Smart Account Ecosystem Implications
1. AA adoption is starting but there is no breakout success case yet. Stars are aligning for the product-market-fit to happen.
The two biggest issues for onboarding a new user onto a dapp are that users typically do not have [i] a pre-configured wallet or [ii] an ability to pay for initial transactions. A breakout moment for [i] happened last year with mobile in-app onboarding with simple social login / verification (no “Connect Wallet” button) powered by application embedded MPC wallets (ex. Privy for FriendTech). The demand for [ii] is still percolating but we believe now is the time for AA to shine for a couple of reasons.
The biggest barrier to SCW adoption was gas cost (on ETH L1). With L2s the cost has come down significantly + SCW transactions can happen a lot more cheaply – but is still expensive at scale.
Developers are building consumer apps for the non-crypto-native user. As a result, the focus on onboarding matters a lot more.
Sponsorship for gas makes sense now because the recipient of transaction fees are the L2 teams themselves. For example – an L2 may be willing to sponsor gas for select dapps because they want to drive transaction fees for their underlying sequencer.
Orthogonal tech trends like Passkeys will benefit the Smart Account adoption. Passkeys (i.e. FaceID to create a wallet + sign transactions) is an additional tailwind for consumer UX.
We expect self-custodial wallets to explore Smart Accounts.
We expect product-market fit will be achieved when costs come down (EIP-7212, EIP-4844), the industry aligns around open-source standards (vs closed relayer models), case-studies for successful gas subsidy programs emerge, and there is willingness and budget from dapp developers to target and spend to acquire users.
2. AA enables the ability for developers to experiment with sponsored onboarding for a net new user – customer acquisition cost (CAC).
The first step of UX has been solved with the advent of L2s – cost of transactions / gas has significantly improved. The next step is for developers to enable AA because users now want seamless transactions.
The idea is once a user is onboarded, they will use the app and initiate the concept of lifetime value (LTV). So long as the LTV > CAC, it is worth it for the developer to explore the CAC (ex. $ of sponsored gas) enabled by AA. Any stakeholders that want to sponsor an onchain transaction can opt to do that action (whether an L2 or dapp).
Dapp POV: the hurdles to onboard a user from zero-to-one have been massively improved via embedded MPC wallets. AA should help complete the “first onchain transaction” bridge and ultimately lead to an instant onboarding experience (no gas cost for first X transactions, no “click per action” UX, no wallet set-up). Early examples are concepts like “Asset Led Onboarding” – where a dapp will provide a user with a Smart Account + sponsored gas / dust for the first 5 transactions, knowing that the dapp will make a break-even ROI on the 6th transaction.
L2 POV: L2 wants to drive users / activity / sequencer fees and is willing to spend “$X” in CAC for sponsored gas powered by AA. Examples include Linea Gas Pass.
3. AA is a first-mover advantage game and not uniquely differentiated from a technology perspective, but rather a GTM / use-case perspective.
Because the tech configurations are all open-source, there is not much technology differentiation in the Smart Account stack (Paymaster, Bundler, SCW). The differentiation is being in the leveraged position to decide on how to route the user transactions. For example, because each transaction can only have one Paymaster – it is up to the transaction orchestrator to decide.
The goal as an “AA” provider is similar to any developer platform, which is to own the relationship and sit between the user and the dapp. The thesis is that so long as a provider owns some piece of the relationship, they can find ways to get creative around monetization (e.g., tiered SaaS for dapp or volume-based revenue)
Outside of product positioning, the way to win is to define how to structure the “CAC” story for Smart Accounts. A Smart Account pitch might be to show the LTV/CAC story – “it costs users 1 cent to transact, but your dapp makes $3 on every trade.” For example, if a dapp was built with Smart Accounts, new users could transact instantly (no keys, no gas), with higher cost associated with SCWs (deployment, function calls, etc.), that would be offset and surpassed by blended lifetime value of new users.
4. AA may help bridge the prevailing narratives around “One Wallet per dapp” vs “Homepage for Web3.”
To date, self-custody wallets have been built towards the “homepage for web3” direction where you have one wallet to access every dapp (collect, own, send, receive, bridge, etc.)
The recent trend of web3 consumers is pointing in the direction of “one wallet per dapp” powered by MPC wallets. A user will download a mobile app, the key is provisioned and used in that dapp only. In the chance that a user is using the same embedded wallet provider (in the background) across multiple dapps, the embedded wallet provider is able to link wallets “offchain” based on the common data identifier and consolidate them to be shown as a single interface. For example, a user using the same email log-in across multiple dapps can see the consolidated view of the wallets across those dapps.
Smart Account architecture may help unify the above two threads by allowing delegation of key signing + tx orchestration across different wallets, assuming there is a safe + secure + simple way to “link” addresses together.
Self-custody wallets will be able to “link onchain” to other wallets that the user controls, and preserve the “homepage” interface experience while allowing the user to manage more than one wallet.
Embedded wallets allow users to “link offchain” but users are only in control of wallets on a per dapp basis. A user can export the embedded wallet keys and utilize AA to link those wallets onchain. This helps transition the embedded wallet consolidation from “link offchain” to “link onchain” which results in a global embedded wallet that the user controls.
That said, AA wallets are likely best suited for single network use cases. For dapps that allow multiple networks, the pain of having to deal with SCWs deployed to multiple networks may not be worth it. Today AA development and adoption is mostly EVM focused – but other networks like Solana are also investing into AA adoption (ex. Squads Protocol).
5. Smart Accounts are at an early stage but maturing every week.
The pieces of the “Smart Account” infrastructure are there but market timing is still a factor.
Standardization (ERC-4337) only happened earlier this year and L2s only started picking up mindshare in Q2-2023.
The norm for dapps is still to use self-custodial or MPC wallets (which are good enough) + the benefits are siloed by per dapp per sponsored tx per wallet. There needs to be a huge number of web3 onchain consumer apps that end up changing the consumer onboarding flow enabled by Smart Accounts from a “nice to have” to a “must have”. So far, while the concept of sponsorship enables “freemium” behavior for consumers, “freemium” behavior has not manifested en masse yet.
Passkeys still need to mature before implementing into Smart Accounts.
The top 3 consumer self-custodial wallets do not implement AA yet.
6. Standards are useful in bolstering AA adoption by making sure the ecosystem is aligned
Historically, many “sponsored gas” programs were being achieved by using custom offchain relayers. Without standards, many dapps would have followed this set-up and this would have led to a narrower path to adoption because each developer would need to adjust their set-up per use-case. Because the set-up is not generalizable, each contract would have needed to support the relayer (Relayer → Contract → User) and transactions could have broken since the contract caller is the relayer (and not the user).
Now that a standard has been set, ecosystem participants can align around how to build together. The jury is still out as to whether Smart Accounts will follow the ERC-4337 specification religiously, or if there will be modifiable plugins / specs (or even new EIPs), but the concept should follow some variant of the standard. Going forward, the main benefit is the standardized definition of the meta-transaction. This helps drive an industry-wide movement towards the benefits of Smart Accounts and creates a best practice for developers + infrastructure providers that handle it (e.g., a developer can choose between 10 different bundlers).