Today, there are scores of crypto wallets, allowing users to store their private keys, keeping their crypto safe and accessible. More so, crypto wallets serve as a medium through which users send, receive, and spend cryptocurrencies. Meanwhile, there are different forms of crypto wallets. They include hosted wallets, non-custodial wallets, hardware wallets and a host of others. Investors determine the form of wallets to embrace based on what they intend to achieve with their crypto assets.
Occasioned by the sustainable growth ravaging the crypto sphere, numerous wallet service providers have emerged. Today, wallet service providers like Metamask, TrustWallet, others compete for patronage and loyalty of users in an evolving and volatile crypto sphere. The heavy competition amidst wallet service providers have, over time, created room for debate or comparison amidst their users. However, the article intends to focus on Metamask vs Trust Wallet, with great emphasis on their functionalities and potentials, thereby enlightening users on the best wallet for their respective requirement.
Nevertheless, it is imperative for every investor, trader, and other concerned body to embrace this content without sentiments. This piece is not devised to place one above the other or attribute preferential treatment to any of the wallet. It is only geared towards ensuring that readers understand the peculiarities of the wallets to make an informed decision. Therefore, consequential decision lies solely on the investor and not the responsibility of the author.
Metamask vs Trust Wallet: General Overview
To effectively do the Metamask vs Trust Wallet debate, it is necessary to do a backgrounds of both projects.
Starting with Metamask, the crypto wallet was founded by Aaron Davis in 2016. It runs as a browser extension, availing crypto wallet services to varieties of crypto users. Metamask connects to the Ethereum blockchain, thereby allowing its users to interact with the Ethereum ecosystem. It stores tokens, built on the ERC-20 and ERC-721 mechanisms of the network. As designed, Metamask is compatible numerous browsers, including Chrome, Brave, Firefox, and Microsoft Edge.
According to findings, Metamask started as a desktop browser plugin for Firefox and Chrome. However, in late 2020, its mobile application for Android and iOS-powered mobile devices were unveiled. Today, Metamask as a crypto wallet boasts of millions of active users, after recording 400,000 before 2020. Worth noting that the persistent increase in its active users is not unconnected to the fact that it offers “top-of-the-line features and functionalities in terms of security and design.” Additionally, the wallet enables users to link multiple wallets, switching between the Ethereum mainnet, major testnets, and many others.
In a bid to improve its offering, Metamask has continued to engage in numerous partnerships. Recently, it collaborated with Sardine, a financial platform offering instant ACH settlements to allow its users the U.S buy cryptocurrencies with their bank accounts through the wallet’s UI. However, for users to use the new “Instant ACH” payments option, they must comply with Sardine’s mandatory KYC process. Also, the crypto wallet also collaborated Asset Reality to help users recover their stolen cryptocurrencies for free.
Still on Metamask vs Trust Wallet debate, it is also essential to do a background check on Trust wallet here. As a mobile wallet, it allows users to store their digital assets in BEP2, ERC20 and ERC721 standards. This thus means Trust wallet is not only compatible with Ethereum, but with other chains. It runs as a secure, open-source, and decentralized crypto wallet, allowing access to over 20,000 Ethereum-based and EVM-Compatible tokens, 63 blockchains, and over one million crypto assets.
Founded in 2017 by Viktor Radchenko, Trust wallet has grown to become one of the leading crypto wallets in the sphere, with over thirty million downloads. It enjoys this feat owing to its attractive features. With Trust wallet, users have full control over their seed phrase. More so, it avails a more secure approaches to storing crypto assets and unleashing transactions. It also posseses an inbuilt DApp browser which allows users to interact dApps without having to leave the wallet.
Notably, Trust wallet, has also in recent times, embarked on numerous integrations to aid its offering. Recently, it integrated Pix, a Brazilian payment method to enables its users in Brazil to easily and instantly buy crypto directly on Trust Wallet. More so, in July, it successfully integrated Polygon NFTs into its platform. This thus allow users to trade Polygon NFTs on Trust wallet.
Metamask vs Trust Wallet: Native Tokens
For the purpose of Metamask vs Trust wallet debate, it is necessary to look into their native tokens. Notably, while Trust Wallet has already established its native token, Metamask is still looking forward to doing same anytime soon. Recall that in March, the project through its head of operations announced plans to launch a native token as well as the Metamask DAO soon. The official wants users to look forward to the unveiling of the token, stressing that the one circulating around as Metamask native token is fake.
As for Trust wallet, its native token, identified as TWT runs as a governance token, allowing holders to vote and propose new upgrades, features for the project. Reportedly, the token runs as a BEP-20 token on BNB Smart Chain and as a BEP-2 token on BNB Beacon Chain. It has a maximum supply of 1,000,000,000 TWT.
By virtue of this, users who see participation in projects’ governance as a priority may opt for Trust wallet. This is because Metamask is yet to unveil or release the date in which it intends to unveil its native token and DAO yet. But Trust wallet, on the other hand, has an established native token already, allowing users to participate in its governance.
Metamask vs Trust Wallet: Accessibility
Indeed, an assessment of the accessibility of both projects is necessary in this Metamask vs Trust Wallet debate. Notably, Metamask operates as a browser extension and mobile app, thereby allowing users to pick its form that is convenient to them. Trust wallet on the other hand runs on IoS and Android devices. Unlike Metamask, it cannot be accessed through web browser, but by downloading its app on their devices.
Based on the aforementioned, it is not an overstatement to say both Metamask and Trust wallet are easily accessible. But, Metamask seems more accessible owing to the fact that users can access it in two different ways. Users can use Metamask on their desktops. Meanwhile, Trust Wallet isn’t accessible through a web browser. With this, they are able to pick the access method that is convenient to them. Users can only use Trust wallets on their mobile phones, either IOS or Android devices.
Fees, user-friendly and compatibility with hardware wallet
As decentralized wallet providers, both Metamask and Trust wallet don’t charge platform fees for users. Though, users are mandated to pay for on-blockchain transactions. In this aspect of the Metamask vs Trust wallet, the comparison is tied. This is because the two wallet doesn’t charge users for using their platform. Making them totally free to use. So, if users are putting platform charges into consideration, the two wallets are good options to explore. Leaving the user with the final decision to make, therefore making this segment a tie.
Furthermore, it’s easy to set up accounts with both Metamask and Trust wallet. Undoubtedly, the two wallet provider share many similarities, and this aspect reflects it. In its user-friendliness, both Metamask and Trust wallets are tied. However, a major shortcomings that’s militating against Trust Wallet is that it’s not compatible with hardware wallets. While Metamask, on the other hand, is compatible with hardware wallets. Meanwhile, users who are seeking a wallet that’s compatible with hardware wallets can turn to Metamask.
The decentralized nature of both Metamask and Trust Wallet doesn’t facilitate the direct purchase of cryptocurrency on their platform. The two wallets rely on third parties like Apple Pay and MoonPay to purchase cryptocurrency. Unlike their centralized counterparts, Metamask and Trust wallet don’t have a Peer-to-Peer feature on their platform. Thus, limiting users to purchasing crypto from these third party.
Including a P2P feature on many centralized crypto exchanges and wallet providers aids users in trading cryptocurrency between themselves. Since this feature is missing on both wallets, it’s fair to say that it’s a tie in their aspect of the comparison. P2P or Peer-to-Peer is a feature that aids users to trade assets directly between themselves. With the feature, the cryptocurrency exchange or wallet provider serves as a third party.
Notably, Trust wallet came into existence to mainly support ERC20 tokens. So far, the wallet has expanded its horizons to support other assets across over 33 blockchains. However, Metamask still maintains its the orthodox approach of only embracing ERC20 tokens.
In this segment of Metamask vs Trust Wallet comparison, the latter comes out top because it supports more assets than the former. Though Users can store BTC or other coins on Metamask, the option doesn’t come straight. To keep BTC, the user must first wrap derivatives as WBTC. Therefore, making Trust Wallet more ideal to use if users are willing to invest in tokens outside the Ethereum blockchain.
Seed Phrase and giving users absolute control
It’s imperative to note that the Metamask vs Trust Wallet comparison remains dominated by their decentralized nature. Offering investors a high degree of control over their assets. Unlike centralized wallets or exchanges, both Metamask and Trust Wallet leaves users in sole control of their assets.
In this regard, the two wallets don’t store users’ data. For instance, Binance, like other centralized wallet provider, usually mandates that users register with some private information. The mandatory requirement reflects the heavy rules and policies of centralized wallet providers. However, Metamask and Trust Wallet do not have heavy internal policies. The two do not support two-factor authentication. Two-factor authentication is a system centralized exchanges employ to aid users to use a second verification method for their wallets.
Instead of a Two-factor authentication, both Metamask and Trust Wallet use seed phrases. These seed phrases helps users to protect access to their wallet. A recovery phrase, also known as a seed phrase, is a series of words provided by a cryptocurrency wallet that gives you access to assets in a wallet. With that, both Metamask and Trust Wallet emphasize the libertarian posture of cryptocurrency. Typically, a user doesn’t have to provide their identity before accessing their assets, but this policy is an alien to centralized wallets. A posture Metamask, Trust Wallet, and other decentralized wallets were established to correct.
In this segment, Trust wallet comes out top. Due to its features on NFTs, Trust wallet aids users to buy, sell and exchange NFTs. However, Metamask only provides a wallet for users to keep their NFTs. Without a doubt, Trust Wallet is a good option for users that crazes for a wallet that can help store their cryptocurrency and NFT at the same time.
In the Metamask vs Trust Wallet comparison, the latter comes out top due to some of its exclusive features. While this article isn’t aimed at downgrading one for the other, yet it’s aimed at examining the best to use.
Nevertheless, users reserve the absolute decision to determine the one that best suits their preference. However, Trust Wallet’s tendency to support numerous blockchains and its support for the storage of more than 250,000 virtual assets. This feature gives it a strong edge over Metamask because Trust Wallet gives users to explore and manage numerous assets.
Trust Wallet as well has an in-built exchange feature that aids users in purchasing cryptocurrency with a card. Though Metamask has a good security mechanism, in comparison with Trust Wallet, Metamask has some significant shortcomings. Also, Trust Wallet is more suitable for users who want a non-custodial wallet that supports more blockchain and is user-friendly.
It’s imperative to note that the two wallets are easy to use, notwithstanding, Trust wallet is more friendly. This is because it’s attached to more third-party exchanges and cryptocurrency. Also, Metamask relies on Decentralized exchanges to facilitate the swapping of assets. Lastly, Trust wallet is fast growing in prominence because it’s attracting more users due to its user-friendly interface.