Did your wallet exhibit issues during the stresstest? Did you feel like you could no longer trust it? Are you now looking for an alternative? or maybe you like your wallet still, but are curious how well the competition fared?

I took the time to stress test the wallet ecosystem, and here's how I did it:

Before the stresstest, I went to https://www.bitcoincash.org/#wallets and downloaded every single android wallet available to my phone, as well as a few more based on recommendation I got on twitter and memo.cash. I then tried to fund them with bitcoin cash and for those where I could I then did a reference transaction and then left a small amount of value on the wallet so I could perform a final transaction during the stress test. During the stresstest, I then opened the wallets and sent a final transaction.
Let's start off with some honorably mentions of wallets that I did not test, because despite listed as supporting Bitcoin Cash, I just didn't find any such support:
Going further, there was a number of wallets that did not support CashAddr, and I had no interest in wallets that after this long time still did not support the new address format:
  1. Yenom | According to comments it does support CashAddr, but I couldn't get it working
There was also a special case of wallets that even though they claim support, I just wasn't able to test it due to the unstable and broken nature of the application itself:
So with 7 of the listed wallets and one of the recommended ones already ruled out we might ask ourselves what expectations we should have and how mature the wallet landscape really is.
Note: the Coinomi wallet was not among the tested due to human error. I apologize for the inconvenience and hope you still appreciate the hard work and effort that went into participating in the stress test (https://www.yours.org/content/a-timelapse-and-lessons-learned-from-the-stresstest-836ced3abad6) and still finding time to complete this wallet test.
Note 2: A kind user commented on the article with transaction links for Coinomi transactions. You can read the comments below, and the data has also been amended to the article.
Note 3: Thanks to those that has already paid for this content, I have earned more than I had expected and I would rather more people learned and got engaged, than I would want to withhold the information. The full article is now available to everyone, but if you can I would still appreciate that you spend the $1 and review the article.
My expectations was not very high after having ruled out so many and experienced such extreme variety in user interfaces and so many poorly designed and difficult to use wallets.Despite this, the end result was remarkedly positive, most wallets tested had reasonable fees and not even a single wallet experience fee escalation, and all wallets that managed to send a transaction propagated across the network and made it into either the next, or in the block thereafter. There was some discrepencies between which block explorers noticed the transactions before being mined, but this is more likely to be an issue with the network rather than the wallets themselves.

Here's the breakdown per-wallet, with fees, transaction links and notes:

  1. Bitcoin.com: 2.43 ƀ ~ 2.46 ƀ | Explorer didn't show transaction until mined
  2. BitPay: 2.43 ƀ ~ 2.50 ƀ | Did not show transaction in the app until mined
  3. BitPie: 20.00 ƀ ~ 20.00 ƀ | High normal fees
  4. BreadWallet: 3.00 ƀ ~ 3.00 ƀ | Desynchronized and had to rescan
  5. Coinbase: 2.26 ƀ ~ 2.30 ƀ | Explorer didn't show transaction until mined
  6. Copay: 2.84 ƀ ~ 2.93 ƀ | Wallet said it failed to send, but transaction was mined
  7. Edge: 6.81 ƀ ~ 6.81 ƀ | Transaction was sent, but didn't show until several blocks later
  8. Guarda Bitcoin Cash: 10.00 ƀ ~ 10.00 ƀ | Very good fee options
  9. Handcash: 2.32 ƀ ~ 2.32 ƀ | Got error messages when sending, but retrying worked
  10. Melis: 6.06 ƀ ~ 6.74 ƀ | Worked the same before and during the stress test
  11. Pixel Wallet: 2.32 ƀ ~ 3.50 ƀ | Kept crashing at send, but transaction propagated

After the articles was published, users have contributed the following:

  1. Coinomi: 22.70 ƀ, 22.70 ƀ | Contributed by Donald Mulders (both during the stresstest)

The following wallets was also tested, but failed for various reasons:

  1. CashPay: After the first send, the app no longer started. Clearing cache helped, but during the stress test the wallet broke down entirely and I was unable to make a stresstest transaction.
  2. Electron Cash: Record-high fees of 230.00 ƀ and during the stresstest the application repeatedly crashed when I tried to send the remaining funds.

I hope you found the read interesting and if I missed anything or you had a different experience, do let me know in the comments below.
 

$5.25
$25.00

Reviews
17 of 17 reviewers say it's worth paying for

0 of 17 reviewers say it's not worth paying for
Comments
  earned 0.0¢
Any subjective favorites?
0.0¢
   3mo ago
  earned 0.0¢
Thanks for the review
0.0¢
   3mo ago
  earned 0.0¢
@emergent_reasons: I have previously used Copay (savings, multisig, security) and Coinomi (spending and testing). With the test results and having fiddled around with a large number of wallets I have moved my spending over to HandCash but I still don't feel quite at home there.
The UI update in the latest copay release was a breath of fresh air back to the old pattern of working with wallets.
I think I am more unsure than ever on which I like most, but I'm definately in the market for a new spending / easy-to-use wallet with support for NFC, fingerprint unlock, convenient backups (or I'll not do backups, they're not worth it on small spending accounts if they are burdensome).
In short: I trust copay to keep my funds safe, but other than that I find all wallets lacking one way or another.
0.0¢
   3mo ago
  earned 0.0¢
Jonathan Silverblood , 3 questions:
1) Dust limit were different between wallets, could you add that information? In Bitcoin.com it was about 5000 sats, instead of the 546 sats.
2) Can you analyse the block explorers during the stress test? It was hard to see the information about the tx in my Bitcoin.com Wallet. It was a problem of the wallet integration with the block explorers?
3) Could you elaborate a wallet ranking, with objective criteria. Could create a counsel of experts that can analyse, vote for points for every subject (User Experience/Interface, 0-conf, dust limit, fees, etc...). Like this site: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1N716qBAan8tlX2R0YMgD4EnD_H6T135nG4cV5o1Bvvs

0.0¢
   3mo ago
  earned 0.0¢
Hi @BCH_Brazil.
1: I cannot re-collect any other data (such as dust levels) as the stress test is over already.
2: many block explorers had "issues" during the test, which I assume is because the network ended up slightly and temporarily segmented. Some wallets broadcasted to different entry points in the network, so issues with transaction visibility was not always a wallets fault, and any block explorer would have issues with transactions from isolated broadcast points.
3: I might set up critera and do a wallet-review series in the future, if there is enough demand to make it economically worth my time. (I would, if so, also provide suggestions for improvement to the wallet developers when possible)
0.0¢
   3mo ago
  earned 0.0¢
So, is Melis wallet the only one that worked properly during the stress test?
0.0¢
   3mo ago
  earned 0.0¢
@-ED-: I wouldn't put it that way; many wallets functioned but had glitches and issues. That melis didn't exhibited any issues at all, could just have been a coincidence - or it could have some magic souce underneath that made it work.
Please take into account the methodology on which I did the testing, it was a single pre-test transaction, and a single transactions during the stresstest, so not a rigorious test and results may have come out differently if I had tested them minutes earlier or later; consider it merely an anecdotal report of a single users attempt to learn more.
It also only tested the ability to send a transaction, so pixel wallet for example faired "ok", but I would not use it myself due to stability issues overall - even before the stress test.
0.0¢
   3mo ago
  earned 0.0¢
Thanks for the review on Pixel Wallet we appreciate it. Will see what we can do to improve it for better performance
Thanks
Pixel Wallet
0.0¢
   3mo ago
  earned 0.0¢
yenom does use cashaddr!
0.0¢
   3mo ago
  earned 0.0¢
@dfsoij: odd, I couldn't make it work. I will add a note about it in the article and consider this a public apology for incorrect reporting if that is indeed the case.
0.0¢
   3mo ago
  earned 0.0¢
To complete your review. I did used coinomi wallet during the stresstest to load up my scale.cash wallet. No issues at my end. Both times my perception was that transactions were instant, just a few seconds. My first transaction was 0.00356755 BCH, transaction cost was 0.00002270 BCH. Second transaction was 0.00321018, also transaction costs were 0.00002270.
25.0¢
   3mo ago
25.0¢ 25.0¢
  earned 0.0¢
@Donald_Mulders: Thank you for leaving the missing information. If you can and don't mind sharing the transaction ID's, I would love to add it to the article as a user-contributed report.
0.0¢
   3mo ago
  spent 25.0¢
Hi Jonathan, i don't mind here they are.
Transaction id 1: 26ebeb93b1eb5a44e7e66c4346c8905c1c636fad3ef54a4bd8b14b1393cc4386
Transaction id 2: 2bba4cba812df9700988e3229d3a8af5d4de7bdcd79d12dc94ecef34ae2a6aa5
0.0¢
   3mo ago
25.0¢
  spent 25.0¢
For me too Melis Wallet worked flawlessly :-)
0.0¢
   3mo ago
25.0¢
  earned 0.0¢
hey, cool article, just one question: why didn't you test the btc.com wallet? I don't understand what you mean by " I just didn't find any such support"
0.0¢
   2mo ago
  earned 0.0¢
@bitentrepreneur: When I opened the wallet it gave me a BTC account and no easily accessible way to receive and send BCH.
If you know how to make it work with BitcoinCash, please do share and I might revisit it in the future. It is sadly too late for me to get stresstest data on it, though.
0.0¢
   2mo ago