Consumer Apps Support Program (CASP) Feasibility Report
Author: Tempe Techie
Research timeline: December 2025 - February 2026
Report date: 25 February 2026
This report is the deliverable of a Firestarter grant I received from the OpCo to explore the feasibility of a Consumer App Support Program (CASP) in the ArbitrumDAO. You can find all the information around the grant in the dashboard maintained by the OpCo here.
For better formatting, you can also read the report in Google Docs here.
Lastly, the notes from all the interviews conducted in the context of the CASP research, as well as the feasibility report itself, have been uploaded in a GPT with which you can chat directly here. While you can know which apps were interviewed (found in the report below) and you can see the notes from each interview, we have removed direct attribution in the GPT.
Summary
This report evaluates whether Arbitrum DAO should create a dedicated Consumer Apps Support Program (CASP), and what form it should take.
The research included interviews with consumer app founders building on Arbitrum, as well as conversations with people from Offchain Labs, the Arbitrum Foundation, and the Arbitrum DAO. Across different verticals, founders described many of the same challenges.
While support for consumer apps within Arbitrum does exist, it is fragmented. Grants, audits, gas subsidies, and investments are available, but there is no single owner responsible for ongoing lifecycle support. After onboarding or receiving a grant, many teams report limited follow-up, unclear communication, and difficulty navigating the ecosystem.
To address these issues, four CASP options were evaluated: a fully fledged CASP, a lean CASP with monetary support, a lean CASP without monetary support, and no CASP.
After discussions with AAEs, it was decided that the path forward is for AAEs to improve their existing app support, rather than creating a new consumer apps support program run by the DAO.
Why Consumer Apps Matter Now
In the past few years, the crypto space has focused primarily on infrastructure. That made sense, especially considering the high gas fees Ethereum faced in late 2017 and early 2018, as well as during the 2020/2021 cycle. Scalability was a real bottleneck, and improving it was a necessary priority for the industry.
Networks like Arbitrum addressed this issue by offering significantly lower transaction fees while still being secured by Ethereum Layer 1. In many ways, the technical foundations were put in place. By 2024/25, the infrastructure seemed ready to support a new wave of users.
However, over the past year or so, the crypto community has not grown as expected. In fact, it has shrunk. One major reason is the rapid rise of AI, which has pulled attention, talent, and capital away from crypto. At the same time, relatively low returns for crypto investors (especially compared to stocks and commodities) have made the space less attractive to new participants. Together, these factors have slowed user growth.
The past few years have shown that while scalable infrastructure is essential, it is not enough on its own. Distribution and user growth matter just as much. Building better rails does not automatically bring more passengers.
To achieve meaningful growth, the focus must shift toward non-crypto-native users. That requires consumer applications: products that solve real-world problems for everyday users while abstracting away the complexity of crypto in the background.
There are already examples of this approach succeeding. Polymarket, built on Polygon, began as a crypto-native application but expanded to a broader audience through account abstraction and improved user experience. Telegram, on the other hand, started as a mainstream messaging app and later integrated blockchain functionality through the TON network.
In today’s environment, focusing exclusively on crypto-native users is no longer a viable path to meaningful growth. The crypto-native user base is relatively small and, if anything, shrinking. It is also largely mercenary in nature; users frequently move from one app or chain to another in search of higher yields or short-term incentives. This dynamic makes retention difficult and limits long-term ecosystem stability.
A better strategy is to focus on non-crypto users and their real needs. When users adopt a product because it genuinely solves a problem for them (not because of speculation or incentives), they are more likely to stay. This leads to stronger retention, healthier ecosystems, and more sustainable growth.
To improve support for consumer applications, we first need to evaluate what is already being done and understand how Arbitrum-based apps experience that support today. Only by assessing the current landscape can we identify gaps and design a more effective framework for driving consumer adoption.
Current Status of Consumer Apps Support
Consumer apps within the Arbitrum ecosystem are currently supported by several different entities and programs.
Offchain Labs
At Offchain Labs (OCL), the Consumer & Gaming Partnerships team is responsible for consumer apps. Their focus is primarily on identifying opportunities and assessing the readiness of applications in areas such as prediction markets, consumer rewards, RWA collectibles, sports fan engagement, and similar categories.
In the prediction markets space, they have worked with apps such as SX Bet, Forkast, Rain, and others. However, prediction markets face significant regulatory challenges due to their unclear legal status in many countries, including the United States. As a result, OCL is looking for ways to collaborate with other AAEs to help address and navigate these challenges.
Last year, OCL announced a joint initiative with the Arbitrum Foundation called Onchain Labs, focused on consumer apps. However, it appears that this initiative has stalled and is currently not operational.
Arbitrum Foundation
Within the Arbitrum Foundation (AF), the Ecosystem team oversees consumer apps. In the past, the Foundation operated a Grant Program, and several interviewed consumer apps (e.g. Session and Bleap) received funding through it.
According to these teams, the program was very helpful. However, that grant program is no longer active, nor is there any post-grant support.
Currently, the Foundation runs programs such as the Audit Program (which provides code audits) and Arbifuel (a gas subsidy program), both of which some consumer apps have utilized. In addition, the Foundation operates the Ambassador Program, which could potentially serve as a distribution channel for consumer applications.
Arbitrum Gaming Ventures
Arbitrum Gaming Ventures (AGV) invests in gaming projects, including consumer-facing apps with gamified experiences, such as prediction markets and similar platforms.
For example, AGV invested in Forkast, a prediction market with a strong eGaming focus. Forkast previously went through the OCL pipeline and was then referred to AGV for investment, which is a good example of cross-AAE collaboration.
Arbitrum DAO
The Arbitrum DAO currently operates the D.A.O. Grants Program, which is scheduled to conclude in early 2026, as well as the DRIP program. However, DRIP is primarily focused on DeFi and RWA infrastructure and protocols rather than pure consumer applications.
Some of the consumer apps interviewed for the purposes of this research received a D.A.O. grant: Maldo, MeetWith, and DualMint.
In the past, the DAO also ran programs such as STIP and LTIPP, which were precursors to the current DRIP program.
Key Takeaways
Several strong consumer apps have either been brought into the Arbitrum ecosystem or have grown within it as a result of these initiatives. However, based on interviews with many of these teams, it is clear that they require additional support to scale, particularly in reaching and onboarding non-crypto users.
While the Arbitrum ecosystem provides builder support across multiple entities, this support is fragmented, program-specific, and often optimized for infrastructure development or crypto-native growth rather than broader consumer adoption.
Consumer App Landscape & Segmentation
For the purposes of this research, twenty different consumer app builders were contacted, most of them through warm introductions. Seventeen discovery interviews were conducted, while three did not respond, and no interviews were conducted with them.
Table 1: Outreach and interviews conducted
| Team | Inquiry for interview | Interview date | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bleap | 16 Dec 2025 | 18 Dec 2025 | Non-custodial wallet with a debit card |
| Session | 17 Dec 2025 | 7 Jan 2026 | Decentralized chat app |
| 9lives | 18 Dec 2025 | 6 Jan 2026 | Prediction market |
| SX Bet | 19 Dec 2025 | 23 Dec 2025 | Prediction market |
| Forkast | 23 Dec 2025 | 6 Jan 2026 | Prediction market |
| Vault777 | 23 Dec 2025 | 6 Jan 2026 | Decentralized casino |
| DualMint | 6 Jan 2026 | 8 Jan 2026 | RWA (tokenized cash flows) |
| Huddle | 9 Jan 2026 | / | Video conferencing |
| Estate Protocol | 9 Jan 2026 | 13 Jan 2026 | RWA (tokenized real estate) |
| Maldo | 12 Jan 2026 | 13 Jan 2026 | Marketplace for real-world services |
| Bluff | 12 Jan 2026 | 15 Jan 2026 | Prediction market |
| Berry | 12 Jan 2026 | / | Fintech |
| Rain | 12 Jan 2026 | 20 Jan 2026 | Prediction market |
| Possum | 13 Jan 2026 | 20 Jan 2026 | Prediction market |
| MeetWith | 19 Jan 2026 | 21 Jan 2026 | Scheduling app |
| GMX | 19 Jan 2026 | 27 Jan 2026 | Perpetuals exchange |
| Volt | 19 Jan 2026 | / | Perpetuals exchange |
| Untangled | 21 Jan 2026 | 27 Jan 2026 | Vaults platform |
| Variational | 3 Feb 2026 | 23 Feb 2026 | Perpetuals exchange |
| Ostium | 3 Feb 2026 | 23 Feb 2026 | Perpetuals exchange |
In addition to builders, interviews were also conducted with representatives from Offchain Labs (Consumer & Gaming Partnerships team), the Arbitrum Foundation (Ecosystem team), and the Arbitrum DAO.
Table 2 below lists apps based on their level of user activity (apps marked in green have higher DAU/MAU levels), whether they have implemented account abstraction, whether they target non-crypto-native users, whether they have a mobile app (or one in development), and how focused they are on the Arbitrum One chain.
Table 2: App status overview
| Team | User base | Account abstraction | Non-crypto users | Mobile app | Arbitrum-focused |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bleap | high | yes | high | yes | yes |
| Session | high | yes | high | yes | yes |
| Maldo | high | yes | high | yes | yes |
| Forkast | high | yes | high | soon | yes |
| SX Bet | high | partially | high | none | partially |
| Ostium | high | partially | mid | soon | yes |
| GMX | high | none | none | none | yes |
| Variational | high | none | none | soon | yes |
| MeetWith | mid | yes | high | none | partially |
| Rain | mid | partially | mid | none | yes |
| Estate Protocol | mid | none | none | none | yes |
| Vault777 | mid | partially | none | none | yes |
| DualMint | mid | none | none | none | partially |
| 9lives | mid | none | none | none | partially |
| Bluff | low | partially | none | none | yes |
| Possum | low | none | none | none | yes |
| Untangled | low | none | none | none | partially |
Consumer Apps Challenges & Needs
Interviews with consumer app founders revealed a consistent and shared set of challenges and needs they have, which limit their ability to scale, especially beyond crypto-native users.
Distribution & visibility
The most common challenge is user acquisition and retention, especially expanding beyond crypto-native audiences and into mainstream markets.
Building effective distribution channels is difficult and expensive, and many teams lack the budget to fund sustained user acquisition through marketing, partnerships, or paid campaigns.
Liquidity
Liquidity remains a major constraint for certain categories of consumer apps, especially prediction markets and RWA-focused products.
Without sufficient liquidity, even well-designed products struggle to deliver a good user experience or reach meaningful adoption.
Audits and code reviews
Security is seen as non-negotiable, but audits are expensive and difficult to navigate. Several founders were not aware of the Arbitrum Audit program at all. Others applied but were not accepted and received no feedback, making it hard to understand how to improve or pursue alternative options.
Fundraising
Many interviewed teams are actively raising new funding rounds. Beyond grants, they would benefit from warm introductions to venture capital firms and angel investors, as well as guidance on fundraising narratives and positioning within the ecosystem.
Hiring
Talent acquisition is another recurring challenge. Teams reported difficulties finding qualified developers, as well as growth and business development talent. This often slows execution and limits their ability to scale once product-market fit begins to emerge.
Regulatory and platform constraints
Regulatory uncertainty continues to affect several consumer verticals, particularly betting, prediction markets, and RWAs.
In addition, teams building mobile apps face platform-level hurdles such as app store approvals and compliance requirements, which add time, cost, and risk to launches.
Ecosystem navigation & support
Founders frequently described the ecosystem as hard to navigate. After receiving a grant or onboarding onto Arbitrum, many teams experience limited follow-up or ongoing support.
Information gaps are common, with teams unaware of existing programs such as audit support or gas subsidies. Slow responses, unclear ownership, and the absence of a dedicated support contact make it difficult to find the right help at the right time.
Teams also expressed interest in stronger facilitation of partnerships with other Arbitrum apps and protocols to enable composability and shared growth.
Proposed Support Program Options
One way to address the challenges consumer apps face is through a specialized program (CASP: Consumer Apps Support Program).
It would be a lean, low-volume program focused on a small number of apps, specifically those that are already live and have a meaningful user base and traction.
The selected apps must have strong ties to Arbitrum. They should either exclusively integrate Arbitrum into their infrastructure or use Arbitrum as the default chain for their core use case.
It’s also important that selected apps target non-crypto-native users. This means they must implement account abstraction, and abstract the blockchain/web3 away. Ideally, users shouldn’t even need to realize that crypto or blockchain is being used at the infrastructure layer.
A strong plus would be having a mobile app and being mobile-first, since most people access the internet primarily through mobile devices.
The main goal of the program would be to increase activity on Arbitrum One. This primarily means increasing transaction volume, but it could also include growing TVL and liquidity if that makes more sense for a given app.
Additionally, improving composability (through integrations with other Arbitrum-based dApps and protocols) would be highly beneficial.
Below are different options for what the program could look like (note that the budget amounts are rough estimates and would need to be recalculated more precisely in a potential governance proposal).
Option 1: Fully Fledged CASP
| Team Size | Scope of Work | Monetary Support | Budget | Expected Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Large (4-5 persons) | Consumer apps support, business development | YES | $1.55M/year | High |
A fully fledged CASP with a dedicated team of 4-5 people responsible for:
- Supporting selected consumer apps throughout their lifecycle on Arbitrum
- Actively sourcing and attracting new, high-potential consumer apps (including established web2 applications)
- Coordinating with AAEs, investors, technical advisors, and ecosystem contributors
- Providing structured monetary support for scaling user acquisition or liquidity, where appropriate
Monetary support could take several forms, such as grants, loans, liquidity provisioning, or other mechanisms aligned with broader ecosystem growth goals. The intent would not be to fund product development, but rather to accelerate distribution and user growth.
The annual budget estimate (~$1.55M) would allocate approximately one-third to team and operational expenses and up to $1M toward direct support of selected apps.
Expected Impact
This option has the highest potential impact due to:
- Active business development efforts
- Ability to attract established web2 consumer platforms
- Direct capital deployment to accelerate user acquisition
- Stronger ownership of the consumer app growth vertical
It could meaningfully expand Arbitrum’s presence among non-crypto-native users.
Risks & Limitations
- Higher operational complexity and coordination requirements
- Risk of overlap with existing AAE mandates
- Capital allocation risk if supported apps underperform
- Requires sustained pipeline quality to justify scale
Timing Considerations
This option would require more setup time and structured alignment with existing ecosystem entities before launch. Clear coordination mechanisms would be necessary from the outset.
Feasibility Assessment
Feasible in principle, but operationally more demanding. Its success would depend on strong internal coordination, high-quality deal flow, and disciplined capital deployment.
Option 2: Lean CASP with Monetary Support
| Team Size | Scope of Work | Monetary Support | Budget | Expected Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lean (1-2 persons) | Consumer apps support | YES | $1.18M/year | Mid-High |
Option 2 would operate with a lean team (1-2 people) primarily focused on:
- Serving as a coordination and support layer for selected consumer apps
- Maintaining regular contact with participating teams
- Identifying bottlenecks in distribution, fundraising, hiring, or ecosystem navigation
- Connecting teams with AAEs, advisors, investors, and other ecosystem partners
Unlike Option 1, this version would not focus heavily on outbound business development. Instead, it would rely largely on existing AAE pipelines (e.g. grant recipients or incubated projects) to identify mature candidates for CASP.
The monetary support component (up to $1M/year) would remain available to selected apps to accelerate user acquisition or liquidity, while team and operational expenses would be significantly lower ($180k/year).
Expected Impact
The impact of this CASP version would depend on:
- The strength of the pipeline from AAEs and ecosystem programs
- The effectiveness of the support & coordination layer
- Effective use of monetary support
While less expansive than Option 1, this model could still significantly strengthen post-grant lifecycle support and consumer app scaling.
Risks & Limitations
- Limited capacity for proactive business development
- Dependence on external pipeline quality
- Capital allocation risk if supported apps underperform
- Impact ceiling lower than a fully fledged version
Timing Considerations
This option could be implemented relatively quickly due to its lean structure. It would require alignment with AAEs to ensure consistent referrals and coordination.
Feasibility Assessment
Operationally feasible with moderate complexity. It strikes a balance between resource efficiency and direct growth support.
Option 3: Lean CASP without Monetary Support
| Team Size | Scope of Work | Monetary Support | Budget | Expected Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lean (1-2 persons) | Consumer apps support | NO | $180k/year | Mid |
Option 3 maintains a lean coordination team (1-2 people), but removes the monetary support component entirely.
The focus would be on:
- Ecosystem navigation and structured follow-up support
- Connecting consumer apps with relevant technical, marketing, and fundraising resources
- Facilitating partnerships and composability within Arbitrum
- Identifying and addressing systemic gaps in consumer app support
Under this model, CASP would function as a dedicated success and coordination layer without directly allocating capital.
Expected Impact
While this option lacks direct monetary support (which may limit acceleration in user acquisition), it can still meaningfully reduce blind spots in support and improve retention of existing consumer apps within Arbitrum.
Risks & Limitations
- Limited capacity for proactive business development
- Dependence on external pipeline quality
- Lower ability to accelerate user acquisition (due to no monetary support)
Timing Considerations
This is the fastest and simplest option to implement. It requires minimal structural changes and limited budget allocation.
Feasibility Assessment
Highly feasible from an operational standpoint. Represents the lowest financial and structural risk among all options.
Option 4: No CASP, AAEs Fill the Blind Spots
| Team Size | Scope of Work | Monetary Support | Budget | Expected Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| None new (existing AAE teams) | Consumer apps support, business development | None (apart from what already exists) | $0 | Low-Mid |
Under Option 4, no new CASP program would be created. Instead, the identified challenges would be addressed by:
- Adjusting internal processes within AAEs
- Improving coordination between existing ecosystem programs
- Increasing awareness of current support tools among consumer apps
Responsibility for consumer app lifecycle support would remain fragmented across existing entities.
Expected Impact
Impact would depend on the extent to which existing entities are able to:
- Improve cross-entity coordination
- Close communication gaps
- Introduce stronger post-grant follow-up mechanisms
If effectively implemented, improvements could occur without additional budget or structural expansion. However, outcomes would rely heavily on internal alignment across independent actors.
Risks & Limitations
- No single accountable owner for consumer app success
- Fragmentation of support and lack of coordination may persist
- No real incentive for systemic change
Timing Considerations
This option could begin immediately, as it requires no new structure. However, meaningful change may take time if dependent on organizational adjustments.
Feasibility Assessment
Fully feasible from a resource standpoint. The key uncertainty lies in whether AAEs are willing to change internal processes to address the gaps identified in interviews.
Practical Examples of CASP Support
Below is a list of actions the CASP program could take to support consumer apps building on Arbitrum. These are concrete, practical examples meant to illustrate what’s possible. This is not a comprehensive list, but rather a starting point for what effective support could look like.
Distribution Channels and Marketing Budgets
The single biggest challenge for most teams is user acquisition, especially when trying to reach people outside the crypto-native audience. Expanding beyond the existing crypto user base is difficult, and many teams lack the channels and relationships needed to do it effectively.
Arbitrum could help by supporting PR efforts and reaching out to media outlets. However, even AAEs have limitations, particularly when it comes to media connections outside the crypto industry. That’s why it’s important for Arbitrum to deliberately focus on building distribution channels that reach non-crypto-native users and are used for promoting consumer apps built on Arbitrum.
In addition to distribution and PR support, monetary support could be directed toward user acquisition. Teams could use these funds for rewards or incentives aimed at non-crypto-native users, or for paid advertising campaigns outside the crypto space.
Building a Network of Arbitrum-Aligned Investors
Many of the interviewed teams are currently fundraising and have explicitly asked whether Arbitrum could help with investor introductions. This includes teams such as Forkast, 9lives, SX Bet, Session, DualMint, and Vault777.
Given that several venture capitalists, angel investors, and well-connected individuals serve as Arbitrum DAO delegates, it would make sense to organize a network of Arbitrum-aligned investors. CASP could make introductions between investors and app teams, helping them secure the capital they need to grow.
Highlighting App Teams at Events
Arbitrum maintains a strong presence at many crypto conferences, either by sponsoring events directly or by hosting side events. This presence should be leveraged more intentionally to promote consumer apps built on Arbitrum.
Inviting teams to give talks, join roundtables, or be featured in other ways would provide them with valuable exposure. All interviewed teams expressed strong interest in participating and indicated that such opportunities would be highly valuable.
At the same time, Arbitrum should increase its participation in non-crypto events to reach non-crypto-native users.
For example, last year Arbitrum participated in a major gaming conference. This type of outreach should become more common. In fact, Arbitrum should attend more non-crypto events (e.g. tradfi or fintech) than purely crypto-focused gatherings.
Help With Hiring
Several teams reported difficulties hiring, particularly when it comes to developers. They have observed a noticeable talent shift from crypto to AI, which has made recruiting even more competitive.
One way CASP could help is by creating and maintaining a network of skilled software developers and other professionals within the Arbitrum ecosystem who are available for full-time roles or contract work. This would make it easier for participating teams to find trusted, ecosystem-aligned talent.
Leveraging DAO Expertise
The Arbitrum DAO includes individuals with a wide range of expertise that could be valuable to consumer app teams. Investing and hiring (mentioned before) are two clear examples, but other needs are likely to emerge throughout the program.
CASP could map the expertise of DAO members and create a structured way to connect app teams with relevant advisors when specific needs arise. For example, DualMint is building a global business development network to reach small and medium-sized businesses interested in joining its platform. Access to experienced business development professionals within the DAO could significantly accelerate that effort.
Bringing New Consumer Apps into the Ecosystem
CASP should not only support existing teams, but it should also actively bring new consumer apps to Arbitrum.
This means proactively reaching out to both crypto-native projects and established web2 apps with real user traction that could integrate Arbitrum into their products.
To do this effectively, Arbitrum should regularly show up at non-crypto events and build relationships with founders outside the crypto space.
Providing Liquidity
Some interviewed apps, mainly in areas such as prediction markets, RWA, and perpetual exchanges, require liquidity to grow and attract traders.
Through targeted monetary support, CASP could help provide liquidity to these platforms.
Non-monetary support could include introductions to independent entities within the Arbitrum ecosystem capable of supplying liquidity, making sure that promising apps are not constrained by capital limitations during their growth phase.
Introductions to TradFi Partners
Several teams indicated a need for banking partners to support on-ramp and off-ramp functionality. Others are seeking connections within tradfi to identify potential clients or partners.
CASP could play a valuable role by opening doors and making introductions to traditional finance institutions. These relationships could be critical for enabling smoother financial UX and expanding real-world adoption of Arbitrum-based consumer apps.
Final Assessment and Conclusion
Information gathered via interviews with AAEs and other relevant stakeholders indicates that the best path forward is not to create a new program like CASP.
Instead, existing AAE consumer app teams should build on the findings and insights from this report and further strengthen their support for consumer and financial apps, improving current initiatives rather than introducing a new program.
This Thursday (12 March 2026 at 4PM UTC) I’ll present this report during a video call. Please check the Arbitrum DAO calendar for full details and the Google Meet link.