WalletOrigin vs ENS
Both make wallets more human. They answer different questions: ENS gives an address a readable name on-chain, while WalletOrigin ties an address to the company domain your customers already know — on any chain, without deploying anything.
A readable name is not a company identity
A name can be registered by anyone willing to pay for it, including someone imitating your brand. Naming and ownership attestation solve different halves of the trust problem.
- Names similar to a brand can be registered by third parties.
- On-chain naming is chain-scoped; treasuries usually are not.
- A name says what to call an address, not who is accountable for it.
The same wallet, two questions
A customer is about to pay a company wallet on Solana.
- 01
A readable name tells them what the address is called.
- 02
A WalletOrigin proof tells them the address is controlled by the same party that controls acme.com.
- 03
Used together, the name is convenient and the domain proof is what actually carries accountability.
Checkable by anyone
- Identity anchored to DNS — the same registrar control that already backs your website and email.
- Chain-agnostic: Ethereum and EVM chains, Solana, Bitcoin, Cosmos, Sui and Aptos in one place.
- No contract deployment and no on-chain transaction to create a proof.
- Nothing is exclusive: a wallet can carry an on-chain name and a domain proof at the same time.
ENS WalletOrigin Purpose naming ownership proof Anchored to on-chain your DNS domain Chains per-chain multi-chain On-chain tx yes no
Add the missing half
Keep the names you already use and add a domain-backed proof of who controls the wallet.
Verify your domain