I am currently working on a series of wallet reviews and to make sure the reviews are consistent I am building a template that anyone can follow. This template will help me value the features and properties of the wallet better. It will also help me make sure that I am being thorough so that i do not miss out on the basic parts of the review.

Wallet introduction

Each review starts with a wallet introduction, consisting of the wallet name, release date, last updated date, available platforms and a short wallet description.
This should include if the wallet is for a single or multiple chains, if it has support for multiple tokens and what userbase it targets. Knowing the proper context of the wallet makes it easier to judge the quality of the features and user interface.

Review scoreboard

The scoreboard is divided into five sections. For each section the wallet is judged based on how well it matches the expectations with regards to the overall landscape and the wallets stated purpose and is then given up to one point towards its final score.
In the review, each section will be presented with a motivation for the score given.


Usability is measured in terms of how well the applications interface matches the target audience.
  • Is it frustrating or enjoyable to use?
  • Does it empower or alienate the intended user?
  • Does it support localization? (language support? available fiat currencies?)
  • Does it work well with regards to disabilities?


Features is measured in terms of how well the application deliver functions that sets it apart from its competition, with regards to its target users.
  • Does the wallet offer the standard functions? (send, receive, backup, history)
  • Does the wallet offer privacy features? (untainted coin selection? tumbling?)
  • Does the wallet offer security features? (fingerprints, multisig, watch-only)


Compatibility is measured in terms of how well the application interact with other actors in the ecosystem.
  • Does it support common address formats? (Base58, Copay, CashAddr, Cashtags)
  • Does it support various connection mechanisms? (Camera/QR, NFC, Bluetooth)
  • Does it support various backup formats? (WIF, Seed types, File, etc)
  • Does it support fee configuration? (available fee levels? Sane defaults?)


Performance is measured in terms of how snappy and responsive the application is when taking common actions like sending and receiving funds.
  • Installation / Setup time (Does it take a long time to start for the first time?)
  • Start-up / Sync time (After having closed for some days, does it sync up quickly?)
  • Send/Receive delays (Does it react quickly to broadcasted transactions?)
  • User interface lag (Does it respond well to user input?)


Robustness is measured in terms of how reliably the application works and what expectations of reliability users can have.
  • Can you use it without internet? (and if so, what functions still work?)
  • Does it rely on a 3rd party service? (and if so, can you choose which?)
  • Does it provide public support? (and if so, is it responsive?)
  • Does it have known developers? (is it open source?)
  • Is the application stable? (Does it crash? Does it lose data?)


Bear in mind that while this template helps me to be thorough, it does not mean that the reviews will be objectively neutral. This is not intended to be an objective comparison, but rather a subjective perspective: it will only have value if you believe my opinions have value.
I look forward to weeks and weeks of testing and review, even if only to better educate myself about the available options out there and to ensure that I give out good recommendations for friends and family that I can actually back up with solid experience.


2 of 2 reviewers say it's worth paying for

0 of 2 reviewers say it's not worth paying for