Tangem vs GridPlus Lattice1 GridPlus Lattice1 leads by 10 points.
GridPlus Lattice1 scores 10 points above Tangem, led by rebuildable firmware, fund-loss record, and maker independence. Tangem ranks #23 and GridPlus Lattice1 #17 of 23 published hardware wallets. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
Tangem42
vs
GRGridPlus Lattice152
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #23 and #17 of 23
GridPlus Lattice1 scores 10 points above Tangem, led by rebuildable firmware, fund-loss record, and maker independence.
Tangem #23 of 2342
GRGridPlus Lattice1 #17 of 2352
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99; a bar is empty at 41 and full at 99.
Why, term by termGridPlus Lattice1 leads on 3 of 6 published criteria; Tangem on 0. The terms sum to the gap.
TermGridPlus Lattice1TangemWeightPoints
Rebuildable firmware4/100/106.5+6.7for GridPlus Lattice1+3.5 of 32
Fund-loss record10/107/102.6+2.1for GridPlus Lattice1+1.1 of 32
Maker independence6/104/102.6+1.4for GridPlus Lattice1+0.7 of 32
Net of the terms+10.2
Reproduced gap+10.1
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below5242+10.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
GridPlus Lattice1Score 52A desktop signer with a large touchscreen — six years without a device-level fund lossStrength: Years in buyers' hands without a device-level fund loss — 10/10Watch-out: Pairing with MetaMask, Rabby or Ambire runs through GridPlus's hosted page (lattice.gridplus.io)TangemScore 42Tap-to-phone NFC cards — closed firmware, and a 2026 laser attack it cannot patchStrength: Proof the device is genuine and unmodified — 7/10Watch-out: In July 2026 Ledger Donjon reset the card password with a laser fault and signed transactions; it affects every card in circulation and cannot be patched
Quick facts
At a glance
3 of 5 rows read the same for both.
FactTangemGridPlus Lattice1
One-time priceSnapshotTangem Wallet 2 Cards set at $59.90 on https://tangem.com/en/pricing/, read 1 October 2026.GridPlus Lattice1 with one SafeCard at $397.00 on https://gridplus.io/products/grid-lattice1, read 1 October 2026.
Asset coverageEditorial——
Region fitSnapshotus, europe, globalus, europe, global
Custody modelEditorialSelf-custody: the keys stay on the deviceSelf-custody: the keys stay on the device
Security postureSnapshotSecure element, EAL6+ certified; closed source; no air-gapped signing.Secure element, no listed certificate; partly open source; no air-gapped signing.
From the published criteria
Which should you pick?
Tangem
42#23 of 23
Pick it when
Tangem leads GridPlus Lattice1 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
Proof the device is genuine and unmodified — 7/10
Tradeoff
In July 2026 Ledger Donjon reset the card password with a laser fault and signed transactions; it affects every card in circulation and cannot be patched
GR
GridPlus Lattice1
52#17 of 23
Leads
Pick it when
Pick GridPlus Lattice1 if rebuildable firmware matters most — it scores 4/10 to Tangem's 0/10 there (weight 27).
Strength
Years in buyers' hands without a device-level fund loss — 10/10
Tradeoff
Pairing with MetaMask, Rabby or Ambire runs through GridPlus's hosted page (lattice.gridplus.io)
Self-identify in 10 seconds
Which one is actually for you?
Tangem
Tangem leads GridPlus Lattice1 on no published criterion
Choose it only if something outside the published criteria decides for you — your country, a funding rail, or custody.
TangemScore 42Tap-to-phone NFC cards — closed firmware, and a 2026 laser attack it cannot patchStrength: Proof the device is genuine and unmodified — 7/10Watch-out: In July 2026 Ledger Donjon reset the card password with a laser fault and signed transactions; it affects every card in circulation and cannot be patched
GRGridPlus Lattice1Leads
Choose GridPlus Lattice1 if rebuildable firmware matters most
Rebuildable firmware: 4/10 against 0/10 for Tangem (weight 27)
Maker independence: 6/10 against 4/10 for Tangem (weight 11)
Fund-loss record: 10/10 against 7/10 for Tangem (weight 11)
GridPlus Lattice1Score 52A desktop signer with a large touchscreen — six years without a device-level fund lossStrength: Years in buyers' hands without a device-level fund loss — 10/10Watch-out: Pairing with MetaMask, Rabby or Ambire runs through GridPlus's hosted page (lattice.gridplus.io)
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
Tangem3/10 out of 10
GridPlus Lattice13/10 out of 10
Rebuildable firmware
by 4 of 10weight 6.5 of 86GridPlus Lattice1 leads
Tangem0/10 out of 10
GridPlus Lattice14/10 out of 10
Genuine check
weight 2.9 of 86Tie
Tangem7/10 out of 10
GridPlus Lattice17/10 out of 10
Checkable keys
weight 2.9 of 86Tie
Tangem0/10 out of 10
GridPlus Lattice10/10 out of 10
Maker independence
by 2 of 10weight 2.6 of 86GridPlus Lattice1 leads
Tangem4/10 out of 10
GridPlus Lattice16/10 out of 10
Fund-loss record
by 3 of 10weight 2.6 of 86GridPlus Lattice1 leads
Tangem7/10 out of 10
GridPlus Lattice110/10 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
Tangem14/20GridPlus Lattice114/20
Tie
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Tangem6.9/30GridPlus Lattice110.8/30
GridPlus Lattice1 leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86 · constant here
Tangem2.7/10GridPlus Lattice12.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86 · constant here
Tangem3.2/8GridPlus Lattice13.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86 · constant here
Tangem5.5/18GridPlus Lattice15.5/18
Tie
Decision rulePublished order
Choose GridPlus Lattice1 unless the term Tangem leads on is the one you are buying.
Tangem leads GridPlus Lattice1 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% (Tangem 3/10, GridPlus Lattice1 3/10)
Scored by Firmware anyone can rebuild and match · 27% (Tangem 0/10, GridPlus Lattice1 4/10)
Scored by Proof the device is genuine and unmodified · 12% (Tangem 7/10, GridPlus Lattice1 7/10)
Scored by Key creation and signing you can check · 12% (Tangem 0/10, GridPlus Lattice1 0/10)
Scored by Sign and recover without the maker · 11% (Tangem 4/10, GridPlus Lattice1 6/10)
Scored by Years in buyers' hands without a device-level fund loss · 11% (Tangem 7/10, GridPlus Lattice1 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
GridPlus Lattice1 scores 10 points above Tangem, led by rebuildable firmware, fund-loss record, and maker independence. Published scores, out of 100: Tangem 42 (rank 23 of 23 hardware wallets), GridPlus Lattice1 52 (rank 17 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
