MPC & Embedded Wallets

MPC & Embedded Wallets evaluated across whether your wallets survive the vendor's exit, cryptographic audits and SOC 2 posture, published pricing you can act on, and how key-share custody is disclosed.

14providers tracked

7ranked (methodology v2026.11.1)

12 November 2026Ranking snapshot

22 October 2026oldest read · due 6 Dec

Independent. Evidence-based.We rank with a published method and sourced evidence. No one can pay to rank.How it works

Set your country and amount to see your costs ·

7 providers match your requirements

Out of 7 ranked providers. 0 excluded.

What this ranks

Ranked here: MPC and embedded wallets with no seed phrase, compared on what happens if the vendor goes, audit and SOC 2 posture, published pricing and disclosure of who holds the key shares.Not ranked here: multisig wallets, wallet brands acquired and switched off, and embedded wallets whose vendor is ranked under Institutional Custody, Relayers or Account Abstraction Infra.7 of the 14 assessed are ranked; 7 were turned away by name. Who, and whyRequirements narrow the list; they never change a published ChainChoice Score. How the ranking works

Dfns

How Dfns was chosen

Leads this ranking on Vendor-Exit Survivability

Institutional MPC

81 out of 100published score, #1 of all 7 worldwide

Evidence

High

4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.

Vendor-Exit SurvivabilityKey-Share Custody DisclosureCryptographic Audit & SOC 2 Posture

Why it leads

Dfns is 5 points ahead of Portal, mainly because it scores higher on its exit survivability mpc and its crypto audit posture mpc.
Best in this ranking on exit survivability mpc (9/10; next 8/10)
Ahead of Portal on exit survivability mpc (+5.0 points) and crypto audit posture mpc (+1.6 points)

Tradeoff

Pricing transparency mpc: 1 point below the best in this ranking

Sort by

#ProviderPriceCompare

Embedded MPC SDK

76 out of 100

Stripe-owned embedded wallets

75 out of 100

TEE enclaves rather than MPC

74 out of 100

Consumer MPC wallet

71 out of 100

Now MetaMask Embedded Wallets

65 out of 100

Embedded wallet business being sold to Kraken's...

57 out of 100

Compare providers (0)

See key differences in features, fees, security and more.

Pricing transparency mpc

Published Pricing Actionability

20% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.

Provider	Pricing transparency mpc (0–10)	ChainChoice Score
Portal	8	76
Privy	8	75
Turnkey	8	74
Dfns	7	81
Web3Auth (now MetaMask Embedded Wallets)	7	65
Zengo	6	71
Magic	6	57

Exit survivability mpc

Vendor-Exit Survivability

40% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.

Provider	Exit survivability mpc (0–10)	ChainChoice Score
Dfns	9	81
Zengo	8	71
Portal	7	76
Privy	7	75
Turnkey	7	74
Web3Auth (now MetaMask Embedded Wallets)	6	65
Magic	4	57

Crypto audit posture mpc

Cryptographic Audit & SOC 2 Posture

25% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.

Provider	Crypto audit posture mpc (0–10)	ChainChoice Score
Dfns	8	81
Privy	8	75
Turnkey	8	74
Portal	7	76
Zengo	5	71
Web3Auth (now MetaMask Embedded Wallets)	4	65
Magic	4	57

Share custody model mpc

Key-Share Custody Disclosure

15% of the published criteria weight. Scored 0–10 from the published evidence; the order below is by this criterion, then the published ranking.

Provider	Share custody model mpc (0–10)	ChainChoice Score
Dfns	9	81
Portal	9	76
Zengo	7	71
Web3Auth (now MetaMask Embedded Wallets)	7	65
Privy	6	75
Turnkey	5	74
Magic	4	57

All 4 published criteria

Every ranked row’s score on each criterion, in the published order. Choose a column to order by it.

	Provider					ChainChoice Score
1	Dfns	9	8	7	9	81
2	Portal	7	7	8	9	76
3	Privy	7	8	8	6	75
4	Turnkey	7	8	8	5	74
5	Zengo	8	5	6	7	71
6	Web3Auth (now MetaMask Embedded Wallets)	6	4	7	7	65
7	Magic	4	4	6	4	57

How this ranking works

How firm the #1 is, the per-criterion arithmetic behind each score, who pays ChainChoice, and which MPC & embedded wallets were assessed and left out.

FirmThis verdict holds under every one-point re-read

See the arithmetic

Every published criterion was moved up and down by one point and the ranking re-run. The same product came first each time. The published rankings file

Why this score4 published criteria · leads 3 of 4

Published criterionWtScore, and the best hereGap out of 10Pts

Vendor-Exit Survivability9.6·911.5

Cryptographic Audit & SOC 2 Posture6·86.4

Published Pricing Actionability4.8−174.5

Key-Share Custody Disclosure3.6·94.3

Σ methodology points26.7/32

Each bar is the score on that criterion’s own 0–10 scale, never rescaled to the pool. The dark line is the best any product here reached on that axis. Wt is the most the criterion can add to the 86-point weighted total. Pts is weight × score × 32; the sum is the methodology score, and each weighted point behind the leader costs 2.6 on the displayed score. how these are weighted

Why it ranks first

Why Dfns leads this category right now

Institutional MPC; you can run your own signer nodes. Strongest on vendor-exit survivability (9/10): Dfns documents a Layer 4 disaster-recovery path in which each signer writes its share, encrypted with the customer's own key, to a bucket the customer owns, so keys can be rebuilt even if Dfns is unavailable. It needs a dedicated MPC cluster and is set up with Dfns support. Weakest on published pricing actionability (7/10): Dfns publishes flat annual plans: Starter $800, Basic $8,000 and Pro $35,000 a year, with wallet and signature allowances. Extra wallets are 'priced on a volume basis' with no rate, higher signature volumes need a conversation, and Enterprise is custom. Published price: Dfns pricing page (dfns.co/pricing, fetched 2026-10-22): Starter "$800" "per year" ("$200" "per quarter"): "1 user", "10 wallets", "1 blockchain", 100 signatures per month.

Best for

Vendor-Exit Survivability — 9/10

Main tradeoff

Priced and shaped for institutions, not consumer apps: the entry tier caps at 10 wallets and 100 signatures per month, and the $8,000/year Basic tier allows only 1,000 signatures per month — a consumer app would blow through that in a day. The self-hosted signer model that earns its exit score also transfers real operational burden: you are now running threshold-signing nodes.

Verify before signup

Dfns pricing page (dfns.co/pricing, fetched 22 October 2026): Starter "$800" "per year" ("$200" "per quarter"): "1 user", "10 wallets", "1 blockchain", 100 signatures per month. Basic "$8,000" per year ("$2,000" per quarter): "3 users", "10,000 wallets", "3 blockchains". Pro "$35,000" per year ("$8,750" per quarter): "5 users", "50,000 wallets (+ pay as you go)", "10 blockchains", "Hybrid deployments". Enterprise "Custom": "10 users", "100,000 wallets (+ pay as you go)", "All blockchains", "On-prem deployments". Signature allowances: "100/mo on Starter, 1,000/mo on Basic, 10,000/mo on Pro and 100,000/mo on Enterprise", with "Higher volumes are available. Reach out to discuss your needs." "No AUM fees. No transaction fees." Additional wallets on Pro and Enterprise "are priced on a volume basis" with no published rate. No monthly price is published; the contract term is "Yearly". Free trial: "A 30-day, self-service trial with full access to our sandbox on testnets: all APIs and SDKs, 10 wallets, 1 user, and 100 signatures per month."

Recommendation summary

What should decide this category

If this company shut down next quarter, could you still open your wallet?

Do you need an exportable key, or is vendor-managed recovery acceptable to you?

Do you need broad multichain support or one ecosystem-first MPC wallet?

Quick picks

Strong options in this category

Start with the lead choice first, then use the shortlist only if you still need a challenger or stronger fit for a specific setup.

Best overall

Dfns

Institutional MPC; you can run your own signer nodes

Best for: Vendor-Exit Survivability — 9/10

Vendor-Exit Survivability · weight 40%9/10Cryptographic Audit & SOC 2 Posture · weight 25%8/10Published Pricing Actionability · weight 20%7/10Key-Share Custody Disclosure · weight 15%9/10

Quick pick

Portal

Embedded MPC SDK, four shares, eject() returns a real private key

Embedded MPC SDK, four shares, eject() returns a real private key. Strongest on key-share custody disclosure (9/10): Portal documents two parallel 2-of-2 key-share pairs, four shares in total, names who holds each, and states that only the user's signing share can initiate a transaction. The integrating organisation holds backup shares, and shares are never reconstructed to sign. Weakest on vendor-exit survivability (7/10): Portal documents an eject that combines the user's backup share with the organisation's custodian backup share to reveal the private key. With self-managed backups this runs through Portal's SDK; the default Portal-managed path runs through Portal's API under the integrator's own key. Published price: Portal pricing page (portalhq.io/pricing, fetched 2026-10-22): Developer "$0 / month", "First 100 Operations Free", embedded MPC wallets "First 25 Operations Free, $0.50 Overage", "Up to 50 Portal Wallets".

Best for: Key-Share Custody Disclosure — 9/10

Vendor-Exit Survivability · weight 40%7/10Cryptographic Audit & SOC 2 Posture · weight 25%7/10Published Pricing Actionability · weight 20%8/10Key-Share Custody Disclosure · weight 15%9/10

Quick pick

Privy

Stripe-owned embedded wallets; Shamir shards, documented user key export

Stripe-owned embedded wallets; Shamir shards, documented user key export. Strongest on cryptographic audit & SOC 2 posture (8/10): Privy's security page lists dated third-party reviews by Cure53 (February 2023), Zellic (June 2023), SwordBytes (December 2023) and Doyensec (February 2024), plus SOC 2 Type II dated April 2026. No protocol review newer than February 2024 is listed. Weakest on key-share custody disclosure (6/10): Privy splits each wallet into two shares, both required to sign: an enclave share decrypted only inside a trusted execution environment and an auth share encrypted and stored by Privy. Neither the developer nor the end user holds a share independently. Published price: Privy pricing page (privy.io/pricing, fetched 2026-10-22): Developer "Free" for "0-499" MAU, with "50K signatures and $1M transaction volume for free every month". Core "500 – 2,499" MAU, "$299 / M". Scale "2,500 - 9,999 MAU", "$499 / M".

Best for: Cryptographic Audit & SOC 2 Posture — 8/10

Vendor-Exit Survivability · weight 40%7/10Cryptographic Audit & SOC 2 Posture · weight 25%8/10Published Pricing Actionability · weight 20%8/10Key-Share Custody Disclosure · weight 15%6/10

Quick pick

Turnkey

TEE enclaves rather than MPC; per-signature pricing, four named audits

TEE enclaves rather than MPC; per-signature pricing, four named audits. Strongest on cryptographic audit & SOC 2 posture (8/10): Turnkey's home page states it is SOC 2 Type II audited and shows Distrust, Cure53, Trail of Bits and Zellic as reviewers. No audit date, scope summary or SOC 2 auditor appears on its public pricing, home or security docs pages. Weakest on key-share custody disclosure (5/10): Turnkey signs inside secure enclaves rather than splitting keys: encrypted private keys are decrypted only inside the enclave when the owner authenticates. The only key splitting it documents is of Turnkey's own quorum keys; the customer holds no share of the wallet key. Published price: Turnkey pricing page (turnkey.com/pricing, fetched 2026-10-22): Pay as You Go "Free to start, no commitments", "$0.10 / signature", "Up to 1k free wallets", "25 free signatures per month". Pro "$99/mo.", "$0.05 / signature", "Up to 2k free wallets".

Best for: Cryptographic Audit & SOC 2 Posture — 8/10

Vendor-Exit Survivability · weight 40%7/10Cryptographic Audit & SOC 2 Posture · weight 25%8/10Published Pricing Actionability · weight 20%8/10Key-Share Custody Disclosure · weight 15%5/10

Considered and not ranked

7 products we looked at and left out

A shortlist is only honest if it says who it turned away. Each of these was assessed against the same published criteria as the ranked table and excluded for a stated reason — not overlooked.

We assessed 14 products here and rank 7 — 50% of what we looked at. That share is of the products we assessed, not of the category: how many exist is not something we can count, so we do not claim a number for it.

Fireblocks Embedded Wallets· Ranked elsewhereDynamic (dynamic.xyz)· Ranked elsewhereCircle Wallets (formerly Circle Programmable Wallets)· Ranked elsewherethirdweb In-App and Ecosystem Wallets· Ranked elsewhereSafe{Wallet}· Ranked elsewhereBitski· No longer operatingCurv

What this ranking does not assess

Control failure: a key or vote changes the rules, freezes or mints.
Information failure: the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.

These can still cost you money here; the ranking does not measure them, so a high place says nothing about them. Which criterion scores each family, and why the others do not apply, is in /data/risk-coverage.json.

Quantum exposure: which signature scheme each product here relies on, and what it has published about post-quantum readiness, as of 15 October 2026. Read the explainer. It changes no score.

How this ranking is built

Reviewed on vendor-exit survivability, cryptographic audit & SOC 2 posture, published pricing actionability, and key-share custody disclosure.

Data checked Oct 2026 · Independent rankings · We show our work

Reviewed 22 October 2026Next review by 6 December 2026Published 5 August 2026Methodology v2026.11.1

How this page is reviewed

Reviewed means every product ranked on this page was read against its sources on or after that date; every ranked category is re-read at least every 45 days. Models research, extract and parse. A deterministic engine ranks. Every quote passes an adversarial refute pass.

Accountable for this review: Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder.

How we review · Review calendar · Corrections log · How we make money

Direct answer

What is the best MPC wallet in 2026?

Dfns ranks #1 overall for MPC & embedded wallets on ChainChoice. Institutional MPC; you can run your own signer nodes. It holds that rank under an affiliate-blind methodology scored across 4 published, weighted criteria — the code that ranks providers physically cannot read affiliate payouts (CI-enforced), so a payout can't move a rank. The verdict re-computes on every fee change, incident, or regulatory action; the full reasoning and the audit receipt are under Methodology.

How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores

Custody failure: whoever holds the assets loses or withholds them.
Scored by Key-Share Custody Disclosure · 15% (Dfns 9/10, Portal 9/10, Privy 6/10)
Exit failure: you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.
Scored by Vendor-Exit Survivability · 40% (Dfns 9/10, Portal 7/10, Privy 7/10)
Key failure: your own keys are made, shown or recovered unsafely.
Scored by Cryptographic Audit & SOC 2 Posture · 25% (Dfns 8/10, Portal 7/10, Privy 8/10)

Not assessed by this ranking: Control failure, Information failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means.

Also scored, as cost, quality or a summary of several families: Published Pricing Actionability (20%).

FAQs

3 questions readers ask before choosing MPC & embedded wallets.

Frequently asked

Questions people ask before choosing MPC wallets

What is the safest type of crypto MPC wallet?

The wrong question for this category. MPC removes the single seed phrase and replaces it with key shares split between parties, so safety turns on what happens to those shares rather than on hardware versus software. Ask instead: if the vendor disappeared tomorrow, can you reconstruct your keys without them, and is that path documented and tested? Are the cryptography audits published against the deployed version? Where are the shares actually held, and who else holds one? A beautifully engineered scheme whose vendor controls a share and publishes no exit path is a worse answer than a plainer one that survives its own supplier.

Do beginners need an MPC wallet before buying crypto?

Rarely, and that is not a criticism. MPC wallets solve a problem beginners usually do not have yet: removing the single point of failure a seed phrase represents, typically for a team, a business treasury, or someone whose holdings have grown past what one phrase should guard. A beginner buying their first crypto is better served by an exchange or a straightforward self-custody wallet, then moving to MPC when losing one device or one person should not lose the funds.

What actually happens if the provider disappears?

That depends entirely on the escape route the provider documented in advance, which is why it carries 40% of the weight. Four of the seven candidates researched are no longer what they were, through acquisition or shutdown. What is scored is an exportable key, a self-recovery path, or third-party escrow with a named trustee — not the vendor's confidence that it will still be here.

Free advisorNo signup needed

Still unsure? Get your best MPC wallets pick

Answer a few quick questions and get one clear recommendation based on how you actually plan to use crypto — then review the evidence before deciding.

No signupFree first pass · PrivateNo spam · No account

Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research

Best picks

Best MPC & embedded wallets in 2026

Weighted on vendor-exit survivability (40), cryptographic audit & SOC 2 posture (25), published pricing actionability (20), and key-share custody disclosure (15). The heaviest is vendor-exit survivability: If the vendor is acquired, pivots, or dies, can key material still be reassembled into a usable wallet — and does that path require the vendor's servers, its app, or its permission?

Best overall

Dfns

Institutional MPC; you can run your own signer nodes

Data checked Oct 2026

Best for: Vendor-Exit Survivability — 9/10

Browse this network

Keep exploring MPC wallets

The same published ranking, read for your country, side by side, or one provider at a time.

Every ranked provider, its full verdict

How this category is defined

MPC Wallets: overview, criteria and weights

Written and reviewed by Mathias Siemonsmeier Founder

Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research

Your setup

7 providers match your requirements

Why it leads

Tradeoff

Compare providers (0)