SafePal S1 vs Satochip Satochip leads by 9 points.
Satochip scores 9 points above SafePal S1, led by rebuildable firmware, genuine check, and maker independence. SafePal S1 ranks #19 and Satochip #16 of 23 published hardware wallets. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
SafePal S148
vs
Satochip57
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #19 and #16 of 23
Satochip scores 9 points above SafePal S1, led by rebuildable firmware, genuine check, and maker independence.
SafePal S1 #19 of 2348
Satochip #16 of 2357
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99; a bar is empty at 41 and full at 99.
Why, term by termSatochip leads on 3 of 6 published criteria; SafePal S1 on 0. The terms sum to the gap.
TermSatochipSafePal S1WeightPoints
Rebuildable firmware5/103/106.5+3.4for Satochip+1.7 of 32
Genuine check7/105/102.9+1.5for Satochip+0.8 of 32
Maker independence10/104/102.6+4.1for Satochip+2.1 of 32
Net of the terms+9.0
Criteria roundingThe criteria block is rounded to whole points before it is spread+0.1
Reproduced gap+9.1
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below5748+9.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
SatochipScore 57An open applet on a €25 NFC card that independent wallets sign with directly — no screenStrength: Sign and recover without the maker — 10/10Watch-out: No screen: you approve what the phone or computer shows, so a compromised host can mislead youSafePal S1Score 48Air-gapped by QR at $49.99 — the cheapest air-gapped signer here, with an unnamed secure elementStrength: Years in buyers' hands without a device-level fund loss — 10/10Watch-out: Its secure element is claimed at EAL5+ on one SafePal page and EAL6+ on another, with no part number
Quick facts
At a glance
2 of 5 rows read the same for both.
FactSafePal S1Satochip
One-time priceSnapshotSafePal S1 at $49.99, VAT and duty excluded, on https://www.safepal.com/en/store, read 1 October 2026.Satochip at €25.00 including VAT on https://satochip.io/product/satochip/, read 1 October 2026; the store prices in euros only and publishes no US dollar list price.
Asset coverageEditorial——
Region fitSnapshotglobalus, europe, global
Custody modelEditorialSelf-custody: the keys stay on the deviceSelf-custody: the keys stay on the device
Security postureSnapshotSecure element, no listed certificate; partly open source; air-gapped signing.Secure element, no listed certificate; partly open source; no air-gapped signing.
From the published criteria
Which should you pick?
SafePal S1
48#19 of 23
Pick it when
SafePal S1 leads Satochip on no published criterion and no score dimension — pick it only if a fact outside the score (country, funding rail, custody) decides for you.
Strength
Years in buyers' hands without a device-level fund loss — 10/10
Tradeoff
Its secure element is claimed at EAL5+ on one SafePal page and EAL6+ on another, with no part number
Satochip
57#16 of 23
Leads
Pick it when
Pick Satochip if rebuildable firmware matters most — it scores 5/10 to SafePal S1's 3/10 there (weight 27).
Strength
Sign and recover without the maker — 10/10
Tradeoff
No screen: you approve what the phone or computer shows, so a compromised host can mislead you
Self-identify in 10 seconds
Which one is actually for you?
SafePal S1
SafePal S1 leads Satochip on no published criterion
Choose it only if something outside the published criteria decides for you — your country, a funding rail, or custody.
SafePal S1Score 48Air-gapped by QR at $49.99 — the cheapest air-gapped signer here, with an unnamed secure elementStrength: Years in buyers' hands without a device-level fund loss — 10/10Watch-out: Its secure element is claimed at EAL5+ on one SafePal page and EAL6+ on another, with no part number
SatochipLeads
Choose Satochip if rebuildable firmware matters most
Rebuildable firmware: 5/10 against 3/10 for SafePal S1 (weight 27)
Genuine check: 7/10 against 5/10 for SafePal S1 (weight 12)
Maker independence: 10/10 against 4/10 for SafePal S1 (weight 11)
SatochipScore 57An open applet on a €25 NFC card that independent wallets sign with directly — no screenStrength: Sign and recover without the maker — 10/10Watch-out: No screen: you approve what the phone or computer shows, so a compromised host can mislead you
Criterion by criterion
Scorecard
Published criteria · weight in points of 8612 of 12 cells scored. Strength is read from the evidence file; the weight is the published one. Methodology
Secure element
weight 6.5 of 86Tie
SafePal S13/10 out of 10
Satochip3/10 out of 10
Rebuildable firmware
by 2 of 10weight 6.5 of 86Satochip leads
SafePal S13/10 out of 10
Satochip5/10 out of 10
Genuine check
by 2 of 10weight 2.9 of 86Satochip leads
SafePal S15/10 out of 10
Satochip7/10 out of 10
Checkable keys
weight 2.9 of 86Tie
SafePal S10/10 out of 10
Satochip0/10 out of 10
Maker independence
by 6 of 10weight 2.6 of 86Satochip leads
SafePal S14/10 out of 10
Satochip10/10 out of 10
Fund-loss record
weight 2.6 of 86Tie
SafePal S110/10 out of 10
Satochip10/10 out of 10
Score dimensions
weights sum to 86
The published score is five dimensions, each weighted for the category. "Published criteria" is the criteria block above; the other four are the engine's own terms — availability, friction, trust record, measured data. Each bar is one side's points out of that dimension's maximum; the weight beside the name is its points of the 86-point weighted total. The published criteria above can fill 24 of the block’s 30. A weight marked “constant here” belongs to a dimension every ranked product in the category holds at the same value: it still counts in the total, and it orders nothing here.
Availabilityweight 20 of 86 · constant here
SafePal S114/20Satochip14/20
Tie
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
SafePal S19/30Satochip12.5/30
Satochip leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86 · constant here
SafePal S12.7/10Satochip2.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86 · constant here
SafePal S13.2/8Satochip3.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86 · constant here
SafePal S15.5/18Satochip5.5/18
Tie
Decision rulePublished order
Choose Satochip unless the term SafePal S1 leads on is the one you are buying.
SafePal S1 leads Satochip on no published criterion and no score dimension — pick it only if a fact outside the score (country, funding rail, custody) decides for you.
The published order weighs every criterion the same way for everyone. To weigh them your way, run .
From the published order
Next best action
If this isn't your case
Other matchups worth comparing
How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
Key failure: your own keys are made, shown or recovered unsafely.
Scored by Secure element you can look up · 27% (SafePal S1 3/10, Satochip 3/10)
Scored by Firmware anyone can rebuild and match · 27% (SafePal S1 3/10, Satochip 5/10)
Scored by Proof the device is genuine and unmodified · 12% (SafePal S1 5/10, Satochip 7/10)
Scored by Key creation and signing you can check · 12% (SafePal S1 0/10, Satochip 0/10)
Scored by Sign and recover without the maker · 11% (SafePal S1 4/10, Satochip 10/10)
Scored by Years in buyers' hands without a device-level fund loss · 11% (SafePal S1 10/10, Satochip 10/10)
Every failure family that applies to this category is scored, except Information failure, which the provider pages show as a fact.
Questions
Frequently asked questions
Satochip scores 9 points above SafePal S1, led by rebuildable firmware, genuine check, and maker independence. Published scores, out of 100: SafePal S1 48 (rank 19 of 23 hardware wallets), Satochip 57 (rank 16 of 23).
Reviewed means both products compared here 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.
Answer a few quick questions and get one clear recommendation based on how you actually plan to use crypto — with rationale, tradeoffs, and a path to monitor the decision.
No signup·Free first pass · Private·No spam · No account
Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research
Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research
