Decoding Web3 Customer Acquisition Costs: How "Valuable" Are Encryption Users Really?

In the Web3 space, the cost of acquiring new users is always a key issue. Based on a large amount of campaign data from 2024, this article provides an in-depth analysis of market cycles, regional differences, and the impact of marketing strategies on CPW, and provides specific practical insights. This article is authored by Asaf Nadler, Chief Operating Officer of Addressable, and is compiled, compiled and contributed by Luffy, Foresight News. (Synopsis: MircoStrategy microstrategy restarts "buy, buy, buy" mode? Full analysis of the new financing plan) (Background supplement: Alpha Nuggets" CLIZA. AI "zero-cost dialogue coin issuance" rewards 80% LP fees, can subvert the token issuance market? About a month ago, I posted an article about Cost Per Wallet (CPW). This growth quantifier specific to the Web3 space measures the acquisition costs of website visitors who have wallets installed on their browsers. The response to this article has been overwhelming. Marketers, advertising agencies, and project founders joined the discussion, sharing their thoughts, challenges, and key takeaways. One thing is clear: CPW touches everyone's sensitive nerves. Among the many private messages and replies, one question stands out: "Tell me about the cost, what is the situation at a specific time, in a specific region, on a specific platform? Does success change the way costs are calculated?" This article will answer this question with detailed information. I analyzed more than 200 programmatic ad campaigns launched by more than 70 advertisers on the Addressable platform in 2024, targeting more than 1.5 million users worldwide, to study CPWs across different market cycles, geographies, campaign execution, and audience segments. CPW Trends 2024: How Does the Market Cycle Affect Costs? Bull-bear cycle: 2024 went through two very different market cycles. At the beginning of the year, the market performed strongly, in a bull market in the first quarter, and the total cryptocurrency market capitalization increased by 21% month-on-month to $1.7 trillion. However, this momentum reversed in the second quarter, falling 12% month-on-month, and the situation worsened further in the third quarter, with the market down 27% month-on-month. However, in the fourth quarter, the market rebounded strongly, up 109% month-on-month, entering another bull market. These market changes naturally affect CPW, but the impact is not uniform. The volatility of CPW in different market cycles reveals more than just the expected pattern of low cost of bull market and high cost of bear market. It also highlights the sensitivity of different regions to market volatility, the importance of timing, and the strategic advantages of targeting resilient markets. Developed markets: Developed markets like the US and Western Europe tend to offer more predictable CPW during bull market phases, but are also highly resilient. In the first quarter, CPW in the United States remained at the level of $5.87, but as market sentiment shifted in the third quarter, costs soared nearly 4 times to $22.81. Western Europe showed a similar pattern and was more volatile, surging 27 times from $1.18 to $32.79. While these markets can provide scale and quality during a bull market, when market sentiment turns bearish, costs increase significantly, making them less sustainable during market downturns. Emerging markets: present different risk-reward profiles. Under favorable conditions, their CPW is extremely low, but cost fluctuations can be extremely dramatic. For example, in Latin America, CPW was as low as $0.56 in the first quarter, but by the third quarter, costs skyrocketed 60-fold to $34.38, reflecting sudden liquidity constraints and changes in demand. The gains were even more striking in Eastern Europe, where CPW surged 99 times to $20.79 from $0.21, suggesting that costs could rise sharply when market conditions deteriorate. Southeast Asia: The strongest performance across market cycles, with CPW fluctuating within 5x, from $3.73 in Q1 to $16.61 in Q3. This stability suggests that local market factors, adoption curves, or advertiser demand may create a more predictable environment, making it an attractive region for brands looking to maintain cost stability under different macro conditions, especially for projects that want to test product usage without being affected by market cycles. The key takeaway is that the market cycle not only affects CPW, but also determines when and where it is feasible to attract wallet holders. While developed regions are efficient in bull markets, they are costly when markets are downturned. Emerging markets are ultra-low-cost, but come with great volatility. Southeast Asia, with its relative stability, may have the best long-term potential for brands looking to mitigate risk across different market cycles. The CPW market cycle for the best and worst performing campaigns isn't the only factor. Top performing campaigns consistently keep CPW low, even during market downturns. In fact, the top 25% of marketing campaigns, even during a bear cycle, cost an amazing $6-8 per wallet to acquire customers. Meanwhile, the CPW of the poorer performing campaigns fluctuated between $4.68 and $44.79. This performance gap can be attributed to product-market fit (PMF), community strength, market buzz, incentives, and creative execution. Campaigns that are well aligned with your audience and have optimized messages maintain affordable CPW regardless of market conditions. For campaigns stuck with high CPW, moving to low-cost regions isn't the only solution. Optimising target audience targeting, messaging, incentives, and creative strategies all increase efficiency and keep CPW stable in any market. CPW Decentralized Finance (DeFi)/Centralized Finance (CeFi) marketing campaigns segmented by audience are the most cost-effective, with a median CPW of $2.79 and a lower quartile of just $0.10. L1/ L2 projects followed, with a median CPW of $3.23, reflecting its high adoption rate. Gaming and betting campaigns cost the most, with a median CPW of $8.74 and a lower quartile of $3.40, perhaps due to high churn, frequent speculation, and fierce competition. If Web3 games are truly "unstoppable," we need to find a more robust user acquisition engine that makes them as sustainable as Web2 games. Conclusion: CPW as a Web3 Growth Framework CPW is not determined solely by the market cycle, it is also influenced by the effectiveness of marketing campaign execution. The top 25% of campaigns maintained a CPW of $6-8 throughout the year, even during market downturns, while the CPW of the poorer campaigns fluctuated significantly from $4.68 to $44.79. This proves that market conditions are no excuse, and that marketing teams that track data, optimize target audience targeting, and repeatedly polish promotional messages and incentives can outperform market cycles; Maintain efficient costs regardless of macro trends. ...