interpretation:

  Here is the English translation of the text, with the specified terms translated as instructed: Although the total transaction volume of Super Champs (463,000 transactions) far exceeds other games (a total of about 13,000 transactions), each wallet only completes about 1-2 transactions, indicating relatively low user engagement. While Blocklords has fewer wallets, each wallet has an extremely high transaction volume (about 42 transactions), which is often associated with repetitive behavior that may be operated by bots. As Blocklords' David Johansson said, "They are fighting the bots." https://www.blockchaingamer.biz/features/interviews/33860/blocklords-david-johansson-podcast/ 4. Cross-Chain Bridges and Plugins: Stable Usage and Higher Gas Costs UniversalX: About 4.4 transactions per wallet, with a cost of $0.55 per transaction. Safe 4337 Module: About 5.1 transactions per wallet, with a cost of $0.053 per transaction. Interpretation: Behind-the-scenes tools: Cross-chain bridges and plugins are not as eye-catching as tokens or games, but their usage remains stable as multiple dApps rely on them. Ecosystem health indicator: The sustained moderate usage of infrastructure services indicates they provide real utility value, rather than being driven by short-term hype. 5. Trend of Specialization in On-Chain Activities @base: 99.5% of gaming wallet activities (312,361 out of 310,934 wallets). @0x Polygon: Dominates NFT and social activities, accounting for 87% of the ecosystem's NFT wallets. @BNBCHAIN: Leads in high-value cross-chain bridge transactions, accounting for 23.2% of all Account Abstraction transactions. @Celo: Strong performance in prediction markets (25,574 wallets, average 12.7 transactions per wallet). 6. Inter-Chain Cost Differences The cost difference for Gasless transactions can be up to 100x across different Blocks, driving different application categories to choose specific Blocks: Ethereum: $2.41 per Gasless transaction (highest). BSC: $0.50 per Gasless transaction. Base: $0.02 per Gasless transaction (lowest among major Blocks). Polygon: $0.03 per Gasless transaction. Conclusion: This massive cost structure difference will drive specific application categories to choose specific Blocks, regardless of technical similarities. For example, high-cost Blocks are not suitable for economically sensitive games and social applications. Overall Observations: NFT Adoption: Although NFT activities may show tens of thousands of wallets minting once (like Piggybox), the subsequent usage rate is extremely low. Infrastructure: The usage of cross-chain bridges and plugins is stable, with higher transaction costs (for cross-chain bridges) or lower volatility as backend tools (for plugins). Divergent Transaction Patterns: There are significant differences in the transactions per wallet across different categories, with some being highly repetitive operations and others being "one-time" behaviors. Long-Tail Effect of Projects: Many projects have almost no user engagement, indicating that free Gas is not enough to drive demand; dApps need to provide real value propositions to retain users. Key Takeaways: Account Abstraction and Gas Sponsorship can indeed boost transaction volume and user registration, but the real test is in repeated user engagement. The data on wallet counts, Account Abstraction, and Gasless transaction volumes often show that usage is concentrated in a few star dApps or large-scale one-time activities. Projects like Piggybox can quickly rise in the rankings with a nearly 1:1 wallet-to-transaction ratio, but their ranking will quickly drop when one-time accounts are filtered out. In contrast, cross-chain bridges and plugin solutions demonstrate more stable medium-level usage, reflecting the actual needs of the ecosystem, rather than short-term hype. Role of ERC-4337 Smart Wallets: All these trends - Gasless games, seamless DeFi, on-chain specialization - are driven by ERC-4337 smart wallets. Unlike traditional Externally Owned Accounts (EOAs), smart wallets significantly improve the user experience through automation, security, and flexibility. What is an ERC-4337 Smart Wallet? A smart contract wallet (or smart wallet) is a programmable Ethereum account that provides the following features: ✅ Batch Transactions: Users can combine multiple operations (e.g., authorization + trade on a DEX) into a single transaction. ✅ Gas Fee Abstraction: Users do not need to hold ETH to pay Gas fees; fees can be paid by a sponsor or with other tokens. ✅ Secure without Seed Phrase: Users can authenticate via keys, social recovery, or multi-factor authentication, rather than relying on the high-risk seed phrase. How do Gasless Transactions Work? When a user initiates a transaction, a Paymaster (a dedicated smart contract) can pay the Gas fees on their behalf, or allow the user to pay with any ERC-20 token. This significantly lowers the entry barrier for new users, making blockchain applications as seamless as Web2 applications. Challenges of ERC-4337 and the EIP-7702 Solution: Despite driving Gasless transactions, ERC-4337 faces significant adoption challenges, which directly contribute to the retention issues mentioned above: Technical Barriers: Complex components (like UserOperations, Bundlers, and EntryPoint contracts) set high thresholds for ordinary users and developers. Cost Issues: While Gasless transactions benefit users, the cost of implementing the full technology stack is high, and the profitability of Bundlers is also affected by Gas price volatility. Reliability Issues: Network congestion can cause transaction delays, and the complex verification logic increases the potential for security vulnerabilities. User Experience Gaps: Cross-chain fragmentation leads to inconsistent wallet experiences, hindering seamless cross-chain management. Key Takeaways: Account Abstraction and Gas Sponsorship have effectively increased transaction volumes and new wallet registrations, but the real challenge is how to maintain continuous user engagement. The data shows: - Many dApps only see usage spikes in one-time activities (like NFT minting, airdrops), with low long-term retention. - A few star projects drive the majority of on-chain activities, while most projects face a lack of actual user demand. - Cross-chain bridges and infrastructure solutions demonstrate more stable usage, indicating they provide real utility value, rather than short-term hype. While ERC-4337 has driven Gasless transactions and improved user experience, its complexity and cost barriers have limited mainstream adoption. EIP-7702 fills these gaps by: - Allowing EOAs to support Account Abstraction: ERC-4337's core issue was excluding Externally Owned Accounts (EOAs), requiring users to switch to smart contract wallets. EIP-7702 solves this by allowing EOAs to temporarily adopt smart contract code, enabling them to use Gas Sponsorship (e.g., paying fees with ERC-20 tokens) and transaction batching (such as authorizing and using ERC-20 tokens in a single transaction). - Simplifying Complexity and Reducing Costs: EIP-7702 streamlines the technical components and lowers the implementation costs, making Account Abstraction more accessible to both users and developers.

• Allow EOAs to temporarily adopt smart contract functionality, reducing the need for permanent wallet contracts, lowering Gas costs, and reducing dependence on EntryPoint or Bundlers.

• Improve Efficiency

• Introduce transaction type 0x 04 for batch processing of EOA operations, providing a more streamlined alternative to ERC-4337's UserOps.

• Optimize Infrastructure

• Limit smart contract code to the transaction execution scope, reducing reliance on alternative memory pools (alt mempools) and Bundlers, thereby simplifying the infrastructure.

• Empower Developers

• Integrate with ERC-4337 while providing a flexible, low-barrier upgrade path, enabling developers to more easily provide enhanced functionality for users.

ERC-4337 laid the foundation, but EIP-7702 will make smart wallets cheaper, simpler, and more user-friendly, accelerating the next wave of Web3 adoption.