Scores last updated
Fit follows the custody model, not the brand.
You hold most keys, the provider holds one, and no single party can move funds alone.
A regulated institution holds keys in segregated accounts under a legal framework built for it.
Unchained (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? The scores are close — Unchained at 85/100 (A-) and Paxos at 79/100 (B+). When the gap is this narrow, the details matter: custody model, single points of failure, and the fine print on fees.
On custody and security, these two are within 3 points of each other (90 vs. 87). 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. Unchained's strongest advantage is in features (86 vs. 65), where Unchained's product breadth and tooling makes a measurable difference.
Here's the key difference: Unchained has no single point of failure (Collaborative Multisig), 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.
Unchained edges out Paxos by 6 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 2-of-3 multisig where client holds 2 keys. strong inheritance and ira products. lending available. 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 — Unchained is built for self-sovereign, 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, Unchained scores higher at 85/100 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.
Unchained scored 90/100 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 Collaborative Multisig. 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.
Unchained charges $250/yr + trading. Paxos charges Custom institutional pricing. Unchained scored 75/100 on fees versus 75/100 for Paxos in our methodology.
Unchained 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.
Unchained's custody insurance is not publicly disclosed. 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.
Unchained involves the holder in key control. Paxos manages keys for you; you hold none. This is the core structural difference to weigh.