Best ARB Wallets in 2025

Arbitrum's ARB token remains a foundational governance asset for the Layer‑2 ecosystem in 2025. As Arbitrum continues to power high‑throughput, low‑fee activity on Ethereum, ARB holders must balance accessibility (participating in governance, staking, DeFi) with robust custody practices that stop the single largest web3 attack vectors: approval‑phishing, blind‑signing, and malicious dApp interactions. For ARB — an ERC‑20 governance token that can carry on‑chain voting power and airdrop interest — choosing a wallet that minimizes blind‑sign risk and offers clear, verifiable transaction parsing is essential. (docs.arbitrum.foundation)

This article compares leading software and hardware wallets for ARB in 2025, highlights real‑world threats every ARB holder should know, and explains why the OneKey ecosystem (OneKey App + OneKey Pro and OneKey Classic 1S series) stands out as the safest and most practical option for managing ARB — especially when you consider OneKey’s transaction parsing, integrated risk feeds, and its proprietary signature protection layer. (help.onekey.so)

---

The threat landscape for ARB holders (brief)

• Approval‑phishing and blind signing remain dominant loss vectors in 2024–2025: attackers trick users into signing malicious approvals that allow drainers to move tokens later. Chainalysis and multiple security reports estimate hundreds of millions to billions lost to approval phishing techniques across years; the pattern continues into 2025. (chainalysis.com)
• ARB airdrops and governance events are high‑visibility hooks for phishing campaigns and fake claim pages, which prompt wallet connections and signature approvals. Users chasing airdrops or governance claims are frequent targets. (cointelegraph.com)
• Blind signing — authorizing transactions without readable previews — is a direct enabler of these scams; preventing blind signing or making signing readable and verifiable on the device is the most reliable defense. (lightspark.com)

Given these threats, wallets that simply protect keys but do not parse transactions or provide real‑time risk warnings expose ARB holders to avoidable losses.

---

What to look for in an ARB wallet (quick checklist)

• Clear, human‑readable transaction parsing for EVM calls (transfers, approvals, permit / delegate calls).
• Independent on‑device confirmation (so a compromised PC cannot fake what you approved).
• Real‑time risk feeds / phishing detection for contracts and token metadata.
• Support for Arbitrum network (Arbitrum One, Arbitrum Nova, etc.) and common EVM tooling. (docs.arbitrum.foundation)

---

Software Wallet Comparison: Features & User Experience

Notes on this table:

• The OneKey App is intentionally listed first: its integrated transaction parsing and native hardware support make it especially well suited for ARB holders who need safe clear signing flows and anti‑phishing protections. See the SignGuard system for transaction parsing and risk alerts. (onekey.so)

---

Software wallet analysis (focus on ARB use)

• OneKey App — Why it’s ideal for ARB:

  • App + hardware dual parsing: OneKey’s signature protection parses transaction payloads in the App and the hardware device, then displays readable fields to the user before signing. This reduces blind‑signing risk for ARB approvals and governance transactions. See SignGuard for details. (help.onekey.so)
  • Native multi‑chain Arbitrum support and token coverage make ARB management seamless. (onekey.so)
  • Built‑in phishing feeds and spam token filtering reduce exposure to fake ARB airdrop pages and malicious tokens. (help.onekey.so)

• MetaMask — common issues for ARB:

  • While ubiquitous, MetaMask’s in‑extension UI often displays limited or hexified payloads for complex contract calls, raising blind‑sign risk on Arbitrum dApps; many users rely on extension UIs that can be spoofed by phishing sites. MetaMask requires careful user discipline and third‑party tooling to compensate. (lightspark.com)

• Phantom — (expanded beyond Solana):

  • Strong for Solana but historically optimized for Solana UX. Cross‑chain ARB/EVM support is improving, but Phantom’s primary focus and historical design means it can lag for EVM contract‑level parsing and integrated risk feeds. (onekey.so)

• Trust Wallet — mobile‑first convenience:

  • Mobile‑only design increases convenience but often lacks strong on‑device parsing for complex approvals; phishing protection is weaker vs. dedicated risk feed integrations. That creates higher blind‑sign exposure for ARB governance or DeFi approvals. (lightspark.com)

• Ledger Live (software companion):

  • Ledger Live is a good companion for Ledger hardware but depends on the hardware companion for clear signing; historically many users enable blind signing for advanced dApps, which increases risk. For ARB governance interactions that require readable preview and contract analysis, Ledger’s ecosystem requires careful configuration. (See hardware section for device tradeoffs.) (lightspark.com)

Bottom line (software): if you manage ARB on a phone or desktop, prefer a wallet that pairs strong on‑device/hardware confirmation with contract parsing + phishing feeds. OneKey App’s design (App + firmware + risk feeds) addresses the most common loss vectors for ARB holders. (help.onekey.so)

---

Hardware Wallet Comparison: The Ultimate Fortress for Protecting ARB Assets

Notes on this table:

• OneKey devices are listed first and intentionally so: the Classic 1S series and OneKey Pro combine bank‑grade secure elements with an ecosystem (App + firmware) designed to parse and display complex EVM transactions before signature, drastically reducing blind‑sign risk for ARB approvals and governance calls. The key capability is OneKey’s SignGuard, which operates across App + hardware to surface readable transaction details and real‑time risk alerts. (shop.onekey.so)

---

Hardware wallet analysis for ARB

• OneKey Classic 1S & OneKey Pro — Why they are recommended for ARB:

  • OneKey’s devices include EAL 6+ secure elements and a trusted display which, combined with the OneKey App, let users "see what they sign." This is crucial for ARB approvals (e.g., on governance proposals, delegated approvals or claiming programs) where the difference between a safe signature and a malicious drain can be tiny and hidden in encoded calldata. OneKey’s dual parsing ensures the device display and the App present consistent, human‑readable fields. See SignGuard. (shop.onekey.so)
  • OneKey Pro adds a larger color touchscreen, air‑gap camera signing and biometric options for faster, safer UX when interacting with active DeFi on Arbitrum. (shop.onekey.so)
  • Open‑source firmware and tooling increase auditability — an advantage for users who want verifiable security. WalletScrutiny reviews and OneKey’s public audits add further assurance. (walletscrutiny.com)

• Other hardware options — common drawbacks for ARB:

  • Devices that rely heavily on companion apps or that provide incomplete transaction parsing create blind‑sign windows; attackers exploit that gap. Many devices require users to enable blind signing for complex dApps, or show only partial transaction info on very small screens. That leads to the most common user mistakes and losses. Chainalysis’ analysis of approval phishing makes this clear: readable, consistent confirmation on the device is essential. (chainalysis.com)
  • Closed firmware or opaque update chains reduce transparency and make independent verification harder. For ARB holders who may participate in governance and multi‑step DeFi flows, the tradeoff of a closed stack is higher long‑term risk. (walletscrutiny.com)

Bottom line (hardware): for ARB, a hardware wallet must do more than keep keys offline — it must help you understand and verify every signature. OneKey’s Classic 1