MetaMask serves over 30 million active users with an eight-year track record, according to MetaMask disclosures. Phantom serves more than 15 million monthly active users across Solana, Ethereum, Polygon, Bitcoin, and Base, according to Phantom. The gap looks decisive on paper, yet Phantom’s user base has grown roughly 28 times since early 2023, while MetaMask’s headline figure has held flat for three years.
The data covers monthly users, swap fees, funding rounds, multi-chain coverage, revenue per dollar of volume, and the security incidents shaping each wallet’s reputation.
Key Takeaways
- Consensys raised a $450 million Series D led by ParaFi Capital at approximately a $7 billion valuation, with MetaMask surpassing 30 million monthly active users (more than 42% growth from four months earlier), according to Consensys.
- Phantom raised a $150 million Series C at a $3 billion valuation, co-led by Sequoia Capital and Paradigm, more than double its previous valuation, according to Phantom.
- Phantom served more than 15 million monthly active users across Solana, Ethereum, Polygon, Bitcoin, and Base at the time of the Series C announcement.
- MetaMask charges a 0.875% service fee on in-wallet swaps and bridge transactions, while Phantom charges a 0.85% in-app swap fee on select pairs.
- Phantom Wallet’s annualized fees reached $170.91 million with cumulative fees of $517.62 million, according to DefiLlama.
- Phantom’s assets under custody surpassed $25 billion, with weekly revenue peaking at $44 million and Phantom briefly outpacing MetaMask on annualized revenue mid-year.
- Address poisoning attacks targeted more than 17 million unique wallet addresses on Ethereum and BNB Chain between July 2022 and June 2024, with 6,633 confirmed cases and at least $83.8 million in losses, according to arXiv research.
Editor’s Choice
- Phantom raised $109 million in its Series B at a $1.2 billion valuation, growing from 40,000 users at Series A to 2.1 million by Series B, with about 100,000 new users per week, according to CEO Brandon Millman.
- Phantom processed approximately 850 million on-chain transactions in 2024 and facilitated over $20 billion in annual swap volume, ending the year with over 10 million monthly active users.
- MetaMask launched native Solana support, with every account now containing 3 addresses by default: one EVM, one Solana, and one Bitcoin.
- MetaMask rolled out native Bitcoin support following its July 2025 Solana launch, eliminating the need for separate wallets or wrapped tokens for more than 30 million monthly active users.
- MetaMask generated $8.75 in revenue per $1,000 in trading volume, slightly higher than Phantom’s $8.50, with Phantom accounting for approximately 35% of Solana’s total volume on high-activity days.
- Phantom served approximately 7 million monthly active users in February 2024, up from 600,000 a year earlier, a roughly 12x jump tracking Solana’s price recovery.
MetaMask Overview: The EVM Incumbent
MetaMask, owned by Consensys, became the world’s leading self-custodial wallet by surpassing 30 million monthly active users, more than 42% growth from four months earlier. EVM dApp connectivity defined the product for years and built a moat that competitors struggled to cross.
MetaMask still describes itself as a very safe choice with over 30 million active users and an eight-year track record, with default Blockaid security alerts that have prevented an estimated $5 billion in user losses since rollout. Native Bitcoin support arrived following the July 2025 Solana launch, removing the need for separate wallets or wrapped tokens to hold BTC for more than 30 million monthly active users. Across CoinLaw’s wallet and exchange coverage, the directional shift toward self-custody has accelerated after each major exchange failure, and MetaMask captured the EVM share of that migration first.
Phantom Overview: The Solana-Native Challenger
Phantom grew from 40,000 users at Series A to 2.1 million by Series B, onboarding about 100,000 users per week, according to CEO Brandon Millman. Phantom Technologies Inc. raised $150 million in its Series C at a $3 billion valuation, co-led by Sequoia Capital and Paradigm, with Millman targeting non-crypto-native consumers through simplified peer-to-peer payments.
At the Series C announcement, Phantom served more than 15 million monthly active users across Solana, Ethereum, Polygon, Bitcoin, and Base. Phantom’s positioning shifted toward a consumer finance app that happens to be self-custody.
Monthly Active Users: The Headline Gap
MetaMask reports over 30 million monthly active users with an eight-year track record. Phantom reports more than 15 million monthly active users across five chains as of its Series C announcement.
The growth trajectory diverges sharply on a longer view: Phantom served approximately 7 million monthly active users in February 2024, up from 600,000 a year earlier, a roughly 12x year-over-year jump that tracked Solana’s price recovery from $11 in late 2022 to around $115 in February 2024. Phantom ended 2024 with over 10 million monthly active users, having processed approximately 850 million on-chain transactions and facilitated over $20 billion in annual swap volume during the year.
Key finding: According to Phantom Technologies, the wallet served more than 15 million monthly active users at its January 2025 Series C close, up from over 10 million at the 2024 year-end. The five-chain coverage, including Solana, Ethereum, Polygon, Bitcoin, and Base, sat behind that growth.
Whether MetaMask’s user base has grown without disclosure or plateaued at thirty million is the open question for the EVM-versus-multichain wallet race.
Funding and Valuation Trajectory
Consensys closed a $450 million Series D led by ParaFi Capital, with participation from Temasek, SoftBank Vision Fund 2, Microsoft, Anthos Capital, Sound Ventures, and C Ventures, valuing the company at approximately $7 billion. That round included MetaMask in its investment thesis but funded the broader Consensys stack, including Infura.
Phantom raised $109 million in its Series B led by Paradigm at a $1.2 billion valuation, with Andreessen Horowitz, Variant, Solana Ventures, and Jump Capital also participating. Phantom Technologies Inc. raised a $150 million in Series C funding at a $3 billion valuation, co-led by Sequoia Capital and Paradigm, more than double its prior valuation.
| Round | MetaMask (Consensys) | Phantom (Phantom Technologies) |
| Latest valuation | $7 billion (Series D, Mar 2022) | $3 billion (Series C, Jan 2025) |
| Latest raise | $450 million | $150 million |
| Lead investor | ParaFi Capital | Sequoia Capital + Paradigm |
| Notable backers | Temasek, SoftBank, Microsoft | a16z crypto, Variant |
Source: Consensys, Phantom Technologies, Bloomberg
The valuation gap narrows when adjusting for scope: Consensys funds Infura, Linea, and MetaMask, while Phantom is wallet-only.
Supported Chains and Multi-Chain Strategy
MetaMask launched native Solana support, with every account containing one EVM address, one Solana address, and one Bitcoin address by default. Bitcoin support followed, letting users buy Bitcoin with fiat, make on-chain Bitcoin transfers, and swap between BTC, EVM-native assets, and SOL without separate wallets.
Phantom launched public multichain support for Ethereum and Polygon, expanding from Solana-only to three-chain coverage in one app. Phantom expanded to Base in 2024 and added Bitcoin Ordinals and BRC-20 in late 2023, joining its existing Solana, Ethereum, and Polygon networks.
Worth noting: according to MetaMask, every wallet account now includes one EVM address, one Solana address, and one Bitcoin address by default, with more networks expected in subsequent releases. Phantom shipped Ethereum and Polygon support in April 2023 and added Bitcoin Ordinals plus BRC-20 coverage in late 2023.
| Chain or feature | MetaMask ship date | Phantom ship date |
| EVM (Ethereum + L2s) | Native since launch | April 2023 |
| Solana native | July 2025 | Native since launch |
| Bitcoin native | H2 2025 (post-July) | December 2023 |
| Polygon native | EVM-covered | April 2023 |
| Base native | EVM-covered | 2024 |
| Bitcoin Ordinals / BRC-20 | Not supported | Late 2023 |
Source: MetaMask, Phantom
Multi-chain breadth, not feature parity on Ethereum, has become the wallet category’s defining axis.
Transaction Fees and Swap Costs
MetaMask applies a 0.875% service fee on all in-wallet swaps and bridge transactions executed through its built-in aggregator. Phantom charges a slightly lower 0.85% on in-app swaps for select pairs, with cross-chain bridges adding a roughly 0.3% bridge provider fee plus gas on both source and destination chains.
Network gas fees on Ethereum can reach $5 to $50 per transaction during peak demand, while Solana gas typically costs less than $0.01 per transaction. The headline swap-fee gap between MetaMask and Phantom sits at 2.5 basis points in Phantom’s favor, small enough that the underlying network fee differential, which can be three to four orders of magnitude on Ethereum versus Solana, dominates the all-in cost for most users.
Browser Extension and Mobile App Footprint
MetaMask describes itself as a very safe choice with over 30 million active users and an eight-year track record across the Chrome extension, iOS, and Android. Phantom processed approximately 850 million on-chain transactions across all its surfaces in 2024, with an install base sufficient to support over 10 million monthly active users by year-end.
Both wallets ship as a Chrome extension plus iOS and Android apps. Phantom’s mobile-first onboarding and peer-to-peer payments sit closer to the consumer finance app category, while MetaMask’s mobile experience still leans on the extension’s dApp-connection mental model. Neither company publishes monthly extension installs alongside MAU.
Revenue and Annualized Fees
Phantom Wallet generated annualized fees of $170.91 million with cumulative fees of $517.62 million as tracked by DefiLlama, plus 30-day fees of $14.01 million and 24-hour fees of $469,059. Combined with Phantom Perps, the total Phantom protocol annualized revenue reaches approximately $268.2 million.
MetaMask generated $8.75 in revenue per $1,000 in trading volume, slightly higher than Phantom’s $8.50 at the same point. Phantom accounted for approximately 35% of Solana’s total volume on high-activity days, and Phantom’s assets under custody surpassed $25 billion, with weekly revenue peaking at $44 million and Phantom’s annual income briefly surpassing MetaMask.
By the numbers: according to DefiLlama, Phantom Wallet’s annualized fees stood at $170.91 million with cumulative fees of $517.62 million since launch, plus 30-day fees of $14.01 million and 24-hour fees of $469,059. Combined with the perpetual futures product, total Phantom protocol annualized revenue reaches approximately $268.2 million.
Solana fee economics, where users transact frequently because gas is negligible, generate more swap revenue per active user than the Ethereum mainnet model.
The Solana Surge Effect
Phantom reported approximately 7 million monthly active users in February 2024, up from 600,000 a year earlier, a roughly 12x year-over-year jump that closely tracked Solana’s network revival, including the Jupiter and Jito airdrops, the rise of Bonk and other memecoins, and a recovery in SOL price from $11 in late 2022 to around $115 in February 2024.
Phantom processed approximately 850 million on-chain transactions and facilitated over $20 billion in annual swap volume during 2024, ending the year with over 10 million monthly active users. Phantom then climbed to more than 15 million monthly active users at the Series C close.
Phantom accounts for approximately 35% of Solana’s total volume on high-activity days. The wallet adoption gap mapped onto Solana ecosystem activity, not onto a wallet feature shipping calendar.
Security Incidents and Address-Poisoning Risk
Academic research from arXiv identified approximately 270 million on-chain address poisoning attempts targeting more than 17 million unique wallet addresses on Ethereum and BNB Chain between July 2022 and June 2024, with 6,633 confirmed successful attacks resulting in at least $83.8 million in losses. A crypto trader lost $50 million in a single address poisoning attack, the most recent in a pattern that included an estimated $68 million wrapped Bitcoin loss in May 2024 from the same technique.
MetaMask notes that address poisoning continues to be one of the most reported scam types affecting users in 2024 and 2025, with default security alerts powered by Blockaid screening transactions in real time and preventing an estimated $5 billion in user losses since rollout. Phantom has not been named in the major address-poisoning incident reports, partly because Solana’s address format is visually distinct from EVM addresses, making spoofing harder.
| Security signal | MetaMask | Phantom |
| Default transaction screening | Blockaid alerts (real-time) | Not separately disclosed |
| Estimated losses prevented | ~$5 billion since rollout | Not separately disclosed |
| Named in major poisoning reports | Yes (Ethereum + BNB Chain) | Not named in major reports |
| Address-format spoofing exposure | Higher (EVM hex visually similar) | Lower (Solana base58 distinct) |
| Track record | Eight years | Founded 2021 |
Source: MetaMask, arXiv research, Phantom
Head-to-Head Comparison Table
MetaMask edges Phantom on revenue per $1,000 in trading volume at $8.75 to $8.50, while Phantom captures approximately 35% of Solana’s total volume on high-activity days, according to DefiLlama and protocol-revenue data. The full per-dimension breakdown sits below.
Verdict by Use Case
MetaMask wins on EVM dApp depth, while Phantom wins on Solana-native flow with approximately 35% of Solana volume on high-activity days. Each verdict below pairs the use case with the wallet that fits per the data tracked across the comparison, so you can match your primary chain and trading frequency to the right default.
- Ethereum-first DeFi: MetaMask wins for your EVM-native workflow, given its dApp integration and Blockaid alerts that prevented an estimated $5 billion in user losses.
- Solana ecosystem activity: Phantom wins if you trade on Solana, given approximately 35% of Solana volume on high-activity days.
- Cross-chain breadth: Phantom wins if you need broad coverage out of the box, given Base support added in 2024, plus Bitcoin Ordinals and BRC-20 in late 2023.
- Institutional or enterprise dApp builders: MetaMask wins, given Consensys’s broader stack including Infura and Linea.
- Cost-sensitive frequent traders: Phantom on Solana, where your gas costs are typically less than $0.01 per transaction versus Ethereum’s $5 to $50 at peak.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
MetaMask leads with over 30 million monthly active users. Phantom serves more than 15 million monthly active users across Solana, Ethereum, Polygon, Bitcoin, and Base. Phantom grew from 600,000 monthly active users to approximately 7 million in just one year, a roughly 12x jump tracking Solana’s price recovery.
Yes, both are self-custodial. Users hold their own private keys and recovery phrases on their own devices. Neither company can access user funds, freeze accounts, or recover lost seed phrases on a user’s behalf, which distinguishes both wallets from custodial exchange accounts.
MetaMask supports all EVM chains, plus native Solana support added in July 2025 and native Bitcoin support added in H2 2025. Phantom supports Solana, Ethereum, Polygon, Bitcoin, and Base, having expanded multi-chain coverage with Base in 2024 and Bitcoin Ordinals and BRC-20 in late 2023.
Phantom has a slightly lower in-app swap fee at 0.85% versus MetaMask’s 0.875%. Network gas dwarfs the swap-fee gap: Solana transactions cost less than $0.01 while Ethereum gas can run from $5 to $50 during peak demand.
Phantom Wallet’s annualized fees stood at $170.91 million, with cumulative fees of $517.62 million, combined with Phantom Perps reaching approximately $268.2 million in total protocol annualized revenue. MetaMask generated $8.75 in revenue per $1,000 in trading volume versus Phantom’s $8.50.
Address poisoning incidents targeted more than 17 million wallet addresses across Ethereum and BNB Chain, with 6,633 confirmed cases and at least $83.8 million in losses. Recent self-custody wallet losses from address poisoning include a $50 million trader loss and an estimated $68 million wrapped Bitcoin loss in May 2024. Phantom has not been named in major address-poisoning incident reports, partly because Solana addresses are visually distinct from EVM addresses.
Conclusion
MetaMask still serves over 30 million monthly active users with an eight-year track record. Phantom climbed to more than 15 million monthly active users across Solana, Ethereum, Polygon, Bitcoin, and Base. Phantom Technologies Inc. raised $150 million at a $3 billion valuation, co-led by Sequoia Capital and Paradigm. Phantom Wallet generated annualized fees of $170.91 million as tracked by DefiLlama. Phantom’s weekly revenue peaked at $44 million during high-activity periods.
MetaMask remains the default if your activity sits on Ethereum and EVM L2s, while Phantom fits if your trading is Solana-native. Both wallets now ship cross-chain coverage, though Phantom shipped earlier, so your choice between the two increasingly hinges on which chain you transact on most.
