Smart contracts are a developer abstraction, not a user abstraction. They expose raw blockchain complexity—gas, nonces, approvals—directly to the end-user, creating a friction wall that limits adoption to the technically proficient.
e-commerce-and-crypto-payments-future
Blog
Why UserOps Are More Important Than Smart Contracts for UX
Smart contracts are the engine, but the UserOperation object is the steering wheel. For the future of e-commerce and payments, the atomic unit of user experience has shifted from contract calls to intent declarations.
introduction
THE UX IMPERATIVE
Introduction
Smart contracts define what is possible, but user operations define what is practical for mass adoption.
User operations (UserOps) are the missing UX layer. They abstract execution into declarative intents, letting users specify what they want (e.g., 'swap X for Y at best price') while specialized infrastructure like ERC-4337 bundlers and solvers handle the how. This shifts complexity from the client to the network.
The proof is in adoption. Protocols that prioritize intent-based flows, like UniswapX and CowSwap, demonstrate superior UX by batching, optimizing, and subsidizing transactions. The ERC-4337 standard has processed over 10 million UserOps, proving the model scales.
The infrastructure shift is complete. The competitive edge for applications no longer resides in smart contract innovation alone, but in the execution layer provided by networks like Stackup, Alchemy, and Biconomy that orchestrate UserOps.
thesis-statement
THE UX PARADIGM SHIFT
The Core Argument: Intent > Execution
The future of blockchain usability is defined by declarative user intents, not imperative smart contract calls.
Smart contracts are a developer abstraction, not a user one. They force users to understand gas, slippage, and transaction ordering, which are implementation details.
UserOps are a user abstraction. They let users declare a desired outcome (e.g., 'swap ETH for USDC at best rate'), delegating execution complexity to specialized solvers like UniswapX or CowSwap.
This inverts the UX model. Instead of users navigating a labyrinth of DEXs and bridges, intent-based systems like Across and LayerZero's Omnichain Fungible Tokens find the optimal path post-hoc.
Evidence: UniswapX handles over $10B in volume by abstracting MEV and cross-chain routing, proving users prioritize outcome over execution mechanics.
key-trends
FROM SMART CONTRACTS TO SMART USERS
The UX Revolution in Three Trends
The next billion users won't care about your contract's bytecode. They'll care about the experience. Here's where the battle is won.
01
The Problem: Gas Abstraction
Users shouldn't need native tokens to interact. Paying for a swap on Arbitrum with USDC on Polygon should be one click. ERC-4337 Account Abstraction and Paymasters make this possible by decoupling payment from execution.\n- Key Benefit: Onboarding from any chain, any asset.\n- Key Benefit: Sponsored transactions for seamless app entry.
~0
Native Gas
100%
Retention Boost
02
The Problem: Fragmented Liquidity
Finding the best price across dozens of DEXs and chains is a user's job. It shouldn't be. Intent-Based Architectures (like UniswapX, CowSwap, Across) let users declare what they want, not how to do it. Solvers compete to fulfill it optimally.\n- Key Benefit: ~5-15% better execution via MEV capture redirection.\n- Key Benefit: Single transaction for cross-chain swaps.
15%+
Better Price
1-Click
Cross-Chain
03
The Problem: Wallet Friction
Seed phrases, network switches, and approval pop-ups are conversion killers. Smart Accounts (ERC-4337) and embedded wallets (Privy, Dynamic) enable social logins, batch transactions, and session keys. The wallet becomes an invisible layer.\n- Key Benefit: ~60s to ~2s sign-up time.\n- Key Benefit: Atomic multi-op flows (e.g., swap, stake, vote).
30x
Faster Sign-Up
1 Tap
Complex Actions
THE INTENT-CENTRIC FUTURE
Smart Contract vs. UserOperation: A UX Paradigm Shift
Compares the traditional transaction model with the emerging intent-based paradigm, highlighting the shift in complexity from user to network.
| Core UX Dimension | Legacy Smart Contract Tx | ERC-4337 UserOperation | Solver Network (e.g., UniswapX) |
|---|---|---|---|
User's Required Input | Exact execution path, gas token, max fee | Declared end-state goal (intent) | Declared end-state goal (intent) |
Gas Abstraction | |||
Fee Payment Token | Native chain token (e.g., ETH) | Any ERC-20 token | Any ERC-20 token |
Cross-Chain Execution Complexity | User-managed (bridges, liquidity) | Bundler-managed via alt mempools | Solver-managed via off-chain auction |
Failed Tx Gas Cost | User pays (100% loss) | User does not pay (Paymaster covers) | User does not pay (Solver absorbs) |
Typical Latency to Finality | < 15 seconds | < 15 seconds | 2-60 seconds (varies by solver) |
Primary Innovation | Deterministic state transition | Decentralized account abstraction | Competitive off-chain order flow auction |
Representative Protocols | Uniswap V3, Aave | ERC-4337, Stackup, Alchemy | UniswapX, CowSwap, Across, Anoma |
deep-dive
THE UX SHIFT
How UserOps Unlock the Payment Future
UserOps abstract away blockchain complexity, making payments as simple as signing a message.
Smart contracts are infrastructure, not UX. They define rules, but UserOps define the user's intent. A smart contract is a static program; a UserOp is a dynamic, signed declaration of a desired outcome, like 'swap X for Y at the best rate across Uniswap and 1inch'.
The wallet becomes the application. With ERC-4337 and Account Abstraction, the user's smart contract wallet (like Safe or Biconomy) handles gas, bundling, and execution. The user only signs a single intent, unlocking batched, sponsored, and gasless transactions.
This enables intent-based commerce. Payment flows move from executing a series of contract calls to declaring a final state. Systems like UniswapX and CowSwap already use this pattern, outsourcing routing and execution to specialized solvers for optimal results.
Evidence: After implementing ERC-4337, Pimlico-powered bundlers process over 1 million UserOps monthly, with Paymaster gas sponsorship covering fees for 40% of those operations, proving the demand for abstracted UX.
counter-argument
THE WRONG ABSTRACTION
The Steelman: 'But Smart Contracts Are the Foundation!'
Smart contracts are a backend primitive; user operations are the frontend abstraction that defines modern UX.
Smart contracts are infrastructure, not interface. They are the deterministic backend. The user's experience is defined by the transaction flow they must navigate, which is the User Operation (UserOp).
The ERC-4337 standard formalizes this separation. It creates a higher-level object (the UserOp) that abstracts signature schemes, fee payments, and execution logic away from the core EVM. This enables account abstraction.
This abstraction enables intent-based systems. Projects like UniswapX and CowSwap don't execute on-chain swaps directly; they solve for user intents off-chain and settle results. The smart contract is just the final settlement layer.
Evidence: The proliferation of ERC-4337 bundlers and Paymasters (like those from Stackup, Biconomy) proves the market prioritizes flexible transaction construction over raw contract execution.
takeaways
USER-CENTRIC INFRASTRUCTURE
TL;DR for Busy Builders
Smart contracts define the rules, but UserOperations (UserOps) define the experience. The future is declarative, not imperative.
01
The Problem: The Gas Fee Nightmare
Users must hold native tokens, approve multiple transactions, and manually manage gas across chains. This kills onboarding and complex interactions.
- ~40% of DApp users abandon due to gas complexity.
- Multi-step DeFi actions require 5+ wallet pop-ups.
- Chain-specific gas locks users into liquidity silos.
-40%
Drop-off
5+
Pop-ups
02
The Solution: Account Abstraction (ERC-4337)
UserOps bundle intents into a single, gas-abstracted transaction. The user signs a message, and a Bundler handles execution and payment.
- Pay gas in any token via Paymasters (e.g., USDC).
- Batch multiple actions into one signature (like UniswapX).
- Enable social recovery & session keys for non-custodial security.
1-Click
Transactions
Any Token
Gas Payment
03
The Architecture: Bundlers & Paymasters
These are the new infrastructure primitives. Bundlers are the new block builders; Paymasters are the new gas stations.
- Bundlers (e.g., Stackup, Pimlico) compete on inclusion, driving down costs.
- Paymasters sponsor gas, enabling gasless onboarding and corporate billing.
- This creates a fee market for user experience, separate from L1 gas.
~500ms
Bundler Latency
$0
User Gas Cost
04
The Intent-Based Future (UniswapX, Across)
UserOps are the gateway to intent-centric architectures. Users declare what they want, solvers compete to fulfill it.
- UniswapX uses fillers to route across AMMs and private liquidity.
- Across uses relayers for optimized cross-chain swaps.
- This shifts competition from liquidity provision to execution quality.
10-30%
Better Price
Multi-Chain
Native
05
The Security Model: From Key Management to Policy
Security shifts from protecting a single private key to enforcing transaction policies. The smart account is the new security perimeter.
- Define spending limits & whitelists per session key.
- Multi-factor approvals for high-value transactions.
- Recovery via social circle without seed phrase vulnerabilities.
0
Seed Phrases
Policy-Based
Security
06
The Bottom Line for Builders
Integrating a UserOp stack (AA SDK, Bundler, Paymaster) is now a core UX requirement, not a nice-to-have.
- Onboarding conversion can increase by >300% with gasless tx.
- User retention improves with seamless cross-chain and batched actions.
- Your moat becomes the quality of the abstracted experience, not just your contract logic.
>300%
Onboarding Lift
UX Moat
Competitive Edge
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall