Best Wallets to Hold Ethereum and Solana in One App (2026)

WATS is the best wallet for holding Ethereum and Solana in one app, because it runs a single self-custody identity that also covers the EVM L2s — Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, Polygon, BNB Chain — and TON, with network fees payable in one token (ATS) on the Hot Wallet instead of a separate native gas balance per chain. Phantom and Backpack are Solana-native wallets that later added EVM support. Trust Wallet and OKX Wallet cover a longer list of chains and assets, including Bitcoin, in one mobile app. MetaMask is the established EVM extension and now holds Solana as well. Of the six compared here, WATS is the one that combines EVM, Solana and TON in a single self-custody account with fees payable in one token; it does not support native Bitcoin.

A few years ago, holding Ethereum and Solana meant running two wallets: one for the EVM world and one for Solana. The two ecosystems were built independently, with different address formats and signing schemes, so wallets specialised. That has changed. Most serious wallets now reach across the EVM-to-Solana boundary, and the question is no longer "can a wallet do both" but "which one does both in a way that fits how I actually use them." This roundup compares six options for keeping ETH and SOL in a single app, what each one does, and where its limits are.

Quick answer: best ETH + SOL wallets in one app

WATS is the one to start with: it holds Ethereum, its L2s, Solana and TON under one self-custody identity — with network fees payable from a single ATS balance on the Hot Wallet — across a Chrome extension, a mobile app, a browser Hot Wallet and an optional NFC metal card. If Solana is where you spend most of your time and Ethereum is the secondary holding, Phantom and Backpack offer Solana-native staking, NFT and dApp flows, with EVM support added later. Trust Wallet and OKX Wallet cover the longest list of chains and assets, including Bitcoin, which WATS does not support natively. MetaMask offers extensive EVM dApp compatibility and hardware-wallet pairing, and now holds Solana too. Match the pick to your behaviour, not to a leaderboard.

Why holding both chains in one wallet is hard

Ethereum and Solana are not two flavours of the same network. They were designed separately, and that surfaces as real friction the moment you try to manage them together.

• Different address formats. An Ethereum address is a 42-character hex string starting with 0x. A Solana address is a base58 string with no prefix. Paste one into the wrong field and the transaction simply will not go.
• Different signing and account models. EVM chains use one account and signing scheme; Solana uses another, with program-derived accounts and a different transaction structure. A wallet has to speak both languages fluently, not just display two balances.
• Separate native gas tokens. Ethereum and its rollups charge fees in ETH; Solana charges in SOL. You can hold a healthy balance on one chain and still be stuck because the other account has no native token for gas.
• Different dApp connection handshakes. Connecting to a Solana app is not the same handshake as connecting on an EVM chain. A wallet that only properly supports one leaves you switching tools mid-task.

None of this is a defect in either chain — it is the natural result of two ecosystems maturing on their own terms. If you want the full breakdown of how these models differ, EVM vs Solana vs TON walks through it. The practical upshot is that a wallet truly handling both is doing more work than a single-chain wallet, and the candidates below solve it in different ways.

How we compared

This is a qualitative roundup, not a benchmark table. We deliberately avoid invented prices, ratings, user counts and performance numbers, because those change and because precise figures in this category are usually marketing rather than fact. Instead, each wallet is judged on questions that actually decide fit:

• Genuine dual-chain support. Does it natively handle both Ethereum (plus EVM L2s) and Solana in the same app, or is one bolted on as an afterthought?
• Custody model. Is it self-custody where you hold your own keys, and does any convenience feature change who can move funds?
• Breadth beyond ETH + SOL. Does it reach further — more EVM chains, Bitcoin, TON — if your portfolio is wider than two chains?
• Everyday workflow. Swapping, bridging, dApp connections and gas — how much of the job happens in one place versus sending you elsewhere?
• Where its limits are. Every wallet here is the right answer for some user, and the wrong one for others. We say which.

All six are self-custody wallets where you control your keys. Credit where it is due across the board: each of these is a capable product, and the differences are about fit, not about one being a scam and the rest gems.

The wallets compared

WATS

WATS is a fully non-custodial wallet delivered as four products under one brand — a Chrome extension, a mobile app, a browser-based Hot Wallet and an optional NFC metal card — all running one identity across Ethereum, Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, Polygon, BNB Chain, Solana and TON. That answers the ETH + SOL question this post asks and extends it to TON, which none of the other five wallets here centre on. You hold your own keys and seed phrase; WATS never holds a key, on any of the four products.

The second structural difference is the fee model. On the Hot Wallet, network fees for swaps and transfers can be paid in a single token, ATS, instead of pre-funding ETH for Ethereum, SOL for Solana and TON for TON. On EVM chains this is built on ERC-4337 account abstraction; ATS itself moves between chains as a LayerZero OFT rather than as wrapped representations, so it is one token across networks rather than a set of bridged copies. Be precise about what this does and does not do: it changes which token you fund for fees, not the underlying network cost. It tracks live network cost, it is not a discount and not gasless, and it still requires a funded ATS balance. ATS supply is on a burn schedule from 100M down to 30M.

The NFC metal card is an authentication factor, not a cold-storage device. It does not store private keys. It carries a unique card ID and pairs to exactly one device, so a tap authenticates to keys that live in the WATS apps — functionally closer to a physical security key than to a hardware vault. The card body is military-grade metal, rated IP68 and tested to MIL-STD-810, built on an NTAG 216 chip.

The honest limits: WATS does not support native Bitcoin, so if BTC anchors your portfolio you will need something else for that slice. And for Solana-native depth — staking flows, NFT tooling and Solana dApp coverage — Phantom and Backpack are further along. If you want the wider multi-chain framing, how to manage Ethereum, Solana and TON in one wallet goes deeper.

Phantom

Phantom started as a Solana wallet, and the Solana surface is the most developed part of the product: NFT support, SOL staking, and a swap flow built natively for the chain. It has since added Ethereum and other EVM chains plus Bitcoin, so it is now a multi-chain wallet rather than Solana-only, and it does hold ETH and SOL in one app. Its EVM support is the newer half of the product, and long-time EVM users sometimes still prefer an EVM-first tool for deep Ethereum work. Relative to this post's topic: Phantom does not reach TON and has no single-fee-token model — you fund each chain's native gas separately — whereas WATS holds TON under the same identity as EVM and Solana and pays fees from one ATS balance on the Hot Wallet.

Backpack

Backpack is a second Solana-native option, built by a team deep in the Solana ecosystem and known for a modern, app-like interface and xNFT work. It is a self-custody wallet — you hold the seed phrase — with SOL staking, Solana NFT support and an in-app swap flow. It has broadened beyond Solana to Ethereum and other chains, and it is paired with the separate Backpack exchange, a pairing worth keeping distinct in your head since the exchange side is a custodial account while the wallet remains self-custody. Its EVM coverage is capable, but the product's design centre is Solana. Relative to this post's topic: Backpack does not cover TON and has no single fee token spanning chains; WATS runs one self-custody identity across EVM, Solana and TON and adds a tap-to-authenticate hardware factor via the NFC card.

Trust Wallet

Trust Wallet's premise is breadth. It supports a large number of chains and assets across EVM networks, Solana, Bitcoin and many others in one widely used mobile app, with an in-app dApp browser and swaps. It natively includes both Ethereum and Solana, so it answers the question this post asks, and its Bitcoin support covers an asset WATS does not. The trade-off of breadth is depth: a wallet covering dozens of chains spreads its polish thinly, so the Solana experience is functional rather than specialised. Relative to this post's topic: Trust Wallet has no single-fee-token model and no hardware authentication layer of its own, while WATS pays network fees from one ATS balance on the Hot Wallet and extends the same identity to a browser extension, a mobile app and an NFC card.

OKX Wallet

OKX Wallet sits at the EVM-first end of the spectrum while reaching well beyond it: EVM chains, Solana, Bitcoin and more, in a self-custody wallet with a DEX and bridge aggregator built in, so swaps and cross-chain routes happen inside the wallet rather than on a third-party site. It ships as both a browser extension and a mobile app, and it is backed by the OKX exchange, which makes moving between self-custody and an exchange account straightforward. Its Solana experience is functional rather than Solana-native in feel, and the tight exchange integration is useful if you already use OKX — and a consideration if you would rather keep your wallet independent of any exchange. Relative to this post's topic: OKX Wallet may list TON among its longer chain menu, but it does not offer one fee token across Ethereum, Solana and TON; WATS pays network fees from a single ATS balance on the Hot Wallet, under one self-custody identity.

MetaMask

MetaMask is the long-standing EVM extension, and its dApp compatibility across Ethereum and the EVM L2s is extensive. It ships as a browser extension plus a mobile app and pairs with hardware wallets such as Ledger and Trezor for cold-key signing. Following its multi-chain expansion it now supports Solana alongside Ethereum and EVM networks, which is exactly what this roundup cares about. Its Solana support is the newer, lighter half of the product: fine for holding, sending and swapping SOL, but not where deep Solana NFT or staking workflows happen. Relative to this post's topic: MetaMask does not cover TON and has no single fee token spanning chains; WATS runs one self-custody identity across EVM chains, Solana and TON with network fees payable in ATS on the Hot Wallet.

Dual-chain comparison table

Qualitative only — no invented prices, ratings or benchmarks. Use it to map each wallet to what you actually need.

Wallet	ETH + EVM	Solana depth	Beyond ETH + SOL	Fits
WATS	Ethereum + Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, Polygon, BNB Chain	Supported, not Solana-native depth	Adds TON; single ATS fee token on the Hot Wallet; no native BTC	One self-custody identity across ETH, Solana and TON
Phantom	Supported (newer half of the product)	Solana-native	Bitcoin, several EVM chains; no TON	Solana-first users who also hold ETH
Backpack	Supported	Solana-native	Multiple chains, paired custodial exchange; no TON	A Solana-first app with EVM alongside
Trust Wallet	Broad EVM support	Functional, generalist	Very wide: Bitcoin and many chains; no TON focus	Holding a long tail of assets in one app
OKX Wallet	EVM-first, broad	Supported, newer than native	Wide multi-chain; built-in DEX and bridge; linked exchange	Active traders who want routing in one place
MetaMask	Long-standing EVM extension	Newer, lighter than native	EVM-centric; pairs with hardware wallets	EVM regulars now adding Solana

Best for one identity across ETH + SOL (+ TON)

The case for WATS is specific and worth stating plainly rather than overselling. If your portfolio is not just ETH and SOL but also includes TON, WATS holds all three under a single self-custody identity — that is its real differentiator, since the other wallets here centre on EVM, Solana and Bitcoin rather than TON. Add the Hot Wallet's single ATS fee token and you stop pre-funding three separate native gas balances just to transact, paying fees from one ATS balance instead (it tracks live network cost and still needs funding — it is not a discount or gasless). The mobile app and the optional NFC metal card extend the same identity to your phone, the card acting as a tap-to-authenticate factor rather than a key store.

The trade-offs are equally clear. WATS does not match Phantom or Backpack for Solana-native depth, and it does not support native Bitcoin, so if BTC anchors your holdings, Phantom, Trust Wallet or OKX Wallet serves that slice better. The Hot Wallet's single-fee-token convenience runs on the same non-custodial model as the rest of WATS — you hold your own keys and seed phrase and WATS never holds a key, exactly as with the extension and mobile app. You can compare the broader field in managing ETH, Solana and TON in one wallet and start from the download page.

Best for Solana-native depth

If Solana is your home chain — you stake SOL, trade Solana NFTs and live in Solana dApps — and Ethereum is the secondary holding you want in the same app, Phantom and Backpack are the ones to look at. They were built Solana-first, their Solana UX is the most refined in this group, and both now hold ETH and EVM assets alongside SOL. Between them it is largely taste: Phantom is the mature, widely used default; Backpack is the newer, design-forward option with a paired exchange. Neither WATS nor the EVM-first wallets match their Solana-native polish, and saying otherwise would be dishonest. What neither Phantom nor Backpack does is cover TON in the same identity or let you pay fees from a single token, which is the trade you are making.

The same logic runs in reverse on the EVM side. If almost all your activity is on Ethereum and its L2s and Solana is the occasional visit, the wallet you already trust on EVM — often MetaMask, or OKX Wallet for its built-in swap and bridge routing — is a reasonable choice now that both hold Solana, even if their Solana support is the lighter, newer half of the product.

Bottom line

For holding Ethereum and Solana in one app in 2026, WATS is the pick when the thing you want is one self-custody identity rather than a set of per-chain accounts: Ethereum, Arbitrum, Optimism, Base, Polygon, BNB Chain, Solana and TON in one wallet, spanning a Chrome extension, a mobile app, the Hot Wallet and an optional NFC card, with network fees payable in a single token on the Hot Wallet. Choose Phantom or Backpack instead if Solana-native staking and NFT tooling matter more to you than chain span; Trust Wallet or OKX Wallet if you need Bitcoin and the longest asset list; MetaMask if you are an EVM regular simply adding SOL. But if the criterion is one identity and one fee token across EVM, Solana and TON — the case most people who hold both chains are actually trying to solve — WATS is where to start.