Who is the opponent of $WCT ? Examining its network moat from the perspective of infrastructure monopoly paths

At the foundational protocol layer of Web3, there are very few projects that truly possess "protocol-level lock-in power." WalletConnect's ability to serve as a communication bridge connecting hundreds of wallets and thousands of DApps is no coincidence; it is following a path of "utility-first + ecosystem capture."

Potential projects that could be benchmarked against WCT include:

LayerZero (ZRO): Focuses on cross-chain messaging, but mainly concentrates on asset bridging;

XMTP Protocol: Primarily targets on-chain communication, but is still limited to the "message" itself;

Particle Network: Builds a smart wallet communication layer, but the number of application integrations is far less than WalletConnect.

WalletConnect has already established a factual standard advantage in three dimensions: "QR code connection experience, automatic chain switching, and session communication protocol." Especially after the enhancement of multi-chain support in WalletConnect v2, almost all wallet and DApp connections have it as the default option.

In other words, the Relay Network that $WCT belongs to is not an isolated new protocol, but rather a service layer network that evolves based on existing market share. This means that WCT has had real traffic entry and node demand from Day 1, rather than "launching a token and then looking for demand."

Among all wallet connection solutions available currently, WalletConnect is the only protocol that can achieve "unified entry + distributed governance." The true moat of WCT is: you may not like it, but you must integrate it.