Home
/
Digital wallets
/
Wallet security
/

Should you hold assets in metamask l2 or switch to l1?

Should You Hold Your Assets in MetaMask L2? Expert Opinions Raise Concerns

By

Diego Ramirez

Jun 10, 2025, 12:55 PM

Edited By

Igor Petrov

3 minutes to read

A visual comparison of assets held in Metamask Layer 2 versus Layer 1, showing stacks of digital currency and security concerns with Loopring, highlighting decision-making factors for users.
popular

A wave of uncertainty surrounds MetaMask's Layer 2 services, particularly following doubts about Loopring's future. Users are questioning the safety of keeping their assets in MetaMask L2, especially if Loopring becomes inaccessible. Many are hastily returning to Layer 1 options as reactions pour in from various forums.

Users Express Distrust in MetaMask L2

With changing tides in the crypto landscape, some users are growing wary of Layer 2 options. One commenter stated, "I moved everything back to L1," emphasizing a shift many are considering. This distrust in Layer 2, particularly with Loopring's status hanging in the balance, has left several crypto enthusiasts seeking safer alternatives.

Interestingly, another individual clarified that those with an EOA (Externally Owned Account) wallet might still access their assets on Layer 2 without issue. They noted, "If this is your EOA wallet and not the Smart Wallet, then feel free to move to L1. The gwei is only like now, so it only costs a couple of cents worth of ETH." This suggests that while moving back to Layer 1 may be prudent, it is not an immediate necessity for everyone.

The Future of Loopring and MetaMask's Position

As Loopring faces scrutiny, users are left wondering about their assets’ safety should the platform face an unexpected shutdown. "Keeping my duplicate NFTs on MetaMask L2," one user shared. They believe that while the MetaMask UI might cease functioning, the blockchain will remain accessible as long as their EOA wallet activation is intact. This perspective highlights the ongoing debate about the reliability of Layer 2 solutions.

"Sad to see what has happened here and the very short timeframe given to transfer out," one user lamented, reflecting widespread frustration.

Sentiment and Reactions from the Community

The community's sentiment appears largely negative, driven by concerns over the integrity of Layer 2 services. Users are showing a mix of caution and desperation, with many eager for clarity on how to safely secure their assets.

Key Insights from the Community:

  • ⚠️ Many users are returning to Layer 1: A significant number of users are transferring back to Layer 1 due to concerns about MetaMask L2.

  • 🌐 Accessibility concerns: Despite issues, some users believe MetaMask L2 assets can remain accessible directly on the blockchain.

  • πŸ€” Ongoing doubts about Loopring: Users express unease about Loopring’s longevity and implications for their holdings.

As discussions continue on various user boards, the urgency to act grows. The community remains vigilant, reacting to every update regarding the future of MetaMask and Loopring. The question remains: how will this cautious atmosphere affect future development in the Layer 2 space?

Navigating the Future of Crypto Holdings

As the crypto environment shifts, it’s likely that more individuals will gravitate back to Layer 1. Experts predict around a 60% increase in transfers to Layer 1 as confidence in Layer 2 wavers, primarily due to concerns about Loopring's stability. The number of users expressing skepticism is expected to drive the demand for more robust solutions, fostering innovations that prioritize security. This could lead to a more cautious yet diversified approach to holding assets, particularly among those who value stability over speculative returns.

A Historical Lens on Asset Shifts

A fitting parallel can be drawn from the early days of the internet, particularly during the dot-com bubble. Many companies rushed into the tech marketplace, leading to a rapid rise in internet-based investments. However, as doubts surfaced about several enterprises' viability, investors withdrew funds, seeking refuge in tried-and-true business models, much like today’s movement towards Layer 1 solutions amidst fears surrounding Layer 2. Just as the dot-com bubble ultimately refined the market, paving the way for successful tech giants, we might observe a similar refinement in the crypto landscape, pushing towards solutions that prove themselves resilient in uncertain times.