ERC-4337 Gas Fees: A Comparative Analysis of dEOAs and ERC-4337
The ERC-4337 standard, also known as “account abstraction,” simplifies user onboarding and interaction with the Ethereum network1. However, a crucial factor to consider when evaluating the effectiveness of this standard is the associated gas fees. This article will delve into an analysis of the gas fees associated with ERC-4337, comparing it with Distributed Externally-Owned Accounts (dEOAs) as proposed by INTU2.
Understanding ERC-4337 and Gas Fees
ERC-4337 allows users to interact with the Ethereum network without understanding the complexities of seed phrases, private keys, or transaction signing1. This standard is expected to enhance mainstream adoption by making crypto more user-friendly1. However, one of the potential drawbacks of this standard is the associated gas fees.
Gas fees on the Ethereum network are essentially transaction fees paid by users to miners for processing their transactions. In the case of ERC-4337, the gas fee is calculated based on the computational effort required to execute the transaction3. The fee is determined by the formula: fee = gas × price3.
According to data provided by Stackup3, creating an ERC-4337 account requires 385,266 gas, compared to zero gas for a traditional wallet. Moreover, a simple transfer using ERC-4337 requires 88,710 gas, while a traditional wallet only needs 21,000 gas. The significant difference in gas fees can be attributed to the fact that ERC-4337 transactions involve a contract call, while traditional wallet transactions do not.
It is important to note that on rollup-based networks such as Optimism and Arbitrum, the absolute difference in gas fees between ERC-4337 transactions and traditional wallet transactions is not as significant3. Nonetheless, the higher gas fees associated with ERC-4337 might deter users, especially those frequently interacting with the Ethereum network.
INTU’s Distributed Externally-Owned Accounts (dEOAs)
INTU proposes a different solution known as Distributed Externally-Owned Accounts (dEOAs). INTU provides Web3-native Externally-Owned Accounts (EOAs) with advanced functionality and usefulness, including account recovery, distributed ownership/risk, and secure account generation2.
The key advantage of dEOAs is that they use the same cryptographic infrastructure already in use by decentralized networks, such as external-user addressing, signature formation, transaction verification, etc2. This means that the gas fees associated with dEOAs are no different from other EOAs.
Comparative Analysis
When comparing the gas fees associated with ERC-4337 and dEOAs, it becomes evident that dEOAs offer a more cost-effective solution. The high gas fees associated with ERC-4337 could potentially deter users, particularly those who frequently interact with the Ethereum network.
Moreover, dEOAs maintain the same gas fees as traditional EOAs, making them a more affordable option for users. Furthermore, dEOAs offer additional benefits such as distributed ownership, secure account creation, and account recovery2, which are not currently available with traditional EOAs or ERC-4337.
Summary
While ERC-4337 represents a significant step forward in enhancing user experience on the Ethereum network, the associated gas fees could potentially limit its widespread adoption.
INTU’s dEOAs offer a promising alternative, providing advanced functionality at the same gas cost as traditional EOAs. As the blockchain industry continues to evolve, it will be interesting to see how these different solutions fare in terms of user adoption and overall impact on the Ethereum network.
:
Footnotes