Zengo Wallet

We got news! Zengo is joining forces with @ eToro, the global leader in stock and crypto trading. Since our beginning in 2018, our mission at Zengo has been to raise the bar and set new standards for crypto custody and the on-chain economy. Together with eToro, we will pursue that mission and take it to the next level as crypto and traditional finance become increasingly interconnected So what’s next? In our new home at eToro, Zengo will continue to build and operate the secure, innovative crypto wallet that millions of users have loved and used to date, and we will keep pushing the boundaries of what can be done in crypto and finance. Simply said: we will continue doing what we’ve always done. This is an exciting day for all of us. It would not have been possible without the work of our amazing team, our dear customers around the world, and, of course, the support of our investors. To all of them, we have two words: THANK YOU! Read more about it - bloomberg.com/news/articles/… #eToro #ZengoWallet #Crypto

@defikadic We should be in the Z-class, sir!

I know that wallets are now racing for privacy. Yes, but there's no privacy feature which is ready to test with real asset, it's only buzzing for now. We're walking through the most commonly-used wallets on the market. Here's the tier list: 1. Tier S: outstanding ones, legend of the wallets, best experience so far @wallet - not a long-built one but OKX wallet has the best UX ever, multi-chain, easy to manage, super friendly to use @MetaMask - most widely used Ethereum wallet and default gateway to DeFi, Metamask is also trying to catch up with others on fees and better UI @TrustWallet - mobile-first multi-chain wallet backed by Binance @phantom - the wallet standard on Solana, solid with biometric + chain-specific protections 2. Tier A: @BinanceWallet - directly integrated with Binance, tons of feature including the Alpha campaign to drive engagement of users @Rabby_io - built by DeBank, very high among DeFi natives (arguably better than MetaMask UX) @coinbase - backed by Coinbase (not tied up with Coinbase exchange), strong brand over US users 3. Tier B: @rainbowdotme - the best-designed theme wallet, but low FDV at launch @exodus - beginner-friendly multi-chain wallet with strong UI, known for UX, less for DeFi depth @ready_co - newer wallet aiming to simplify Web3 onboarding @Backpack - well-known on Solana but the TGE of BP token has made users to turn their back on Backpack @SafePal - Binance-backed wallet offering both hardware and software solutions @safe - a smart contract multisig wallet for DAOs and institutions Bybit wallet - directly connected with Bybit 4. Tier C: @0xFrame - desktop-first wallet for advanced users, not popular among regular users @AtomicWallet - multi-chain wallet with built-in swaps and staking @ZenGo - keyless wallet using MPC instead of seed phrases, leading in privacy @unisat_wallet - emerging in the middel of BRC-20 and inscriptions What's your fav one?

Thrilled to join the @eToro family! 🚀 Together, we're bringing self-custody and MPC technology to millions of users worldwide. The future of finance is on-chain — and we're building it together.

Exciting times ahead, joining the @eToro family and building the future of on-chain!

@eToro Excited to join forces and push the boundaries of what's possible with eToro! 🚀

Big news! eToro is acquiring @ZenGo a leading self-custody crypto wallet. This acquisition moves us closer to the intersection of traditional finance and the on-chain economy, bringing Zengo’s pioneering MPC technology to the eToro family. Read more about our vision for the future of digital assets👇 etoro.tw/3Q8rUwB

Small spaceship attaches to big spaceship.. @ZenGo are you ready? You know where we are going 🌖 Courtesy of @Cointelegraph

@yoniassia @Cointelegraph We were born ready :)

💪💵💶💷

@hinapansari Please reach out to help@zengo.com

So @ZenGo support tells me that it will take 1-3 business days to resolve issue. That was Monday. Now Wednesday they won’t know till Sunday. Of course the fact you are entirely reliant on an app with no desktop option for transactions is highly problematic.

@moonpay Yes we are!

Sports fans are going on-chain. Now they have the most secure way to do it. Zengo has integrated @Chiliz Chain, giving our 3M+ users direct access to $CHZ and Fan Tokens with zero risk of seed phrase theft. New chains. Same bulletproof security. 🏟️ World Cup 2026 is coming. Are you ready?

Builders and businesses on TRON ($TRX) 🚀 Zengo Business Wallet supports TRON, helping teams operate on-chain with: 🔐 MPC security ✍️MultiSig & payment workflows 🪙 Powerful treasury management for teams Secure. Scalable. Built for modern businesses in #Web3. @ZenGo @trondao #Crypto

@Rpikes320 We are here and answer fast. Just try again

@ZenGo I have been trying to reach support for hours. My wallet is not working., support is not answering and I can't send an DM on here.

USA₮ @usat is now on Zengo 🇺🇸

@tatum_io 🙏

@ZenGo Congrats guys!

👋 gm 1m+ 🤖📱android frens

✅ Apple, Nvidia, Tesla, Microsoft, Meta and more Send/ Receive/ Trade Tokenized Stocks are now available on Zengo 24/7 Just tap receive or swap, search "xStock" to get started.

@OldGrowthCrypto Thank you!

🚨 Bullish on @ZenGo expanding to Cardano for Bitcoin DeFi domination! 🔥 This is huge for secure, MPC-powered access to the biggest untapped opportunity in crypto. Will Zengo also incorporate $NIGHT support? Midnight's privacy ZK layer + Bitcoin/Cardano bridge vibes would be insane! 🌑💪 Who's ready? @ZenGo @MidnightNtwrk @cardano #BitcoinDeFi #Cardano #NIGHT #Crypto

@GeroWallet Thank you. Good luck to you too.

It makes sense that most criticism comes from Cardano wallet teams, because they actually know what is baseline Cardano wallet work vs what is truly novel or ecosystem-wide. Your Cardano deliverables listed so far are largely baseline wallet features: store, send, receive, buy, swap, connect. The differentiators you mention (MPC, seed-phrase-free, business accounts) are mostly general Zengo architecture, not Cardano-specific public goods or reusable primitives. Open-source cryptography is great, but it is not the point. The question is what Cardano-specific components, standards, or tooling you will open-source so the entire ecosystem benefits, not just Zengo users. Finally, the proposal reads as a high-level narrative with a budget and projections, but it does not yet include structured milestones, acceptance criteria, and measurable KPI-based delivery checkpoints that match the scale of the funding request. Good luck

Hi @ZenGo team, thanks for publishing a draft proposal and asking for community feedback before submitting. As a wallet team already building in the Cardano ecosystem, I think it is important to challenge the framing, scope, and budget of this proposal, especially given the size being discussed. 1) Cardano does not have a wallet shortage Cardano already has a mature wallet ecosystem with multiple well established wallets supporting: -ADA and native assets (CNTs) -staking -dApp connectivity -hardware wallet integrations -Cardano-native UX built around the eutxo model Because of this, the argument that “Cardano needs another wallet integration” is not inherently a strong justification for a large Catalyst allocation. Wallet support is a baseline expectation for any chain. Many wallets, including multi-chain wallets, integrate new networks without needing multi-million ADA grants. 2) If Zengo users wanted Cardano exposure, they likely already have it This is a critical point. If Zengo’s users are genuinely interested in Cardano today, they can already use one of the existing and trusted native Cardano wallets. That is already the standard route taken by users who want access to Cardano’s staking, native assets, and the broader dApp ecosystem. So the community should question how much incremental adoption this integration truly brings versus simply repackaging existing Cardano access inside another wallet interface. From an ecosystem standpoint, Cardano paying a premium for “access to a user base” is not the same thing as funding new infrastructure or innovation that benefits all builders. 3) The proposal appears to bundle unrelated goals into one request Your post frames the initiative as expanding into Cardano with the goal to “bootstrap and grow DeFi on Bitcoin.” Those are not the same deliverable, and they should be evaluated separately: A) Integrate ADA and CNT support into Zengo This is standard chain integration work. It is useful, but it is not novel research and development. B) “Bootstrap Bitcoin DeFi” using Cardano This is a much larger ecosystem-level initiative that depends on: -liquidity and integration strategy across multiple protocols -security and audits -ecosystem alignment and composability standards -measurable outcomes beyond “integration shipped” When these goals are bundled together, it becomes difficult for voters to assess value for money. It also risks turning a basic integration request into a much larger funding ask based on narrative rather than objective deliverables. 4) Catalyst should prioritize public goods, not subsidize private product expansion Catalyst funding is most impactful when it funds things that: -create reusable infrastructure -improve developer tooling and standards -unlock new ecosystem capabilities -benefit multiple builders, wallets, and dApps In contrast, funding a large “add Cardano to our wallet” effort looks closer to subsidizing a commercial roadmap decision. @ZenGo will benefit directly from this integration through product expansion, potential monetization, and brand reach. The Cardano community should be careful about funding something that primarily benefits one private entity rather than the ecosystem as a whole. 5) The budget requires a transparent breakdown to be credible If this proposal moves forward, it needs a clear and public breakdown of what is being funded, for example: -what portion is for ADA and CNT integration only -what portion is for any Bitcoin DeFi components -what portion is for security, audits, QA, and maintenance -what is open-source and reusable by the wider Cardano ecosystem Without this level of clarity, it is hard for the community to evaluate whether the request is proportionate, efficient, and aligned with Catalyst’s mandate. 6) What the community should ask before this goes to a vote Here are the questions that should be answered clearly: -What exact problem does this solve for Cardano that is not already solved by existing native Cardano wallets? -What measurable outcomes will prove success beyond “we integrated Cardano”? -What will be open-source and reusable by other wallets and developers in the ecosystem? -What is the long-term maintenance plan after the funding period ends? -Why is Catalyst the right source of funding for basic chain support rather than Zengo funding this internally as part of standard product expansion? It is good to see more teams exploring Cardano. However, Cardano already has a strong wallet ecosystem, and if users want Cardano they can already access it through established native wallets today. If this is fundamentally a business expansion decision for @ZenGo , it should be funded as such. If the real goal is Bitcoin DeFi growth, the proposal should focus on open infrastructure and reusable ecosystem primitives rather than a large budget to add baseline Cardano support inside a single wallet.

We have received far more positive echoes than negative so far and that is an indication we pay attention to. The conversation has been constructive so far. It is worth noting however that the critics seem come mostly from other Cardano wallets and that is also saying something. While we value each input we carefully thought about the best approach to deliver something with impact that will represent for us a massive upfront investment. If any Cardano wallet had been successful at delivering on the above it would be known by now, this means there is still an important opportunity to achieve. We suggested the best path that works for us and we believe eventually for users of the ecosystem. We clearly structured the proposal with actual deliverables (by the way all our cryptography is open source). The operational cost of a wallet at scale is meaningful. We serve first our customers and the customers of an ecosystem. We wish you luck in servicing the ecosystem. We will try our way if the community grants us the chance to try. Because eventually it will be their decision and not yours or ours (alone)

The question is not whether Zengo is good. The question is whether a multi-million ADA Catalyst allocation is the correct mechanism to fund what is, at its core, a commercial multi-chain expansion and a distribution play. Cardano voters have a responsibility to evaluate value-for-money, ecosystem public good, measurable outcomes, and precedent risk. 1) “Flagship Bitcoin-first wallet” does not automatically justify Catalyst funding Cardano does not exist to subsidize the roadmap of every large wallet in the space. If the argument is that Zengo is a major Bitcoin-first wallet and can bring distribution, that is a business advantage for Zengo as much as it is for Cardano. It does not automatically follow that the Cardano treasury should cover the full integration cost, especially at this scale. A reasonable expectation for any leading wallet is to expand chain support when a chain has meaningful user demand and economic opportunity. 2) The “seed phrase wallets hit a ceiling” argument is not relevant to Cardano’s funding decision Your point about seed phrases, MPC, and security is valid as a product differentiation. But it does not answer the core issue: Why should Catalyst fund a large integration primarily to bring Zengo’s architecture to Cardano, instead of funding ecosystem-wide security improvements that benefit all wallets and users? If MPC and advanced account security is a missing dimension, then Catalyst should prioritize: -open standards for wallet security -reusable libraries and primitives -reference implementations that multiple Cardano wallets can adopt Otherwise it is effectively saying: “Fund our wallet because we are safer than others.” That is not a neutral ecosystem investment. That is a competitive claim. 3) “Cardano-first wallets are not sufficient for a virtuous loop of growth” needs proof, not narrative This is the core strategic claim you are making, and it needs evidence. Cardano’s growth is not blocked because it lacks access to a non-native wallet brand. Growth loops come from: -apps people actually use -liquidity -on-chain utility -stablecoins -ramps and off-ramps -payment experiences -merchant rails -low-friction onboarding -partnerships that bring real usage A new wallet integration does not automatically create a virtuous growth loop. Especially when the users who want Cardano already have trusted options today. If the thesis is that Zengo can activate Bitcoin-first users into Cardano DeFi, then the proposal should include: -clear adoption assumptions -a measurable funnel model -specific targets (not just “we will bring distribution”) 4) “Upfront investment required is meaningful” is not a justification for price You wrote that the upfront investment is meaningful and that it will cost you a lot more than the Catalyst amount. That does not make the ask more reasonable. It raises more questions. Catalyst does not exist to reimburse “expensive builds.” Catalyst exists to fund high impact public goods and ecosystem unlocks. If the work costs more because the approach is premium, enterprise-grade, or includes substantial internal product development, then the community should ask which parts are: -essential ecosystem deliverables -versus internal Zengo roadmap work that primarily benefits Zengo In short, “it costs us more” is not a valid argument for a large grant. It can even be an argument against it if the deliverables are not clearly scoped into public-good components. 5) “Deliverables are clearly articulated and quantified” needs to include public-good guarantees Quantified deliverables are great, but the bigger issue is whether they are aligned with Catalyst’s purpose. A key question that still remains unanswered is: what is the ecosystem-wide reusable output? If a proposal at this size is approved, the minimum expectation should be: -open-source components wherever possible -reusable standards that other Cardano wallets and developers can leverage -documentation that reduces integration cost for the entire ecosystem -long-term maintenance commitments Otherwise, Cardano is paying for a walled integration inside one private wallet. 6) “Supporting Cardano is not enough, it has to be done the right way” is too subjective Every team claims they will do it “the right way.” That is not a measurable milestone. If “the right way” means: -correct staking implementation -correct token handling -correct dApp connectivity -correct signing flows -correct hardware wallet support -correct transaction building for EUTxO edge cases Then those are standard expectations, not premium optional features. If “the right way” means new architecture and new primitives that improve the ecosystem, then those primitives must be clearly described, made reusable, and ideally open-sourced. 7) “Bitcoin DeFi primitives built from scratch” should not be tied to one wallet integration This is the most important part of your response, and it is also where the proposal can easily become misaligned. If the goal is to bootstrap Bitcoin DeFi on Cardano, funding should prioritize: -shared infrastructure -open interoperability standards -composability across wallets -integrations that benefit multiple DeFi protocols -security primitives and audits Putting a large amount of Catalyst funding behind a single wallet risks turning an ecosystem initiative into a single distribution channel bet. If Bitcoin DeFi is the real mission, then the ecosystem should not fund it in a way that only benefits Zengo’s platform. 8) “Fast and cheap” versus “right way” is not a valid reason to request a large amount of ADA The community is not asking for cheap. It is asking for efficient and aligned spending. -Catalyst voters should require: -a lean MVP scope with clear milestones -a smaller initial budget tied to verifiable adoption results -expansion phases only if KPIs are met -open-source and ecosystem reuse commitments from the beginning This is how you create accountability, reduce risk, and avoid setting a precedent where every large wallet requests millions to add Cardano. Zengo may genuinely bring value, and I respect the ambition. But the current argument still reads like: -fund our chain expansion because we are a leading wallet -trust us that it will create growth loops -we want resources to sustain a long road That is not enough for a multi-million ADA allocation. If you want Cardano community support at this scale, I strongly recommend restructuring the proposal into: -a clearly scoped Cardano integration MVP with limited budget -a second phase tied to proven adoption and measured outcomes -a public-goods layer including open components and reusable primitives -a neutral success framework focused on ecosystem-wide impact, not brand presence That would make it far easier for voters to evaluate value-for-money, reduce risk, and ensure this benefits Cardano as a whole, not only one wallet’s roadmap.