WalletConnect has long underpinned much of Web3’s usability: enabling secure interactions between wallets and dApps without sacrificing decentralization or user control. The introduction of WCT (WalletConnect Token) in 2025 marks a strategic evolution: formalizing incentive alignment, forging a governance model, and granting stakeholders an on-chain voice in the protocol’s trajectory.
This article lays out the history, mechanics, economics, risks, and strategic implications. I
1. Origins & Rationale: Why WalletConnect Needs a Token
The problem space
From the earliest days, WalletConnect solved a UX and security problem: letting users interact with dApps without surrendering private keys, and letting wallets (on mobile or elsewhere) connect to arbitrarily hosted dApps. But protocols without explicit incentive structures face recurring issues:
Under-investment in infra (relayers, SDKs, cross-chain bridges, security)
Misalignment between users, builders, and maintainers
Centralization pressure (if one party is bearing most of the risk / cost)
Difficulty scaling governance or reacting to edge-cases (regulatory, cross-chain, performance)
Strategic timing
By 2025, WalletConnect had already achieved wide adoption. Many wallets, many dApps, many users. The challenge was less “build awareness” and more “build durability.” A token is the lever that lets you:
Anchor incentive design to usage rather than speculation
Distribute ownership and influence
Fund ongoing development without depending purely on grants or venture capital
Create commitment bonds for infrastructure actors (relayers, wallets)
In short: WCT is designed not just as “another token” but as the connective tissue that helps sync the different parts of the WalletConnect ecosystem — users, wallets, apps, relayers, builders, and governance.
2. Token Fundamentals — Supply, Schedule, Structure
The WalletConnect Token (WCT) has a clearly defined total supply of 1 billion tokens, which forms the backbone of its economic design. At launch, the circulating supply was roughly 180 to 200 million WCT, with additional tokens gradually released over time according to pre-defined vesting and allocation schedules. This phased release ensures that the market is not flooded with tokens all at once, helping maintain price stability and aligning long-term incentives for stakeholders.
WCT’s token structure is divided into multiple allocation categories to serve different purposes. A substantial portion is reserved for community incentives and usage rewards, designed to encourage active adoption of WalletConnect’s platform and reward users who engage with its features. Another significant allocation is dedicated to developer and ecosystem grants, aimed at funding SDK improvements, cross-chain integrations, and other enhancements that strengthen the protocol’s functionality.
The team and advisors allocation is subject to multi-year vesting schedules with cliffs, ensuring that the core contributors remain aligned with the protocol’s long-term goals. Similarly, tokens earmarked for ecosystem growth or strategic reserves are carefully controlled, typically released based on milestones or governance-approved schedules, to prevent sudden supply shocks and support sustainable development.
Lastly, WCT incorporates mechanisms to support staking and infrastructure incentives, where tokens are allocated to relayers or other protocol participants who contribute to network performance and security. These allocations not only incentivize active participation but also act as temporary token sinks, helping regulate circulating supply. Overall, the supply, schedule, and structure of WCT are designed to balance immediate utility with long-term sustainability, ensuring that all stakeholders—from users to developers to governance participants—have aligned incentives within the WalletConnect ecosystem.
3. Utility & Mechanics: What WCT Enables
Tokens without meaningful utility are much more likely to devolve into speculative assets. WCT is designed to serve multiple, overlapping roles:
Governance & Voting
Proposal mechanism: Token holders can propose changes to protocol parameters (e.g. incentives, relayer fee schedule, technical domains).
Voting power: Usually proportional to holdings; there may be mechanisms (like vote-locking, voting with time-weight, or quadratic voting) to avoid purely wealthy address dominance.
Quorums & thresholds: To ensure that decisions have sufficient participation, not just by a small fraction. Also delay / timelock for critical changes.
Incentive Alignment & Rewards
Usage-based rewards: Users, wallets, or dApps who generate high volumes of WalletConnect sessions might receive WCT as reward. This encourages deeper integration and more regular use.
Developer and SDK grants: To support innovation (new features, performance improvements, multi-chain expansion, etc.)
Staking, Relayers & Infrastructure
Relayer stake or bonds: Relayers (components that help route messages between wallet & dApp) are central to performance and trust. Stake/bond mechanisms ensure slashing or penalties (if misbehavior) or at least reputational / financial incentives to maintain high service standards.
Uptime / service quality rewards: Infrastructure providers can earn WCT for reliability, latency, scale.
Token Sinks (what removes supply pressure)
Lockups / time-locked staking: Tokens locked for staking are temporarily out of circulation.
Governance fees or proposal deposits: Sometimes proposals require deposits to avoid spam. If a user makes a proposal that fails, their deposit might be forfeited, which acts as a sink.
Protocol-oriented fees (if any): If in the future WalletConnect charges fees for advanced relayer services, SDK premium features, etc., part of those fees might be denominated or paid in WCT, or burned, or fed back to stakers.
4. Ecosystem Map: Who Are the Stakeholders, Who Moves What, How Value Flows
The WalletConnect ecosystem is a carefully interconnected network of participants, each playing a crucial role in the token’s functionality and overall value flow. At the center are wallet users, who interact with dApps through WalletConnect’s secure connections. These users benefit from a seamless and reliable experience while potentially earning WCT rewards for their engagement. By using the protocol, they contribute to the network’s activity, which in turn drives demand for WCT and reinforces the ecosystem’s growth.
Wallet providers, including mobile and web wallets, act as the primary interface for users. They integrate WalletConnect’s SDKs to enable token-aware features, such as usage rewards or staking capabilities. Their incentives are aligned around delivering superior user experiences, increasing adoption, and sometimes participating in governance decisions to influence the protocol’s direction. High-quality wallet integration improves session reliability, increases user engagement, and helps maintain positive feedback loops for WCT usage.
dApp developers also play a vital role in this ecosystem. By building applications that leverage WalletConnect, they ensure the protocol remains central to everyday blockchain interactions. Developers may apply for grants or participate in incentive programs, while their adoption of WCT-aware features helps deepen engagement and adoption across the ecosystem. Their success is closely tied to the ease of SDK integration and the performance of WalletConnect sessions.
Infrastructure participants, particularly relayers, are essential for ensuring network reliability and speed. These nodes stake WCT as bonds, receive rewards for uptime and service quality, and help maintain the trustworthiness of the protocol. By participating actively, relayers not only earn rewards but also create a system where high performance is incentivized, benefiting the entire ecosystem.
Governance participants—holders who engage in voting or propose protocol changes—ensure the ecosystem evolves in a community-driven and sustainable way. Their decisions impact token distribution, incentive structures, and strategic direction. A strong governance system keeps all stakeholders aligned, from users to developers to relayers.
Finally, investors and ecosystem grant recipients are also key stakeholders. Investors provide liquidity and participate in the market dynamics of WCT, while grant recipients contribute to development, integration, and adoption. Both groups influence the token’s demand and overall health of the ecosystem. Together, these stakeholders form a dynamic value flow network, where usage, incentives, governance, and participation interconnect to sustain WalletConnect and the WCT token in a balanced and self-reinforcing system.
5. Real-World Use & Adoption Metrics (as of mid-2025)
To move beyond claim and narrative, let’s ground this with what’s actually happening: how WalletConnect / WCT are being used, what usage data is available, and what implications that has.
Active session growth: One of the key metrics is the number of active wallet-dApp sessions per day / week. Growth in this number indicates more use of WalletConnect features. This metric also helps measure how many users could qualify for usage rewards or airdrops.
Wallet & dApp integrations: Number of wallets or dApps that adopt or upgrade to the new WalletConnect SDK version that supports WCT-aware hooks (for rewards, for relayers, etc.). Each integration expands the potential user base and increases token utility.
Relayer performance: Uptime, latency, geographic dispersion, cost. If relayers are unreliable, user experience suffers; if they’re high quality, rewards and stakes will flow more evenly.
Grant project outputs: Are SDKs improving; is cross-chain interop better; are UX issues (disconnects, fail-cases) being reduced; are new features (mobile signage, better UI, recovery mechanisms) being introduced; what is developer satisfaction / feedback.
Governance participation: Number of proposals submitted; voter turnout; how contentious or impactful proposals are (e.g. protocol parameter changes, security audits, incentive program redesign).
Token velocity & circulation: The rate at which WCT moves (i.e. how often tokens are used / traded / transferred) vs how many are locked or staked. A high velocity without strong sinks can reduce per-token value; strong locking / staking helps.
Exchange liquidity & spread: Trading pairs available; liquidity in major pairs (e.g. WCT/ETH, WCT/USDC); depth of order books; how much slippage; also CEX vs DEX volumes.
6. Comparative Landscape: What WCT Competes With (or Complements)
WalletConnect Token (WCT) does not operate in isolation; it exists within a broader ecosystem of blockchain infrastructure tokens that provide similar or complementary functionalities. In comparison to Chainlink (LINK), WCT shares the concept of staking and infrastructure incentives. Chainlink’s value largely stems from its decentralized oracle network, where nodes are rewarded for reliable data provision. While WCT is not an oracle token, it similarly incentivizes relayers and infrastructure participants to maintain high service quality. The key difference is that WCT’s utility is primarily focused on user-to-dApp connectivity and session management rather than delivering external data to smart contracts.
When compared to The Graph (GRT), WCT’s positioning is again analogous in that both tokens reward infrastructure participants and fund developer ecosystems. The Graph incentivizes indexing nodes and subgraph developers, creating a self-reinforcing ecosystem around blockchain data access. WCT, in contrast, emphasizes seamless wallet connectivity and cross-chain session reliability. Lessons from The Graph highlight the importance of strong developer adoption and robust infrastructure performance, both of which are crucial for WCT to establish lasting value.
Looking at layer-2 or scaling solutions like Polygon or Optimism, there are similarities in token-based governance, staking, and network incentives. These projects capture value through transaction throughput, user adoption, and protocol fees. WCT differs because it focuses on the connective layer between wallets and applications rather than on-chain settlement or gas optimization. Its moat lies in enhancing user experience and interoperability rather than providing raw throughput or layer-1 security.
Finally, WCT complements other wallet connectivity or bridging protocols that also facilitate cross-platform interactions. Many competitors offer similar features, but they often struggle with centralization or limited token utility. WCT’s advantage is its existing adoption, credibility, and a structured incentive system that aligns wallets, users, developers, and relayers. By studying these comparative projects, it becomes clear that WCT must balance adoption, token utility, and governance effectiveness to remain competitive while leveraging its unique focus on UX and connectivity to create a durable niche in the Web3 ecosystem.
From these comparisons, some lessons emerge:
1. Token sinks and revenue ≈ demand are crucial. High usage doesn’t automatically translate to token value; there must be mechanisms to absorb supply (staking, protocol fees, burns, etc.).
2. Developer trust & SDK quality often make or break infrastructure tokens. If wallet SDKs are buggy or hard to integrate, adoption suffers even if incentives are high.
3. Governance effectiveness: A big token supply is not enough; you need real governance activity to influence outcomes. Projects with weak governance often get overtaken by competition or miss inflection points.
7. Deep Dive: Tokenomics & Distribution (Unlock Schedules, Lockups, Dilution)
To model WCT’s future value, you need to understand exactly how many tokens will enter circulation at which calendar points. Unlocks, vesting cliffs, and dilution all affect market psychology.
Known unlock schedule / key dates
April 15, 2025: Transferability enabled. This meant many previously locked or non-transferable allocations gained liquidity. Depending on how many tokens were previously “non-circulating,” this date often corresponds to a sharp change in price / liquidity.
Team / Advisors vesting cliffs: typically first year cliff, followed by linear vesting.
Ecosystem grant disbursements: likely milestone or time-based; some may depend on deliverables.
Usage reward & airdrop claims: may have deadlines or windows in which users can claim, after which unused allocations may return to the treasury or be reallocated.
Dilution risk & mitigation
Large future unlocks: If millions of WCT are scheduled to unlock suddenly, price may face downward pressure unless matched by demand increase or token sink behavior.
Treasury wise spending: How fast the treasury spends or distributes tokens (for grants, partnerships) matters; slow, responsible pacing builds confidence; rapid, poorly communicated distributions can spark concern.
Lock-ups for early backers: Ensuring that early private or strategic investors are locked to similar vesting schedules helps avoid feeling that they have privileged exit windows.
8. Revenue & Monetization Scenarios: How WCT Might (or Might Not) Generate Cash Flow / Value
A useful way to assess long-term upside is to imagine plausible monetization or value capture models. Even if WCT is not currently generating revenue, what levers exist or might be proposed?
Possible revenue engines
1. Premium Relayer / Infrastructure Services
WalletConnect could offer higher-grade relayer / router services (better latency, regional nodes, redundancy) for clients (dApps / wallets) who pay for service. These payments could be denominated in WCT, or converted to WCT via protocol mechanics.
2. SDK or Feature Tiering
Basic WalletConnect features remain free and open-source; advanced SDK features (rich mobile support, onboarding flows, anti-fraud checks, analytics, custom branding) are premium, monetized via WCT or subscription (where subscription fees are converted / locked in WCT).
3. Transaction / Session Fees
While WalletConnect historically does not charge users directly, a small fee or “relayer surcharge” for certain high-volume dApps (or for low latency / high priority services) is possible. If paid in other tokens, there might be a buyback or conversion to WCT for economic alignment.
4. Governance / Proposal Fee Models
To avoid governance spam, proposals might require deposits in WCT; unsuccessful proposals may lose deposits (which are burned or redistributed), adding a sink and possible modest source of fees.
5. Partnerships / Integrations
Joint ventures with wallets, chains, or dApp platforms that agree to distribute WCT, co-fund grants, or integrate WCT in user reward systems. Integration deals may lead to broader demand via non-speculative use.
Constraints & challenges in revenue capture
User resistance to fees: Web3 users are especially sensitive to fees. If WalletConnect introduces fees, even small ones, there can be backlash or migration to native wallet-dApp connection methods.
Competition or disintermediation: As blockchains evolve, some wallets or platforms may build wallet-to-dApp connection layers natively (no need for external relayers or the WalletConnect stack), reducing dependency.
Regulatory & jurisdictional risk: If fees are charged or tokens used for payments, certain jurisdictions may view WCT as a financial instrument; need legal clarity.
Technical overhead & security costs: Premium or enterprise-grade services require heavy investment in performance, monitoring, audit, and scaling—these consume resources.
9. Market & Price Dynamics: What Drives Valuation
Knowing what utility and mechanics exist is half the battle. Understanding the levers that move price (short-, mid-, long-term) is the rest.
Price drivers
Announcements / feature launches: e.g. new chain support, better relayer network, major SDK updates, partnerships.
Governance decisions that shift incentives (e.g. more rewards, adjusted staking, changing token sinks) — these often lead to re-rating of token value.
Unlock events and token release windows: large release into circulation often exerts downward pressure unless mitigated by corresponding demand.
Usage growth: increasing session counts, dApp integrations, relayer traffic. High growth gives narrative and financial basis for token utility.
Liquidity & exchange support: being listed on big exchanges, good liquidity, stable trading pairs, low slippage all help stability and investor confidence.
Macro crypto / regulatory environment: everything from interest rates, macro risk, crypto regulation, taxation, competition (native wallet tech from platforms) feed in.
Potential valuation models
Network-value-to-usage ratio: compare market cap to active sessions or other usage metrics. Lower ratio suggests undervaluation; higher suggests premium or overpricing.
Discounted future cash flow (if revenue streams emerge): modelling potential revenue from premium relayer services, SDK fees, and applying discounting for risk.
Comparable infrastructure tokens multiple: Look at tokens like Chainlink, The Graph, etc. Compare price / utility metrics. But need to adjust for differences in user base, fees, adoption.
Token supply flow modelling: how many tokens unlock when; how much is locked/staked; what's likely to be burned or used as sink. This helps modelling dilution and net token supply growth.
10. Risks & Failure Modes: What Could Derail or Diminish WCT
Even with everything going right, there are structural risks. Honest awareness of them is essential.
1. Low participation / governance apathy
If token holders do not vote, proposals fail, or governance becomes symbolic rather than effective, utility value diminishes.
2. Overextension of incentives
Too many grants / reward programs with high outflow can strain treasury; if those outflows aren’t matched by adoption, yields, or actual value capture, financial sustainability suffers.
3. Relayer bottlenecks / centralization
If only a few relayers dominate or if staking/bonding leads to centralization, then performance risks increase; also risk of overdependence.
4. Usurping by built-in or native alternatives
Blockchains or platforms themselves may build native wallet-dApp communication layers, or direct app store / OS mitigations that bypass WalletConnect. That can eat into demand.
5. Tokenomics mis-calibration
Poorly designed emissions, unlock schedules, or lack of sufficient sinks can lead to heavy downward pressure on token value.
6. Security incidents
Any exploit in staking, governance, or relayer code has outsized risk: reputational, financial, legal.
7. Regulatory headwinds
As tokens accumulate utility / fees, regulators may view WCT as a security or financial instrument in some jurisdictions, subject to compliance, taxation, disclosure.
11. Vision Scenarios & Long-Term Pathways: Where Could WCT / WalletConnect Be in 1-3 Years?
Looking ahead, the trajectory of WalletConnect and its WCT token over the next one to three years can be envisioned through multiple scenarios that balance adoption, governance, and infrastructure growth. In the optimistic scenario, WCT achieves significant adoption across wallets, dApps, and relayers. Active participation in governance ensures that protocol decisions are well-aligned with user and developer needs, while premium services and ecosystem grants drive further engagement. In this scenario, staking and lock-ups are substantial, token sinks are effectively applied, and network reliability is high. The combination of these factors creates a virtuous cycle: as usage grows, token demand rises, reinforcing value for all stakeholders and cementing WCT as a critical infrastructure asset rather than a speculative token.
The base case scenario assumes steady but moderate growth. WalletConnect continues to expand its user base and integrations, but premium services and infrastructure enhancements progress incrementally rather than explosively. Governance participation is present but not exceptionally high, and token sinks are limited. In this case, WCT retains utility and relevance, but its price and adoption reflect gradual progress rather than rapid market enthusiasm. Unlock events and token circulation increase over time, and while this may cause short-term fluctuations, the ecosystem remains stable, with usage-driven value gradually reinforcing the token’s role.
In the cautious or pessimistic scenario, adoption and governance engagement are low, and the protocol struggles to implement sustainable premium services or incentive mechanisms. Unlock events may flood the market with WCT, creating downward price pressure, while competing native solutions or alternative connectivity protocols could capture market share. In this scenario, infrastructure reliability may be inconsistent, governance decisions might fail to address strategic challenges, and community trust could erode. Although WCT still holds functional utility for basic connectivity, its broader potential as a value-generating infrastructure token diminishes, highlighting the importance of disciplined execution, strong community engagement, and effective governance in shaping the token’s long-term path.
Across all scenarios, the underlying determinant of success is how effectively WalletConnect aligns its ecosystem: users, developers, wallets, relayers, and governance participants. Scenarios differ primarily in the degree of adoption, governance activity, infrastructure reliability, and the execution of tokenomics. By carefully monitoring these levers, stakeholders can anticipate whether WCT is progressing toward an optimistic future, maintaining steady base-case growth, or facing headwinds that could limit its long-term potential.
12. Strategy Advice: For Investors, Builders, & Community Members
Below are practical, tactical takeaways — what one should do (not just think) if you want to engage meaningfully with WCT or evaluate it.
For Long-Term Investors
Build / maintain a model of unlock schedule + expected demand + token sink rates. Identify months when large unlocks happen; anticipate potential dips or trade-windows.
Monitor metrics: active session growth, integration announcements, developer activity (SDK updates, grant projects), relayer performance. These are leading indicators.
Watch governance proposals carefully: changes to incentive schedules, staking reward rates, premium features. These often move value more than marketing.
Consider staking or locking (if available) to reduce exposure to sell-pressure and to get yield or governance rights.
For Builders / SDK / Wallet / dApp Developers
Align with WalletConnect’s roadmap: integrate new SDKs early; build support for WCT-aware hooks (reward eligibility, stakes, etc.). That gives you first-mover benefits.
If offering services (relayers, infrastructure), design for reliability, low latency, and geographic distribution. Reputation matters; profit comes from reliability.
Consider contributing to grant programs / open source components: helps build goodwill, visibility, and possibly direct rewards.
For Community & Governance Participants
Be active in proposal forums: not just voting, but proposing improvements (could be technical or economic). Communities that do this well shape their destiny.
Push for transparent reporting: treasury spend, relayer metrics, grant performance, SDK health, security audits. Visibility builds trust.
Advocate for anti-centralization features: limits on large stake concentration; perhaps multiple relayer providers; mechanisms to ensure that new participants (wallets, relayers) can join easily.
13. What to Watch Now: Key Catalysts & Red Flags (Next 6-12 Months)
Over the next six to twelve months, there are several critical catalysts and potential red flags that stakeholders should monitor to assess the trajectory of WalletConnect and the WCT token. One of the most important indicators is major chain expansion, such as support for additional Layer-2 solutions or non-EVM chains. Expanding WalletConnect’s reach into new blockchain ecosystems increases the addressable user base, drives more session activity, and strengthens demand for WCT. Similarly, the launch of premium services—like enhanced relayer features or advanced SDK capabilities—would provide tangible utility for WCT and signal the protocol’s ability to monetize and sustain infrastructure improvements.
Another key factor is the delivery of large grants or ecosystem projects. Early grants that produce meaningful outputs, such as cross-chain SDK integrations, mobile wallet enhancements, or performance optimizations, serve as a leading indicator of ecosystem vitality. High-quality project execution not only improves protocol functionality but also reinforces community confidence and adoption, creating a positive feedback loop for token utility.
Governance activity and changes are equally important. Proposals that adjust reward rates, modify staking incentives, or introduce token sinks can directly impact the token’s economic dynamics. Active and effective governance demonstrates that WCT holders have a meaningful voice in shaping the ecosystem, while low participation or ineffective proposals may reduce perceived value.
Market dynamics around unlock events and the corresponding market response are also critical. Large token releases, whether from team allocations, treasury reserves, or private sales, can create short-term price volatility. Observing how the market absorbs these unlocks provides insight into holder confidence, liquidity depth, and potential selling pressure.
Lastly, relayer and infrastructure health should be closely monitored. Metrics such as uptime, latency, and decentralization levels indicate the robustness of WalletConnect’s connectivity layer. Poor performance or centralization risks could undermine user trust and limit adoption. Equally, any regulatory or legal developments concerning token classification or usage could influence how WCT is perceived, adopted, or traded in various jurisdictions.
By keeping an eye on these catalysts and red flags, stakeholders can more accurately anticipate shifts in WCT’s utility, adoption, and market performance over the near term, allowing for informed decisions on participation, investment, or contribution to the ecosystem.
14. Expanded Analysis: Narrative & Mindshare in the Web3 Context
While much of the analysis so far has been technical or economic, it’s also essential to examine how storytelling, perception, and alignment shape whether WCT becomes part of the Web3 cultural infrastructure or is relegated to “one more token.”
Trust & transparency drive mindshare. As with many protocols, transparency around unlocking schedules, audits, treasury usage, and decision-making significantly affects reputation. Communities reward projects that are open with docs, dashboards, and clear communications.
Use-case storytelling wins. It’s not enough to claim that “users will be rewarded.” Tangible stories (e.g. “this wallet user, after using WalletConnect 50 times in a month, got X WCT and could vote on feature Y”) are powerful. They help non-crypto people see real value.
Designing for simplicity. Claiming rewards, voting, staking — interfaces must be intuitive and low-friction. Otherwise, even well-designed utility becomes under-utilized utility.
Community recognition & identity. Early adopters, builders, relayers, wallet teams all want to feel part of something. Recognizing contributions publicly, establishing reputational systems (badges, leaderboards, early adopter perks) can increase loyalty.
Educational resources. WalletConnect has the chance to become a reference point: tutorials, dashboards, case studies, videos — all teaching about token mechanics, security best practices, governance participation. Well done, this raises the baseline trust and reduces friction.
15. Case Studies: Early Wins & Use Examples
To make this less abstract, here are examples (real or plausible) of early success cases or “micro-studies” that show how WCT functionally creates value.
Case Study A: Wallet-Mobile UX Improvement
A mobile wallet integrates the latest WalletConnect SDK that supports improved session reconnection, better error recovery, and lighter bandwidth usage. Users of that wallet start using WalletConnect more frequently. The wallet receives a grant in WCT for its work on SDK integration. Because users are more satisfied, retention improves, more sessions → more usage rewards → more demand for WCT. This virtuous cycle enhances UX and token value.
Case Study B: Relayer Performance Competition
Multiple relayers are staking WCT and competing on reliability and geographic coverage. A dApp needing low latency in Asia switches to one of the relayers offering better coverage. The better relayer earns more usage, gets rewarded more WCT. Users see fewer delays. Over time, high-quality relayers gain share, and WCT staked volume rises, lowering circulating supply and improving network resilience.
Case Study C: Governance Decision That Matters
Suppose a proposal is made to shift part of the ecosystem grant budget to fund SDKs in non-EVM chains (e.g. Solana, Sui, Base, etc.). If passed, that opens up new ecosystems, new wallets and users; requires new SDK work. If the community supports this, it demonstrates governance isn’t just symbolic. If the chain expansion leads to significant usage, valuation models get more favorable.
16. Additional Creativity: Possible Innovations to Enhance WCT’s Power
Here are creative features or experiments WalletConnect/WCT could consider to capture more value, deepen ecosystem, and differentiate ahead of competition.
Reputation-based bonuses: Beyond pure token holdings, reward relayers or users with high reliability, low latency, low error rates, or long-standing contributions with additional rewards or multiplier effects.
Time-locked voting or booster rewards: Encourage longer stake/lock-ups by offering boosted voting power, additional rewards, or early adopter tiers.
Quadratic or delegated voting: To give smaller holders a voice, perhaps via delegated voting or reputation roles; or quadratic voting to reduce dominance by large token holders.
NFT / “badge” overlays: For example, users or relayers who reach certain thresholds of usage or reliability receive non-fungible tokens or special reputational badges which carry perks (e.g. lower fees, early access).
Cross-protocol synergy / partnerships: e.g. wallets or dApp platforms that reward WCT; or swap protocols or DeFi aggregators that let users stake WCT for yield; or use WCT in combinations with other protocols for discounts or governance in partner ecosystems.
Insurance / secure backup mode: Given the importance of wallet/dApp session security, building optional security or insurance features (e.g. for relayers or sessions) paid via WCT could open paths for new utility and trust.
17. Closing Thoughts: The Stakes & Opportunity
WCT is more than a token—it’s a commitment by WalletConnect to shift from being a high-utility infrastructure layer to being a governed, incentive-aligned, sustainably resourced, community-owned ecosystem. The stakes are high:
If done well, WCT could cement WalletConnect’s position as a critical connective protocol in Web3—part of what makes the UX seamless, helping wallets and dApps scale, helping usage grow without centralized bottlenecks or overdependence on external funding.
If done poorly, there’s risk of becoming “another token launch” where speculators outnumber users, unlocks hurt price, governance remains symbolic, and competition or native platform solutions chip away at relevance.
For anyone involved—user, build, investor—the key is to watch for evidence over promise: real technical deliverables, high usage, meaningful staking, active governance, and an ecosystem that eats its own tail (i.e. reinvests value via grants and reinvestments). The future value of WCT will be earned, not claimed
