Base recorded a sharp increase in daily active addresses as a trading competition encouraged participants to create new wallets.
However, network transactions and user-paid fees declined during the same period. The contrasting figures raised questions about whether the activity reflected genuine user growth.
The surge also highlighted how promotional campaigns can influence blockchain engagement metrics.
Base daily active addresses surge 49.9% as network fees decline
Base recorded 943,277 daily active addresses on October 22, marking a 49.9% increase from the previous day. Growthepie data showed that the figure represented the network’s highest reading since September 23.
The increase followed an 82.5% jump to 629,142 active addresses on October 21. Furthermore, October 22 activity exceeded the previous seven-day median of 352,544 addresses by 167.6%.
However, the increase in wallet activity did not translate into higher transaction volumes or network revenue. Transactions declined 8.6%, falling from 10.49 million to 9.58 million.
Meanwhile, user-paid fees dropped 20% to approximately $91,059, compared with $113,703 on October 21. BaseScan recorded a similar transaction decline, from approximately 10.53 million to 9.63 million.
By October 23, daily active addresses had fallen 38% to 584,540. Nevertheless, activity remained 65.8% above the pre-surge median.
Network fees declined another 19.8% to approximately $73,062, while daily transactions slipped to 8.87 million.
GMGN trading competition requires participants to create new wallets
The increase coincided with GMGN’s Base trading competition, which launched on October 21. The contest offers a $20,000 prize to its winner and runs through October 26.
GMGN invited traders to compete for leaderboard positions through Base token transactions. Base promoted the competition on October 22, coinciding with the network’s peak activity.
Under GMGN’s rules, participants must register wallets containing no funds, holdings, or previous trading history. Only transactions completed through GMGN using registered wallets qualify for the competition.
The contest also limits starting capital to $2,000 and restricts participants to one entry each. Furthermore, organizers prohibit wash trading and coordinated transactions.
Consequently, the competition requires participants to create fresh addresses, increasing the number of wallets appearing in network statistics.
However, available blockchain figures cannot establish how many additional addresses originated directly from the competition.
Base activity metrics face questions over wallet-based growth
Growthepie tracks daily active addresses by counting unique sending addresses across blockchain transactions. However, the analytics platform warns that promotional campaigns and Sybil wallets can inflate activity figures.
The platform also explains that individual users can control multiple wallets. Therefore, it recommends evaluating active addresses alongside network revenue to understand broader activity patterns.
Both network fees and transaction volumes declined during Base’s latest address surge.
Questions surrounding Base activity metrics also extend beyond the GMGN competition.
Chainalysis previously recorded more than 138 million x402 transactions on Base. However, TRM Labs estimated that AI agents generated only 0.6% to 7.5% of the transactions it screened.
Separately, Artemis and a16z analysts estimated that manipulated activity accounted for 48% of transactions and 81% of volume in December 2025.
These findings provide additional context for interpreting Base’s latest wallet growth against declining network fees.
