MetaMask vs Uniswap Wallet: what are the key differences?

For years, MetaMask has been the default choice. We use it to connect to everything, and in exchange, it often charges a 0.875% service fee when users swap tokens directly in the app. Uniswap Wallet, launched by one of the leading decentralized exchanges, challenges this model with a simple premise: go direct to the source and cut out the aggregator tax.

GNcrypto tested both wallets to see if that premise holds up. We compared the “Universal Gateway” (MetaMask) against the “Vertical Specialist” (Uniswap), scrutinizing mobile interfaces, swap fee structures, and the actual utility of Uniswap’s built-in MEV protection.

MetaMask vs Uniswap Wallet at a glance

Security & permissions – granular control vs safety rails

Both wallets are non-custodial, meaning you – and only you – hold the keys. But they protect you from very different threats. MetaMask is built to stop you from signing a bad contract (scams); Uniswap Wallet is built to stop bots from eating your lunch (MEV). So let MetaMask wallet vs Uniswap clash.

MetaMask’s primary security focus is interaction safety. Because it connects to thousands of random dApps, it has built the industry’s most robust permission system.

• Spending caps: When you approve a token for spending (e.g., letting Uniswap spend your USDC), MetaMask forces you to set a specific limit. It defaults to a “custom” cap rather than “unlimited,” preventing the “drainer” nightmares where a hacked protocol wipes your entire balance years later.
• Phishing protection: It integrates with Blockaid (and similar databases) to simulate transactions before you sign them. If a contract looks malicious, the wallet throws a bright red warning. It’s a “Guard Dog” that barks when you walk into a bad neighborhood.

Uniswap Wallet assumes you are trading legitimate tokens but are at risk from MEV bots (Maximal Extractable Value). These are predators that watch the mempool and “sandwich” your trade – buying before you to pump the price and selling after you to pocket the difference.

• Native MEV protection: Uniswap Wallet routes your swaps through private RPCs (like MEV-Blocker) by default. Your transaction is hidden from the public mempool until it is confirmed, starving the front-runners.
• Simulation: Like MetaMask, it simulates transactions to show you the net balance change (e.g., “You will lose 1 ETH and gain 3000 USDC”) before you sign, helping prevent basic “fat finger” errors.

The verdict: If you are farming yield on sketchy new protocols, MetaMask’s spending caps are your lifejacket. If you are swapping huge volumes on the ETH mainnet, Uniswap Wallet’s MEV protection is your bulletproof vest.

Swap experience compared – built-in vs protocol swaps

Swapping tokens is the bread and butter of these apps, but their business models are diametrically opposed. One acts as a travel agent that books your flight for a fee; the other is the airline itself.

MetaMask uses an Aggregator Model. When you ask for a quote, it scans multiple decentralized exchanges (like Uniswap, Curve, and 1inch) to find the best market price.

• The cost: This convenience comes with a steep price tag. MetaMask adds a 0.875% service fee to every transaction. On a $10,000 trade, you are handing $87.50 directly to Consensys, not including gas.
• The logic: You pay for the “laziness” of not leaving the app. While efficient, the routing algorithm rarely saves you enough to offset the nearly 1% surcharge.

When analyzing the Uniswap Wallet vs MetaMask swap flow, the difference is strictly financial. MetaMask offers broader market coverage (scanning multiple DEXs) but taxes you heavily for it. Uniswap Wallet limits you to its own liquidity pools but removes the middleman tax, offering a direct pipe to the market that is almost always cheaper for standard assets.

Uniswap Wallet uses a Direct Protocol Model enhanced by UniswapX.

• The cost: You pay the standard protocol fees (typically 0.3% to liquidity providers) and potentially a small interface fee (approx. 0.25% on certain pairs), but you avoid MetaMask’s 0.875% surcharge.
• UniswapX advantage: The wallet leverages “intent-based” routing. Instead of you paying for a failed transaction, fillers bid to execute your trade. This can result in gas-free swaps and improved pricing, as professional fillers capture the arbitrage spread and pass some savings back to you.
• MEV Protection: By default, swaps are routed through private RPCs, shielding you from “sandwich attacks” (bots that front-run your trade to give you a worse price).

Our verdict: If you are swapping huge volumes, Uniswap Wallet saves you money on both fees and slippage. MetaMask’s swap button is a luxury feature for users who don’t care about the cost.

When to use each

Methodology – why you should trust us

At GNcrypto, we put transparency first when evaluating hot cryptocurrency wallets. Our reviews are based on hands-on testing and thorough analysis across all key dimensions that matter for self-custody and daily crypto use.

We do not audit wallet code or guarantee security against all attack vectors. Instead, our scores reflect usability, feature completeness, and observable security practices. We do not accept payment for ratings or modify scores based on partnerships.

Categories & weights

We rate hot wallets on seven criteria. Security and Asset Support are weighted heaviest because a wallet that isn’t safe or can’t hold your coins is useless, regardless of how pretty the UI is.

• Security & Key Management – 25%
• Supported Assets & Networks – 20%
• Transaction Costs & Speed – 15%
• User Experience & Interface – 15%
• DeFi & dApp Integration – 10%
• Recovery & Backup Systems – 10%
• Customer Support & Documentation – 5%