Provider at a glance
- Category
- Institutional Custody
- Official website
- anchorage.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 76 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
Anchorage Digital
US national trust bank for digital assets
Institutional Custody
#3 Overall
Ranked #3 of 9 institutional custody in the published ranking
76
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Anchorage Digital right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Which legal entity actually takes my assets — and does its licence on the register say it may?10/10, the category best
- If they fail, are the assets still mine — or am I queueing as an unsecured creditor?9/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Is the insurance number mine, and does it cover the wallet setup I'll actually run?3/10 here; Zodia Custody scores 9
- Can I find out what this costs before I'm inside their sales process?5/10 here; Gemini Custody scores 9
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: United States, Asia.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best custodian shows where it lands for you.
What will Anchorage Digital cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your balance
- $10k
How safe is Anchorage Digital?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
- On the registersNYDFS BitLicense: authorised, Anchorage Digital NY, LLC (US-NY, since 2024-12). Read 3 November 2026. Open the register
Alternatives to Anchorage Digital
Compare all 4- 1Gemini Custody4 points above · stronger on insurance as written (6 against 3)80$40
- 2BitGo4 points above · stronger on insurance as written (7 against 3)80
- 4Zodia Custody5 points below · stronger on insurance as written (9 against 3)71
For your setup
Find out if Anchorage Digital fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Anchorage Digital lands for you, which criteria your answers weight up, and which stated needs the record does or does not meet. The published rank stays beside it.
- A few questions
- No account required
- Ranking-blind: no commercial input
- Personalised in under 60 seconds
Find my best custodianNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Anchorage Digital ranks #3
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (24.2 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest. Best in this ranking on 2 of 4.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
3510+11.208.010#1/9Loading evidence…
309+8.647.09#1/9Loading evidence…
203+1.923.09#4/9Loading evidence…
155+2.404.09#3/9Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−4behind BitGo, #2
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 74–78 and stays #3
Evidence4 of 4 scored4 quoted, 4 with a source link
What would move the rank
Each line is the ranking run again with one of Anchorage Digital’s criterion scores changed and every other value held: the smallest whole-point change on that criterion that moves its rank, and where the re-run puts it. Up to 4 climbs and 3 falls are listed, smallest change first. Nothing here is a forecast.
Is the insurance number mine, and does it cover the wallet setup I'll actually run? 3 → 6 on its ladder · passes BitGo+380#3 → #2
Can I find out what this costs before I'm inside their sales process? 5 → 9 on its ladder · passes BitGo+480#3 → #2
Which legal entity actually takes my assets — and does its licence on the register say it may? 10 → 7 on its ladder · Zodia Custody passes it−370#3 → #5
If they fail, are the assets still mine — or am I queueing as an unsecured creditor? 9 → 6 on its ladder · Zodia Custody passes it−371#3 → #4
Smallest climb: “Is the insurance number mine, and does it cover the wallet setup I'll actually run?” 3 → 6 passes BitGo, #2.
Strengths
2 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Which legal entity actually takes my assets — and does its licence on the register say it may? — 10/10, the category best
- If they fail, are the assets still mine — or am I queueing as an unsecured creditor? — 9/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
2 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Is the insurance number mine, and does it cover the wallet setup I'll actually run? — 3/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Can I find out what this costs before I'm inside their sales process? — 5/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- There is no insurance number anywhere — the strongest charter and insolvency paper in the pool ends in a limitless covenant that Anchorage 'or an Affiliate' maintains some third-party policy, and the same filed agreement releases Anchorage from Losses caused by following your own instructions 'even if following such Client Direction constitutes gross negligence by Anchorage'. A loss event outside the trust mechanics leaves you with the bank's balance sheet and an undisclosed policy.
Competitive position
Where Anchorage Digital leads and where it trails
Rank on every objective dimension among the rows scored on it. A criterion in the top third of its pool is listed as a lead, the bottom third as a trail; the middle is neither. Popularity, size and commercial terms are not dimensions.
Availability#6 / 911.0 of 20 · best 14.0
Published criteria#2 / 918.1 of 30 · best 18.6
Friction#1 / 92.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 93.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 98.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Anchorage Digital leads
- Which legal entity actually takes my assets — and does its licence on the register say it may?#1 / 9
- If they fail, are the assets still mine — or am I queueing as an unsecured creditor?#1 / 9
- Can I find out what this costs before I'm inside their sales process?#3 / 9
Where it trailsNo criterion in the bottom third of its pool.
Closest alternatives
The 3 nearest rows by score
Nearest by published score in either direction. Each card states the criteria on which the two rows differ and the cost difference under the same scenario inputs; the compare arithmetic below shows why the higher one ranks higher.
BitGo#2 of 9 · score 80 · 4.0 points ahead
Anchorage Digital leads on
- Which legal entity actually takes my assets — and does its licence on the register say it may?10 vs 8
- If they fail, are the assets still mine — or am I queueing as an unsecured creditor?9 vs 8
- Can I find out what this costs before I'm inside their sales process?5 vs 2
BitGo leads on
- Is the insurance number mine, and does it cover the wallet setup I'll actually run?7 vs 3
Largest single reason BitGo is ahead: availability (+7.8 display points).Scenario cost: BitGo has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Gemini Custody#1 of 9 · score 80 · 4.0 points ahead
Anchorage Digital leads on
- Which legal entity actually takes my assets — and does its licence on the register say it may?10 vs 8
- If they fail, are the assets still mine — or am I queueing as an unsecured creditor?9 vs 8
Gemini Custody leads on
- Is the insurance number mine, and does it cover the wallet setup I'll actually run?6 vs 3
- Can I find out what this costs before I'm inside their sales process?9 vs 5
Largest single reason Gemini Custody is ahead: availability (+2.6 display points).Scenario cost: Anchorage Digital has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Zodia Custody#4 of 9 · score 71 · 5.0 points behind
Anchorage Digital leads on
- Which legal entity actually takes my assets — and does its licence on the register say it may?10 vs 7
- If they fail, are the assets still mine — or am I queueing as an unsecured creditor?9 vs 5
- Can I find out what this costs before I'm inside their sales process?5 vs 4
Zodia Custody leads on
- Is the insurance number mine, and does it cover the wallet setup I'll actually run?9 vs 3
Largest single reason Anchorage Digital is ahead: published criteria (+7.5 display points).Scenario cost: Zodia Custody has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
80 vs 76 · gap 4.0Why Gemini Custody ranks above Anchorage Digital
The compare workspace's arithmetic applied to these two rows. Each dimension's share of the gap is its weight × the difference, on the displayed scale — it reproduces the displayed gap of 4.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisGemini CustodyGap share
Availability · 23% weight11.012.0−2.6, worse
Published criteria · 35% weight18.118.6−1.3, worse
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisGemini CustodyPoints
Which legal entity actually takes my assets — and does its licence on the register say it may? · w35108+2.24, better
If they fail, are the assets still mine — or am I queueing as an unsecured creditor? · w3098+0.96, better
Is the insurance number mine, and does it cover the wallet setup I'll actually run? · w2036−1.92, worse
Can I find out what this costs before I'm inside their sales process? · w1559−1.92, worse
Net7680−4.0
Your scenario
Anchorage Digital is not priced for this scenario
The annual management fee on your balance. Excludes performance fees, spreads and any redemption charge. Change an input and every figure recomputes from the published rate; the published rank does not move.
your cost/yr · default scenario — set your own
Your balance · your input$10k
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 29 September 2026.
your cost/yrCost is stated as your cost/yr in USD; it is never a yield, never annualised, and it does not enter the score.
Not priced on this basis
Under the default inputs · USDCategory median and cheapestNot statedOnly 1 of 9 rows publish a comparable price; a median and a cheapest row need at least 3.
8 of 9 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 29 September 2026
One row per published criterion: the page each strength was read from, its source type by domain, the reading date and whether the file and the published table agree. Open a row for the quote and the receipt.
4 of 4 cells scored
Score evidenceVerified4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from receipts
4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from a quoted, sourced receipt equal to the published strength.Public receiptsReading…4 quoted with a source URL
The receipt file has not been read yet.Evidence confidenceHighcoverage and corroboration, never freshness
4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.RobustnessHoldsrank #3 across every one-point re-run
Whether the position holds when one criterion score is changed by one point and the ranking is run again. It is always a re-run of the ranking, never an estimate.The newest evidence read on the platform is 3 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 29 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Which legal entity actually takes my assets — and does its licence on the register say it may?strength 10 · weight 35Report an error—29 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.If they fail, are the assets still mine — or am I queueing as an unsecured creditor?strength 9 · weight 30Report an error—29 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Is the insurance number mine, and does it cover the wallet setup I'll actually run?strength 3 · weight 20Report an error—29 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Can I find out what this costs before I'm inside their sales process?strength 5 · weight 15Report an error—29 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Insolvency failure: the firm or issuer that owes you cannot pay.Scored by If they fail, are the assets still mine — or am I queueing as an unsecured creditor? · 30% (Anchorage Digital 9/10)Scored by Is the insurance number mine, and does it cover the wallet setup I'll actually run? · 20% (Anchorage Digital 3/10)
- Regulatory failure (Anchorage Digital 10/10): no licence where you are, or a forced market exit.Scored by Which legal entity actually takes my assets — and does its licence on the register say it may? · 35%
Not assessed by this ranking: Control failure, Liveness failure, Custody failure, Execution failure, Exit 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: Can I find out what this costs before I'm inside their sales process? (15%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- No rate card on the vendor's site: https://
www .anchorage .com /pricing answers HTTP 301 to the homepage (re-probed 29 September 2026). The only discoverable custody price is one client's negotiated contract, the SEC-filed Anchorage Master Custody Service Agreement order form with Fundamental Global Inc. (EX-10.3, effective "7/17/2025", fetched 29 September 2026): Monthly Custody Fee by "AUC TIER (graduated basis)" in "Annual Basis Points": "Less than $10m" 30; "Greater than or equal to $10m but less than $100m" 20; "Greater than or equal to $100m but less than $500m" 17; "Greater than or equal to $500m" 15. "One-Time Onboarding Fee" "$0.00."; "Monthly Minimum Fee" "$3,000.00"; "Client shall pay a Fee which shall be the greater of i) Monthly Custody Fee, or ii) Monthly Minimum Fee." Not a published rate. The 21Shares MCSA (SEC-filed, effective 11 September 2024) prints its fee section as "[**REDACTED**]".Anchorage Digital — official pricing page ↗ · 29 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDAnchorage Digital — official pricing page ↗ · 29 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- The contracting entity is named in the executed, SEC-filed agreement itself: 'by and between Anchorage Digital Bank N.A.
- Supported chains
- Not published
- Markets served
- us, asia
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- This is a genuine market restriction, not OFAC boilerplate. Anchorage's own legal page states: 'Anchorage Digital services are offered to institutions and certain high net worth individuals in limited circumstances, and are not marketed to residents outside the US and Singapore.' (https://
www .anchorage .com /legal, re-verified HTTP 200 19 August 2026). Singapore-specific disclosure on the custody page (re-verified 19 August 2026): 'Anchorage Digital Singapore is not a member of the Singapore Deposit Insurance ("DI") Scheme and assets are not subject to the protections enjoyed by depositors with DI Scheme member institutions.' CONTRADICTS the live entry's supportedRegions: ['global']. - CCSS level
- Not on the register as read 15 October 2026 (absent from that page, not a finding that no audit exists)C4 completed CCSS audits register ↗ · 15 October 2026
Legal entity on file: Anchorage Digital, placed in 2 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Anchorage Digital: where to complain, and where to report a scam
Loading the routes for your country.
How this page is reviewed
Reviewed means this product in this category 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
History
What the record carries
Changes to published ranks are recorded in a ledger; every step and its cause is listed on the rank-history page. The entries below begin with the current verified snapshot, then the methodology versions whose changes applied to this category, newest first.
11 methodology entries
- 29 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 76, #3 of 9. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.8When nothing serves your country, the list shown for reference is the published ranking · platform-wide- fixed The reference list shown when nothing serves your country is the published order with the published scores, and a build check now fails any such list out of that order or with a score the ranking does not publish.
- fixed The explorer prints an overall rank only for a row the published ranking holds; a country entrant such as Coinbase Commerce for US merchants shows no overall rank.
- changed Published orders do not move. Country results change only where nothing serves the country: in India bill pay keeps Bitcoin Well first and now shows Strike second, as published; 35 such runs across all categories and countries now match the published list exactly.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.7Forty-one more products are offered only where their own quoted terms serve- fixed 141 country exclusions on 31 rows, each the name of a country the row's own quoted terms exclude: for example Mercuryo Hungary, China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Chile, Colombia and Morocco; Gemini Custody the United Kingdom, Australia and the EU after its wind-down; Backed xStocks the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, Nigeria, the Philippines and Venezuela.
- changed Thirteen rows list the only countries their terms serve: Coins.ph the Philippines, Spritz bill pay, Brex, Unchained, WisdomTree, Franklin BENJI and AnchorWatch the United States (with its territories for AnchorWatch), PRYPCO Mint the UAE, N26 crypto seven EU countries, Gemini Tokenized Stocks the EU, XNET the US, Canada and the UK, Coldbit Steel and MetaMask Card the countries they list.
- changed Published (no-country) orders do not move. Country results change: in India six categories each lose one row (bill pay, cards, off-ramps, P2P, seed backup, tokenised real estate), and bill pay there has no row confirmed available, so it shows the published order marked as such; country pages list 23 fewer rows (24,357 to 24,334). The grounding test now matches full country names in any case, which shows seven earlier exclusions were quoted all along: the named debt of unquoted exclusions falls from 40 to 33 pairs.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.6A criterion you require re-scores the rows that meet it · platform-wide- changed The explorer sends each criterion you require, at any band, as fit_required with your other answers; region, licence, chain and fact filters stay filters. On /best, a required criterion joins For you as a marked preference does, which needs your country; Overall stays the published ranking, filtered.
- added Every published criterion has a golden case as the explorer sends it (require:<criterion>), so the order a requirement gives is replayed and gated as the published order is, and a change to it needs an entry here.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt institutional_custody:anchorage_digital:2026.10.18:ab70d998e7c9
Are you Anchorage Digital? Reply to this verdict, or send evidence, ask for a correction or claim the listing. Every message gets a public ticket number; none of it changes a rank unless a public page or a signed statement supports it.