Fireblocks excels at secure, high-throughput transaction orchestration because of its proprietary Secure Multi-Party Computation (MPC) and network-of-trust architecture. For example, its infrastructure supports over 1,500 institutional clients, secures more than $4 trillion in assets, and facilitates over $100 billion in monthly transfers, making it the de facto standard for exchanges, hedge funds, and custodians requiring speed and deep integration with DeFi protocols like Aave and Compound.
LABS
Comparisons
Fireblocks vs. Copper: Institutional Custody & DeFi Connectivity
A technical, data-driven comparison of Fireblocks and Copper, focusing on their MPC technology stacks, policy engine granularity, DeFi and exchange integrations, and suitability for RWA tokenization workflows.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Battle for Institutional Crypto Infrastructure
A data-driven comparison of Fireblocks and Copper, the two dominant platforms for securing and managing institutional digital assets.
Copper takes a different approach by optimizing for the unique settlement and custody needs of institutional trading desks. Its core innovation is the Copper Loop, a segregated settlement network that enables instant, off-blockchain transfers between members, drastically reducing counterparty risk and settlement times. This results in a trade-off: while its network is exceptionally efficient for its member base, its ecosystem is more curated compared to Fireblocks' vast, open API-driven partner network.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximum security, high transaction volume, and deep integration with a vast ecosystem of exchanges, OTC desks, and DeFi, choose Fireblocks. If you prioritize ultra-efficient, risk-minimized settlement for a sophisticated trading desk operating within a trusted institutional network, choose Copper.
tldr-summary
FIREBLOCKS VS. COPPER
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A direct comparison of institutional digital asset infrastructure, focusing on core strengths and ideal use cases.
01
Fireblocks: Enterprise-Grade Security & Network
MPC-CMP wallet infrastructure with patented technology and a $500M+ insurance policy. Fireblocks Network connects to 1,800+ counterparties (exchanges, OTC desks, custodians) for instant settlement. This matters for institutions requiring deep liquidity access and the highest security assurance for treasury management and trading.
1,800+
Network Counterparties
$500M+
Insurance Policy
02
Fireblocks: Developer-First Platform
Unified API for managing wallets, transactions, and policies across 70+ blockchains and 1,500+ tokens. Non-custodial DeFi integration with pre-screened smart contracts via the DeFi API. This matters for engineering teams building complex multi-chain applications, staking services, or automated treasury operations.
70+
Supported Blockchains
1,500+
Supported Tokens
03
Copper: Prime Services & Custody Specialization
DeepClear settlement provides simultaneous exchange trading and custody settlement, reducing counterparty risk. Institutional DeFi access via CopperConnect, offering a single point of entry to protocols like Aave and Compound. This matters for hedge funds, family offices, and asset managers focused on active trading and capital efficiency.
0
Exchange Counterparty Risk
04
Copper: Regulatory & Staking Focus
FCA-registered custodian in the UK with a focus on European compliance. Institutional staking services for assets like ETH, SOL, and DOT, with optional insurance. This matters for regulated entities in Europe seeking compliant custody and a streamlined path to generating yield on digital assets.
FCA
UK Registration
ENTERPRISE DIGITAL ASSET CUSTODY
Feature Matrix: Fireblocks vs. Copper Head-to-Head
Direct comparison of institutional-grade custody platforms for CTOs and VPs of Engineering.
| Metric / Feature | Fireblocks | Copper |
|---|---|---|
Custody Model | MPC-CMP with SGX | MPC with ClearLoop |
Supported Assets | 1,300+ | 450+ |
Insurance Coverage (Max) | $750M | $500M |
Exchange & DeFi Connectivity | 1,300+ venues | 40+ venues |
Staking & DeFi API | ||
Regulatory Licenses (e.g., VASP) | NYDFS BitLicense, FCA | FCA, BaFin, FINMA |
Settlement Network (TPS) | ~1,500 | N/A |
pros-cons-a
CUSTODY INFRASTRUCTURE COMPARISON
Fireblocks vs. Copper: Pros and Cons
A data-driven breakdown of strengths and trade-offs for institutional digital asset custody and treasury management.
01
Fireblocks Pro: Unmatched Security & Insurance
Enterprise-grade MPC and SGX: Fireblocks' proprietary MPC-CMP and hardware isolation technology has secured over $4T in assets with zero wallet breaches. This matters for regulated institutions (banks, hedge funds) requiring the highest security standard and $750M+ in insurance coverage.
$4T+
Assets Secured
0
Wallet Breaches
02
Fireblocks Pro: Extensive Network & DeFi Integration
Largest institutional DeFi gateway: Direct, secure connectivity to over 1,500 exchanges, OTC desks, and DeFi protocols (Aave, Uniswap, Lido). This matters for active treasury managers seeking seamless staking, lending, and trading across 50+ blockchains without moving assets off-platform.
1,500+
Connected Venues
50+
Blockchains
04
Copper Pro: On-Chain Settlement Specialization
Settlement-finality architecture: Copper's ClearLoop network enables simultaneous trade settlement on-chain, eliminating counterparty risk. This matters for OTC desks and institutions executing large block trades who cannot tolerate settlement lag or default risk.
05
Fireblocks Con: Higher Cost Structure
Premium pricing model: Enterprise plans start at a significant premium, with costs scaling based on AUM and transaction volume. This matters for smaller funds or projects with sub-$100M TVL where infrastructure cost is a primary constraint.
06
Copper Con: Narrower Protocol & Chain Support
Selective blockchain integration: While strong for major assets, support for emerging L1/L2 chains (e.g., Sui, Sei, Berachain) and niche DeFi protocols can lag behind Fireblocks. This matters for protocol treasuries or VCs needing custody for a diverse, experimental portfolio.
pros-cons-b
PROS AND CONS
Fireblocks vs. Copper: Institutional Custody Compared
A side-by-side analysis of two leading institutional digital asset platforms, highlighting key architectural and service differentiators for CTOs managing high-value assets.
01
Fireblocks: Enterprise-Grade Security
MPC-CMP and SGX-based isolation: Fireblocks' proprietary technology creates a secure enclave for each private key shard, significantly reducing the attack surface. This architecture is validated by firms like Fidelity and BNY Mellon for securing billions. This matters for regulated entities (banks, hedge funds) with zero-tolerance for single points of failure.
02
Fireblocks: Deep DeFi & Web3 Integration
Native integration with 50+ DEXs, lending protocols, and staking services via the Fireblocks Network. Enables programmable treasury workflows directly from cold storage (e.g., auto-compound yield on Aave, trade on Uniswap). This matters for active treasury managers seeking yield without sacrificing custody security.
03
Copper: Prime Brokerage & Exchange Connectivity
Unique 'ClearLoop' network provides direct, secure connectivity to 40+ centralized exchanges (CEXs) like Binance and Coinbase. Assets remain in Copper's custody during trading, eliminating counterparty risk. This matters for trading desks and funds executing high-frequency, cross-exchange arbitrage strategies.
04
Copper: Staking-as-a-Service Focus
Institutional-grade staking for 20+ Proof-of-Stake networks including Ethereum, Solana, and Polkadot. Offers non-custodial options via MPC and handles all infrastructure, slashing protection, and tax reporting. This matters for long-term asset holders (family offices, VCs) prioritizing passive income from staking rewards.
05
Fireblocks: Potential Drawback
Higher cost structure and potential vendor lock-in. The proprietary MPC stack and comprehensive API ecosystem can lead to significant annual commitments and complex migration paths. This is a trade-off for teams with tight budgets or those prioritizing multi-vendor strategies.
06
Copper: Potential Drawback
Less mature DeFi integration compared to Fireblocks. While improving, Copper's native support for direct interactions with decentralized applications (e.g., Curve, Compound) is not as extensive. This is a trade-off for protocol treasuries or DAOs whose primary operations are on-chain.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Platform
Fireblocks for Institutional Custody
Verdict: The definitive choice for regulated entities and large-scale asset protection. Strengths:
- MPC-CMP Technology: Industry-standard for secure, non-custodial key management, eliminating single points of failure.
- Regulatory & Insurance: SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001 certifications, and comprehensive crime insurance policies (up to $1B+).
- Institutional Network: Direct, secure connectivity to over 1,300+ counterparties (exchanges, OTC desks, custodians) for settlement. Best For: Hedge funds, banks, and corporates requiring the highest security attestations, insurance, and a battle-tested network.
Copper for Institutional Custody
Verdict: A strong alternative with deep DeFi integration for active treasury management. Strengths:
- ClearLoop Network: Unique segregated settlement layer for instant, off-chain transfers between trusted counterparties, reducing settlement risk.
- DeFi-Centric: Native integration with protocols like Aave and Compound for on-chain yield generation directly from custody.
- Multi-Party Computation: Also employs MPC technology for secure key sharding. Best For: Institutions and DAOs that prioritize active participation in DeFi and require fast, secure internal settlement alongside custody.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Recommendation
Choosing between Fireblocks and Copper hinges on your organization's primary security model and operational scale.
Fireblocks excels at institutional-grade security and network isolation because of its patented MPC-CMP technology and multi-layer defense. For example, its secure enclave architecture and over $4 trillion in transferred digital assets demonstrate its dominance for high-value, high-frequency operations. Its extensive DeFi connectivity through the Fireblocks Network and support for 40+ blockchains make it the go-to for active trading desks and protocols requiring deep liquidity access.
Copper takes a different approach by specializing in secure, segregated custody for long-term asset holders and funds. Its core strength is the CopperKey MPC system, which uniquely allows client keys to be generated and stored completely off Copper's infrastructure. This results in a trade-off: while offering unparalleled client-controlled security for vaulting, its transaction engine and DeFi integrations are less extensive than Fireblocks', making it ideal for HODL strategies over active trading.
The key trade-off: If your priority is high-velocity operations, deep DeFi integration, and managing assets across a vast multi-chain landscape, choose Fireblocks. Its enterprise workflow tools, insurance coverage, and transaction policy engine are built for scale. If you prioritize ultimate client-controlled custody, regulatory compliance for fund structures, and security-isolated cold storage, choose Copper. Its off-platform key generation is a decisive factor for institutions where custody sovereignty is non-negotiable.
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall