High Gas Fees: MetaMask ETH-USDT vs. Polygon MATIC?

Why are gas fees so high for transfers between MetaMask ETH-USDT wallets compared to the Polygon network?

The fees are enormous, especially for small transfer amounts, making the cost ratio to the transferred amount quite significant. I'm talking about using a MetaMask ETH-USDT address vs. a Polygon MATIC address. I'm curious about the technical reasons behind these cost differences and if there are any effective ways to reduce these fees. Can anyone share their knowledge or advice? Thanks!



from Recent Questions - Bitcoin Stack Exchange https://ift.tt/EG4XZNq
via IFTTT

Popular posts from this blog

Bitcoin Mining Could Be Strengthening The Ruble, Russian Central Bank Says

Image
Bitcoin mining may be providing incremental support to the Russian ruble, Central Bank Governor Elvira Nabiullina said, while cautioning that the effect is difficult to measure because much of the sector still operates in a legal and reporting gray zone. Bitcoin Mining May Support The Ruble Responding to a question at a press conference, Nabiullina said it is “probably difficult to quantify” mining’s influence “because a significant part of mining is still in a gray area.” Still, she added that mining is “indeed one of the additional factors contributing to the strong ruble exchange rate.” As Russian business news portal for RBC reported , her remarks come as Russian officials increasingly frame mining and crypto flows as macro-relevant, not just a niche tech or energy story. Earlier, Maxim Oreshkin, deputy head of the presidential administration, said ruble forecasts have been thrown off by the underestimation of financial flows tied to mining and cryptocurrency. In his view, the s...
Read more

Crypto Exec Warns Tokenization Is Moving Faster Than Expected

Image
According to a post shared on X by Keith Grossman, president of crypto payments firm MoonPay, finance is heading toward an onchain future that could unfold over several years. The view comes as large banks and asset managers begin product tokenization, a move that once seemed extreme but is now being treated as a practical step by major institutions. Regulatory Signals Push Institutions Forward Based on reports cited by Grossman, progress has accelerated because rules are becoming clearer. Legislative efforts, regulatory guidance, bank involvement and accounting standards are starting to line up. That combination reduces uncertainty, which is often what slows large pools of capital. BlackRock has already launched tokenized funds, while Franklin Templeton is running tokenized money market funds on public blockchains. Those actions suggest that tokenization is no longer confined to pilot labs or internal trials. It is being used with real assets and real clients. Bank of Ameri...
Read more

Bitwise Clients Pour $69M Into Solana as Bulls Fight to Reclaim $200 Resistance Zone

Image
Institutional confidence in Solana (SOL) continues to surge as Bitwise clients invest a massive $69.5 million, supporting the blockchain as a frontrunner among alternative Layer-1 assets. The investment shows a growing appetite for scalable, low-cost blockchain solutions beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum. Solana has been one of 2025’s standout performers, supported by its lightning-fast transaction speeds, affordable fees, and expanding DeFi and Web3 ecosystems. The Bitwise allocation signals institutional validation of Solana’s infrastructure and future potential, particularly as adoption accelerates tokenized asset markets. On-chain metrics reveal heightened activity, transaction volumes, developer participation, and staking inflows are all climbing. This combination of technological strength and real-world integration reinforces investor optimism, even as short-term volatility tests the $200 resistance level. Bitwise Expands Its Institutional Crypto Strategy Bitwise Asset Management’...
Read more