Anchorage vs Zodia Custody

Anchorage and Zodia Custody both operate in the dedicated custody space, but they take fundamentally different approaches to how your bitcoin is held. The scores are close — Anchorage at 69/100 (B-) and Zodia Custody at 64/100 (C+). When the gap is this narrow, the details matter: custody model, single points of failure, and the fine print on fees.

Where Each Platform Wins

Custody and security — the most heavily weighted category in our methodology at 35% — tilts 25 points toward Anchorage (75 vs. 50). Both platforms carry single-point-of-failure risk, but Anchorage mitigates it more effectively through its Crypto-Native Bank approach. On fees, Anchorage wins by 7 points. Anchorage charges Custom compared to Custom at Zodia Custody. Over a multi-year holding period, fee differences compound — a point worth considering for long-term accumulators.

The Custody Question

Neither Anchorage nor Zodia Custody has fully eliminated single-point-of-failure risk. Anchorage uses Crypto-Native Bank and Zodia Custody uses Single Custodian. Both models leave your bitcoin exposed to custodial concentration risk — if that one entity fails, your bitcoin could be locked, seized, or lost. For long-term holders, this is the most important factor to weigh.

Bottom Line

Anchorage edges out Zodia Custody by 5 points. It's a close call, and the right choice depends on your specific situation — how much bitcoin you're holding, how often you need access, and whether you prioritize occ-chartered crypto bank. staking, trading, settlement. soc 1 & 2. over backed by standard chartered and northern trust.. Keep in mind these platforms target different audiences — Anchorage is built for institutions, while Zodia Custody serves banking. One thing to watch with Zodia Custody: single custodian. newer entrant. limited track record..