Casa vs Foundation (Passport)

Casa and Foundation (Passport) both operate in the dedicated custody space, but they take fundamentally different approaches to how your bitcoin is held. The scores are close — Casa at 83/100 (A-) and Foundation (Passport) at 82/100 (A-). 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

On custody and security, these two are within 1 points of each other (86 vs. 85). When custody scores are this close, look at the specifics: key management model, insurance coverage, and whether either platform has a single point of failure. On fees, Foundation (Passport) wins by 15 points. Foundation (Passport) charges ~$200 compared to $30 - $250/yr at Casa. Over a multi-year holding period, fee differences compound — a point worth considering for long-term accumulators. Casa's strongest advantage is in features (82 vs. 70), where Casa's product breadth and tooling makes a measurable difference.

The Custody Question

Both Casa and Foundation (Passport) have addressed the single-point-of-failure problem — neither relies on a single custodian or a single set of keys. That puts both platforms ahead of the majority of the industry. The difference comes down to implementation: Casa uses Self-Custody Multisig, while Foundation (Passport) uses Hardware Wallet.

Bottom Line

Casa edges out Foundation (Passport) by 1 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 best self-custody ux. mobile key management. inheritance protocol. over open source hardware and software. beautiful industrial design. bitcoin-only.. Keep in mind these platforms target different audiences — Casa is built for self-custody, while Foundation (Passport) serves bitcoin purists. One thing to watch with Foundation (Passport): smaller company. physical exposure risk. self-custody burden..