Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Consultation
Smart Contract Security Audits
View Audit Services
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore DeFi
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View App Services
LABS
Comparisons

Fireblocks vs. BitGo: Custody & Corporate Action Support

A technical analysis comparing Fireblocks and BitGo as institutional-grade custody platforms, focusing on MPC security models, support for complex corporate actions, and suitability for tokenized real-world assets (RWA).
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS

Introduction: The Battle for Institutional Trust

A data-driven comparison of Fireblocks and BitGo, the two dominant forces in institutional-grade digital asset custody and corporate action support.

Fireblocks excels at secure, high-velocity transaction orchestration for active trading and DeFi integration. Its core strength is the patented Secure Multi-Party Computation (MPC) and network of over 1,300 direct integrations with exchanges, OTC desks, and protocols like Aave and Compound. This enables real-time settlement and programmatic workflows, which is why institutions like BNY Mellon and Revolut rely on it for operational agility. Their $3 trillion+ in cumulative transfer volume underscores its dominance in high-throughput environments.

BitGo takes a different approach by prioritizing regulated, auditable custody and deep support for complex corporate actions. As the first qualified custodian for digital assets, its multi-signature wallet model with geographically distributed key shards is the gold standard for long-term asset storage. BitGo's platform natively supports over 700 digital assets and offers specialized services for staking, lending, and tax lot accounting, making it the preferred choice for funds and corporations like Swan Bitcoin requiring strict compliance and asset servicing.

The key trade-off: If your priority is developer velocity, DeFi integration, and executing high-frequency strategies, choose Fireblocks. Its MPC technology and vast ecosystem minimize friction for active portfolios. If you prioritize regulatory compliance, deep asset support for long-term holdings, and robust corporate action management, choose BitGo. Its established custody framework and comprehensive asset servicing provide the trust and operational control demanded by traditional finance.

tldr-summary
Fireblocks vs. BitGo

TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance

A data-driven breakdown of core strengths for institutional custody and corporate action support.

01

Fireblocks: DeFi & Network Connectivity

Multi-chain DeFi gateway: Direct, policy-controlled access to 60+ DEXs, lending protocols, and staking services via the Fireblocks Network. This matters for institutions seeking yield or active treasury management without manual wallet transfers.

02

Fireblocks: Developer & API-First

Deep API integration: Comprehensive REST APIs and SDKs for programmatic wallet creation, transaction signing, and policy automation. This matters for fintechs and exchanges building custom custody workflows or embedding crypto services.

03

BitGo: Regulated & Insurance Focus

$750M in custody insurance: Industry-leading, regulated custodial model with SOC 2 Type 2 certification and qualified custody for institutions. This matters for regulated entities (RIAs, banks) with strict compliance and insurance mandates.

04

BitGo: Multi-Sig & Asset Breadth

Legacy multi-signature expertise: Pioneering 3-of-3 multi-sig with over $64B in assets under custody, supporting 700+ tokens including niche assets. This matters for funds and treasuries prioritizing battle-tested, transparent key management for a wide asset base.

FIREBLOCKS VS. BITGO: CUSTODY & CORPORATE ACTIONS

Head-to-Head Feature Matrix

Direct comparison of enterprise custody solutions for digital assets.

Metric / FeatureFireblocksBitGo

Insurance Per Wallet (Max)

$50M

$100M

Supported Assets

1,300+

700+

Staking Support

DeFi & Web3 Access

MPC vs. Multi-Sig

MPC Network

Multi-Sig (3-of-3)

Direct Exchange Connectivity

30+

15+

Annual Fee Model

Tiered, based on AUM

0.10% - 0.25% of AUM

pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS ANALYSIS

Fireblocks vs. BitGo: Custody & Corporate Action Support

A data-driven comparison of institutional custody solutions for CTOs and Protocol Architects managing high-value assets.

01

Fireblocks: Enterprise-Grade DeFi & Tokenization

Specific advantage: MPC-CMP technology with a proprietary network of over 1,300 institutional participants. This matters for real-time settlement and DeFi integrations. Fireblocks supports direct staking, governance, and interaction with protocols like Aave and Uniswap from the vault, reducing operational overhead.

1,300+
Network Participants
50+
Blockchain Networks
02

Fireblocks: Drawback - Cost Structure

Specific trade-off: Premium pricing model with significant setup and annual fees. This matters for budget-conscious teams or projects with predictable, lower-volume transaction patterns. The advanced feature set comes at a cost that may not be justified for simple HODL strategies.

03

BitGo: Regulated & Insured Custody

Specific advantage: First regulated custodian for digital assets in the US (NYDFS Trust Charter) with a $750M insurance policy from Lloyd's. This matters for public companies, banks, and funds requiring maximum regulatory compliance and asset protection for long-term storage.

$750M
Insurance Policy
2018
NYDFS Charter Year
04

BitGo: Drawback - Legacy Architecture & Speed

Specific trade-off: Reliance on multi-signature (multi-sig) technology can lead to slower transaction signing and more complex operational workflows compared to MPC. This matters for high-frequency trading desks or protocols requiring rapid, automated treasury movements across multiple chains.

pros-cons-b
FIREBLOCKS VS. BITGO

BitGo: Pros and Cons

Key strengths and trade-offs for institutional custody and corporate action support at a glance.

01

BitGo: Multi-Sig & Regulatory Clarity

Pioneering multi-signature security: BitGo's 3-of-3 multi-sig model, with a client-controlled key, provides a robust, non-custodial security architecture. This matters for institutions requiring direct key control and regulatory compliance, as BitGo is a qualified custodian under NYDFS regulations and a publicly-listed, audited entity.

02

BitGo: Native Staking & Tokenization

Integrated staking and WBTC leadership: Offers native, non-custodial staking for assets like ETH, SOL, and DOT directly from custody. As the sole custodian and mint/redeem agent for WBTC (over $10B market cap), BitGo is critical for DeFi and tokenization strategies where yield and liquidity are priorities.

03

Fireblocks: Network & Policy Engine

Superior transaction policy automation: Fireblocks' MPC-CMP technology and granular policy engine allow for complex, automated workflows (e.g., 10+ approval layers, time-based limits). This matters for large enterprises and funds managing high-volume, multi-chain operations across 60+ supported blockchains with a single API.

04

Fireblocks: DeFi & Exchange Connectivity

Unmatched institutional DeFi access: The Fireblocks Network connects directly to over 1,500 liquidity venues, exchanges (like Binance, Coinbase), and DeFi protocols. This reduces counterparty risk and settlement times for trading desks and hedge funds executing complex cross-platform strategies.

05

BitGo: Potential Drawback

Less agile for high-frequency operations: The traditional multi-sig model can be slower for transaction signing compared to MPC. The platform's focus on deep custody and compliance may feel less streamlined for teams requiring rapid, automated trading and settlement across a vast array of newer L1/L2 networks.

06

Fireblocks: Potential Drawback

MPC key management complexity: While secure, the MPC-CMP model means no single party holds a complete key. For some regulated entities, this differs from traditional custodial definitions and may require additional legal structuring. The extensive feature set also introduces a steeper learning curve for basic custody needs.

CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY

Decision Framework: Choose Based on Your Use Case

Fireblocks for Institutions

Verdict: The clear leader for regulated entities and complex treasury management. Strengths: Unmatched support for corporate actions like staking, voting, and airdrop claims through its Policy Engine and Workflows. Offers the broadest blockchain coverage (60+ networks) and deep integrations with trading desks (e.g., Genesis, FalconX) and DeFi protocols (Aave, Compound). Its MPC-CMP technology provides a superior security model for large, multi-entity organizations. Considerations: Higher cost structure; complexity can be overkill for simple holding.

BitGo for Institutions

Verdict: A robust, battle-tested choice for secure custody with strong foundational services. Strengths: Pioneered the multi-signature custody model and offers regulated, qualified custody via BitGo Trust Company. Provides essential corporate action support for staking (ETH, SOL, DOT) and lending. The BitGo Portfolio and Tax tools offer solid treasury management. A trusted name with a long track record. Considerations: Less automated for complex DeFi operations; blockchain support is narrower than Fireblocks.

verdict
THE ANALYSIS

Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation

A decisive breakdown of which custody solution aligns with your corporate treasury's primary operational and security model.

Fireblocks excels at secure, high-velocity digital asset operations because of its patented MPC-CMP technology and extensive DeFi and Web3 integrations. For example, its network supports over 1,500 tokens and direct connections to 60+ exchanges and liquidity venues, enabling real-time staking, lending, and trading without moving assets from custody—a critical feature for active treasury management. Its $3.5 trillion+ in secured assets and insurance coverage up to $750 million underscore its enterprise-grade security posture.

BitGo takes a different approach by emphasizing institutional-grade, regulated custody with a focus on multi-signature (multi-sig) wallet architecture and specialized support for complex corporate actions. This results in a trade-off: while potentially less agile for rapid DeFi interactions, BitGo provides deep expertise in areas like staking-as-a-service for 400+ assets, on-chain governance voting, and tax lot accounting—services critical for long-term asset holders and institutions navigating strict compliance frameworks.

The key trade-off: If your priority is operational agility, DeFi integration, and managing assets across a fragmented ecosystem, choose Fireblocks. Its technology stack is built for speed and connectivity. If you prioritize proven, auditable multi-sig security, deep support for staking and governance, and a custody-first model for long-term asset holding, choose BitGo. Its focus on regulated, specialized corporate actions makes it a fortress for strategic treasury reserves.

ENQUIRY

Get In Touch
today.

Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.

NDA Protected
24h Response
Directly to Engineering Team
10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall
NDA Protected Directly to Engineering Team
Fireblocks vs. BitGo: Custody & Corporate Action Support | ChainScore Comparisons