Scores last updated
Fit follows the custody model, not the brand.
Separate institutions each hold a key under their own ceremony; no one of them can move funds.
A regulated institution holds keys in segregated accounts under a legal framework built for it.
Onramp (dedicated custody) and Paxos (stablecoin-issuer) serve different corners of the Bitcoin ecosystem, but the question that matters most is the same: who controls the keys? Onramp scores 90/100 (A) versus 79/100 (B+) for Paxos. The 11-point spread is meaningful — it usually comes down to custody architecture and fee structure.
Custody and security — the most heavily weighted category in our methodology at 35% — tilts 10 points toward Onramp (97 vs. 87). Onramp eliminates single points of failure in its custody architecture, while Paxos relies on a model where one compromised entity could put your bitcoin at risk. On fees, Onramp wins by 9 points. Onramp charges $250/mo compared to Custom institutional pricing at Paxos. Over a multi-year holding period, fee differences compound — a point worth considering for long-term accumulators. Onramp's strongest advantage is in features (88 vs. 65), where Onramp's product breadth and tooling makes a measurable difference.
Here's the key difference: Onramp has no single point of failure (Multi-Institution Custody), while Paxos does (NY Trust Company (State-Regulated)). This matters because a single-point-of-failure model means one compromised entity — whether through a hack, insolvency, or government action — could result in total loss of funds. History has proven this risk is not theoretical. FTX, Celsius, and BlockFi all represented single points of failure for their users.
Onramp edges out Paxos by 11 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 only platform with multiple regulated custodians and jurisdictions. inheritance, dynasty trusts, insurance on segregated incidents. over ny dfs-regulated trust company. issues pyusd for paypal, usdp, and pax gold (paxg). monthly attestations by withumsmith+brown. strongest regulatory position of any stablecoin issuer.. Keep in mind these platforms target different audiences — Onramp is built for institutions & hnw, while Paxos serves institutions & issuance partners. One thing to watch with Paxos: single entity risk. paxos was ordered by ny dfs to stop minting busd in 2023. b2b focus means limited direct consumer access..
Based on our six-category scoring methodology, Onramp scores higher at 90/100 compared to 79/100. The biggest differentiator is custody security, which accounts for 35% of the overall score. However, the right choice depends on your individual needs — review the category breakdown above.
Onramp scored 97/100 on custody and security in our methodology. It has no single point of failure, distributing custody across multiple entities. Its custody model is classified as Multi-Institution Custody. Always verify these details and do your own research.
Yes. Paxos uses a NY Trust Company (State-Regulated) model, which means a single compromised entity could put your bitcoin at risk. This is a structural concern for long-term holders.
Onramp charges $250/mo. Paxos charges Custom institutional pricing. Onramp scored 84/100 on fees versus 75/100 for Paxos in our methodology.
Onramp offers dedicated inheritance or beneficiary features. Paxos does not advertise a dedicated inheritance feature. Match the mechanism, whether beneficiary designation, trust titling, or key inheritance, to your estate plan.
Onramp carries insurance of up to $100 million per incident, through Lloyd's of London. Paxos's custody insurance is not publicly disclosed. Custody insurance covers specific named events up to shared limits, not price loss or every failure mode. Verify current terms before relying on coverage.
Onramp manages keys for you; you hold none. Paxos manages keys for you; you hold none. This is the core structural difference to weigh.