Gas is a UX tax that blocks mainstream adoption by forcing users to manage native tokens and approve unpredictable fees for every transaction.
account-abstraction-fixing-crypto-ux
Blog
The Future of Gas: Dynamic, Sponsored, and Invisible
Gas is shifting from a user-burden to a programmable backend resource. This analysis explores how paymasters, dynamic pricing, and business logic will redefine on-chain economics and user experience.
introduction
THE COST OF FRICTION
Introduction
Gas fees are the primary UX failure of blockchains, but a new stack is emerging to abstract them away.
The future is gas abstraction, where users sign intents for outcomes, not transactions, and a competitive solver network handles execution and payment, as pioneered by UniswapX and CowSwap.
Sponsored transactions and paymasters, like those enabled by ERC-4337 account abstraction, allow dApps to subsidize or pay fees in any token, making gas invisible to the end-user.
Evidence: Chains like Base and zkSync have seen over 5 million sponsored UserOperations, proving demand for fee-less onboarding and predictable cost structures.
key-trends
THE END OF GAS AS A USER PROBLEM
The Three Pillars of Gas Abstraction
Gas fees are the primary UX bottleneck. The future is a stack that makes them dynamic, sponsored, and invisible.
01
The Problem: Static Fees in a Dynamic World
Users pay for worst-case gas, not actual usage. This creates a ~30%+ overpayment on L2s and unpredictable costs during congestion.\n- Inefficient Capital: Users lock up excess ETH for safety.\n- Failed Transactions: Static estimates fail during mempool wars, wasting time and fees.
30%+
Overpayment
~15%
TX Fail Rate
02
The Solution: Dynamic Gas with EIP-4337 & AA
Account Abstraction enables gas estimation at execution time. Protocols like Starknet and zkSync bake this in, while Safe{Wallet} and Biconomy bring it to EVM.\n- Pay-As-You-Go: Fees deducted from the transaction's outcome.\n- Session Keys: One approval for multiple actions, amortizing cost.
EIP-4337
Standard
~0ms
Estimation Lag
03
The Problem: The Native Token Tax
Every new chain forces users to acquire its gas token. This fragments liquidity and creates a >60% drop-off for new users who must bridge or buy ETH/AVAX/SUI first.\n- Onboarding Friction: The "gas buy" step kills conversion.\n- Liquidity Silos: Capital trapped in gas tokens instead of productive assets.
>60%
User Drop-off
$5B+
Trapped Liquidity
04
The Solution: Sponsored Transactions & Paymasters
Dapps pay gas on behalf of users, a model proven by Polygon PoS and Avalanche. ERC-4337 Paymasters let users pay with any ERC-20 (e.g., USDC).\n- User Acquisition: Dapps absorb cost as marketing.\n- Currency Agnostic: Gas paid in the token you're already using.
ERC-4337
Paymaster
0
Native Token Needed
05
The Problem: The Wallet Pop-Up of Death
Every transaction requires a wallet confirmation and gas approval. This ~5-second interruption destroys flow-state for gamers and traders. Security is binary: full access or nothing.\n- Context Switching: Breaks application immersion.\n- All-or-Nothing Security: Can't delegate low-risk actions.
~5s
UX Delay
100%
Access Granted
06
The Solution: Invisible Gas & Intent-Based UX
Gas becomes a backend service. Users sign intents (e.g., "buy this NFT") and solvers like UniswapX and CowSwap handle execution and gas. Privy and Dynamic embed this in traditional UX.\n- Flow-State Preserved: No transaction pop-ups.\n- Optimized Execution: Solvers compete on price and speed.
UniswapX
Intent Pioneer
~500ms
To Signed Intent
deep-dive
THE FUTURE OF GAS
From Commodity to Service: The Paymaster Economy
Gas abstraction transforms transaction fees from a user-managed commodity into a protocol-sponsored service, unlocking new business models and user experiences.
Gas abstraction kills the wallet pop-up. Users no longer approve individual transaction fees, enabling seamless onboarding and predictable session-based pricing. This is the core promise of ERC-4337 Account Abstraction, which separates fee payment from transaction initiation.
Paymasters enable subsidy-as-a-service. Protocols like Pimlico and Biconomy operate paymaster networks that let dApps sponsor user gas fees. This creates a user acquisition cost model where protocols pay for growth, similar to web2 customer acquisition.
The business logic shifts on-chain. Paymasters execute conditional logic, allowing fees to be paid in any ERC-20 token or waived entirely for specific actions. This enables meta-transactions and complex sponsorship rules directly in smart contracts.
Evidence: Over 4.5 million UserOperations have been processed on Pimlico's Bundler network, demonstrating real demand for sponsored transaction infrastructure. This volume proves the paymaster economy is operational, not theoretical.
FROM STATIC TO ABSTRACTED
Gas Model Evolution: A Comparative Analysis
Comparison of gas fee models across three evolutionary stages, highlighting the trade-offs between user experience, protocol complexity, and economic security.
| Feature / Metric | Static (EVM Standard) | Sponsored (ERC-4337 / Paymasters) | Invisible (Intent-Based / Solver Networks) |
|---|---|---|---|
User Pays Gas Directly | |||
Gas Abstraction Layer | |||
Requires Native Token for Fees | |||
Fee Payment in Any ERC-20 | |||
Typical Fee Premium | 0% | 5-15% | 10-50% (solver bid) |
Primary Use Case | Direct transactions | Smart contract wallets (Safe, Argent) | Cross-chain swaps (UniswapX, Across), limit orders (CowSwap) |
Settlement Finality | Next block | Next block | 1-5 min (solver competition window) |
Key Infrastructure | RPC nodes, wallets | Bundlers, Paymaster contracts | Solvers, Intent Standard (ERC-7521), SUAVE |
Major Risk Vector | Wallet drainers | Paymaster censorship | Solver MEV, failed execution |
counter-argument
THE COST OF ABSTRACTION
The Centralization Trap and Economic Realities
Gas abstraction centralizes risk and creates unsustainable economic models that threaten protocol security.
Gas abstraction centralizes risk. Protocols like ERC-4337 Account Abstraction and Particle Network's intent-centric middleware shift transaction payment from users to centralized relayers or paymasters. This creates a single point of censorship and failure, directly contradicting blockchain's core value proposition.
Sponsored transactions create misaligned incentives. The 'paymaster' model externalizes costs, forcing protocols to subsidize user activity to compete. This leads to a winner-takes-most market where only the best-funded projects (or those with unsustainable token emissions) can afford user acquisition, stifling innovation.
The endpoint is the new battleground. Infrastructure like Alchemy's Bundler and Stackup's Paymaster Service will dominate, creating oligopolistic control over transaction flow. This replicates the extractive economics of Web2 cloud providers within decentralized networks.
Evidence: The Ethereum Foundation's ERC-4337 roadmap acknowledges this, with future upgrades focusing on decentralizing the bundler network to mitigate the systemic risk introduced by the abstraction layer itself.
protocol-spotlight
THE FUTURE OF GAS: DYNAMIC, SPONSORED, AND INVISIBLE
Architects of the New Gas Layer
Gas is the final UX frontier. The next wave of infrastructure abstracts its complexity, making transactions dynamic, sponsorable, and invisible to end-users.
01
The Problem: Static Gas Markets Are User-Hostile
Users face unpredictable fees and failed transactions due to volatile, opaque gas markets. This creates a terrible UX and stifles adoption.
- Key Benefit: Predictable costs via EIP-1559-style base fees and priority auctions.
- Key Benefit: ~99%+ reduction in failed transactions through dynamic fee estimation.
~99%
Tx Success
-70%
Fee Volatility
02
The Solution: Intent-Based Abstraction (UniswapX, CowSwap)
Users declare what they want, not how to execute. Solvers compete to fulfill the intent, abstracting away gas, slippage, and cross-chain complexity.
- Key Benefit: Gasless signatures for users; solvers pay gas.
- Key Benefit: $1B+ in settled volume demonstrating viable economic models.
$1B+
Settled Volume
0 Gas
User Pays
03
The Solution: Paymaster-Powered Sponsored Transactions
DApps or protocols can sponsor gas fees for their users, removing the final friction of needing the native token. This enables true onboarding.
- Key Benefit: ERC-4337 Account Abstraction enables flexible sponsorship logic.
- Key Benefit: ~50% increase in user conversion for onboarding flows.
~50%
Conversion Lift
ERC-4337
Standard
04
The Problem: Cross-Chain Gas is a Multi-Asset Nightmare
Bridging requires holding gas tokens on both source and destination chains. This fragments liquidity and creates a terrible multi-wallet experience.
- Key Benefit: Native gas abstraction via protocols like LayerZero's OFT and Axelar GMP.
- Key Benefit: Single-asset UX; pay for all chains with one token.
1 Token
All Chains
-90%
UX Friction
05
The Solution: Programmable Gas Policies (Gelato, Biconomy)
Infrastructure layers allow developers to set complex rules for who pays gas, when, and how. Gas becomes a programmable resource, not a user concern.
- Key Benefit: Conditional sponsorship (e.g., free tx for first-timers).
- Key Benefit: Relay network with ~300ms execution latency for meta-transactions.
~300ms
Relay Latency
100%
Policy Control
06
The Endgame: Invisible Gas as a Competitive Moat
The winning L2s and dApps won't have the cheapest gas; they'll have no user-visible gas at all. Gas cost becomes a backend operational expense, absorbed into product economics.
- Key Benefit: Mass-market UX indistinguishable from Web2.
- Key Benefit: Protocol-owned liquidity from sequencer/MEV revenue can fund the subsidy, creating a flywheel.
0 Friction
User UX
Flywheel
Economic Moat
risk-analysis
THE FUTURE OF GAS
Execution Risks and Failure Modes
The static, user-paid gas model is a UX dead end. The next evolution shifts risk and execution complexity off-chain, creating new failure modes.
01
The MEV-Captive Wallet
Sponsored transaction models like Pimlico's Account Abstraction Bundler or Ethereum's PBS rely on searchers/validators to pay fees. The risk is wallet logic becoming optimized for extractable value, not user intent.
- Centralization Vector: Wallets may route to the highest-bidding, not most reliable, block builder.
- Censorship Risk: Transactions without MEV potential may be ignored or delayed indefinitely.
- Opaque Subsidy: Users trade upfront cost for loss of transaction neutrality.
~90%
of Blocks
0 Gas
User Cost
02
Solver Insolvency in Intent-Based Flow
Systems like UniswapX, CowSwap, and Across use solvers to fulfill user intents off-chain. The core failure mode is solver capital inadequacy during volatility.
- Liquidation Cascade: A major solver defaulting can trigger a liquidity crisis across the intent ecosystem.
- Adversarial Filling: Malicious solvers can front-run or poorly execute orders if economic security is weak.
- Fallback Latency: Reverting to on-chain execution adds ~30+ seconds of lag, breaking UX promises.
$100M+
Solver TVL
<1s Target
Failover Time
03
Verification Fragmentation in Cross-Chain Gas
Universal gas abstractions (LayerZero, Circle's CCTP) hide destination chain fees. The risk moves from payment to state verification. A failure in the relayer or oracle network bricks the transaction.
- Single Point of Failure: Most 'gasless' cross-chain bridges rely on a small set of attestors.
- Unpredictable Cost: The sponsoring entity may price-gouge during congestion, hidden from the user.
- State Inconsistency: A successful source chain tx with a failed destination execution creates orphaned funds.
5/8
Attestor Threshold
∞
Hidden Cost
04
The Subsidy Time Bomb
Protocols like Polygon's Gasless or Base's Onchain Summer sponsor fees to drive adoption. This creates unsustainable economic models and centralizes transaction filtering.
- Budget Exhaustion: When subsidies end, user activity collapses, revealing faux product-market fit.
- Whitelist Censorship: Sponsors control which contract calls are allowed, stifling innovation.
- Economic Attack: Adversaries can drain the subsidy pool with spam, costing protocols millions.
$50M+
Subsidy Pools
-100%
Post-Subsidy
05
Smart Account Lock-In
ERC-4337 smart accounts enable gas sponsorship and batched transactions. The risk is vendor lock-in at the bundler or paymaster level, creating new central points of control.
- Bundler Censorship: If your chosen bundler (e.g., Stackup, Alchemy) goes down, your wallet is unusable.
- Paymaster Rug: A malicious or faulty paymaster can drain user funds or revert critical transactions.
- Portability Loss: Moving a smart account between service providers is non-trivial, unlike EOAs.
5 Major
Bundler Providers
High
Switch Cost
06
Regulatory Blowback on 'Free' Transactions
When gas is abstracted, the payment flow becomes opaque. Regulators may classify sponsored transactions as money transmission or securities issuance, targeting the sponsoring entity.
- KYC/AML on Wallets: Sponsors may be forced to implement identity checks on all users, breaking pseudonymity.
- Liability Shift: The protocol or dApp, not the user, becomes legally responsible for transaction content.
- Innovation Chill: The threat of enforcement will push development to jurisdictions with unclear rules.
Global
Jurisdiction Risk
TBD
Legal Precedent
future-outlook
THE GAS
The Invisible Engine: Predictions for 2024-2025
Gas fees will evolve from a user-facing tax into a dynamic, sponsored, and invisible infrastructure cost.
Gas abstraction becomes standard. Users will stop paying gas directly. Protocols like Pimlico and Biconomy will embed sponsored transactions, making gas a backend cost for applications. This mirrors the transition from per-minute internet billing to flat-rate SaaS models.
Dynamic fee markets fragment. The monolithic gas market will split. EIP-4844 blob fees for L2s, priority fees for MEV, and execution fees for L1 will operate independently. This creates arbitrage opportunities for bundlers and specialized validators.
Account abstraction enables intent-based routing. Wallets like Safe and Argent will use ERC-4337 to submit user intents. Solvers on networks like EigenLayer or Espresso will compete to fulfill them at the lowest total cost, abstracting chain selection.
Evidence: Over 60% of transactions on Polygon PoS already use gas sponsorship. The proliferation of L2s like Arbitrum and zkSync forces this abstraction, as users refuse to manage 10 different native tokens for gas.
takeaways
THE FUTURE OF GAS
TL;DR for Busy Builders
Gas is evolving from a user-hostile tax into a strategic, abstracted layer for protocol growth and UX.
01
The Problem: User Friction is a Protocol Killer
Native token gas fees create an insurmountable onboarding wall, capping TAM and killing session-based interactions like gaming. The solution is Gas Sponsorship via paymasters like Biconomy and Gelato.\n- Key Benefit: Users pay in any ERC-20 token (or nothing).\n- Key Benefit: Protocols subsidize fees to acquire users, turning cost into a growth lever.
~90%
Onboard Faster
$0
User Cost
02
The Solution: Account Abstraction is the New Standard
Externally Owned Accounts (EOAs) are primitive, forcing users to manage seed phrases and pre-fund networks. ERC-4337 Bundlers and Smart Accounts (Safe, ZeroDev) abstract this complexity.\n- Key Benefit: Social Recovery and session keys enable seamless, secure UX.\n- Key Benefit: Atomic multi-op bundles enable complex intents without intermediate failures.
ERC-4337
Standard
1-Click
Transactions
03
The Endgame: Gas as an Invisible Utility
The final evolution removes gas from user consciousness entirely, baked into the application layer. This is the domain of Intent-Based Architectures (UniswapX, CowSwap) and Unified Liquidity Layers (Across, LayerZero).\n- Key Benefit: Users sign what they want, not how to do it.\n- Key Benefit: Solvers compete on execution, absorbing gas volatility and optimizing for best final outcome.
Dynamic
Pricing
Invisible
To User
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