Skip to content
Crypto Almanac Daily
A
Wallets

Argent

Best for open-source verification

Source code:Public repositoryDocumentation:Blocked to automated checksSecurity page:Not identifiedPublisher:Argent LabsRubric:v2.0 · verified 9 Aug 2026
Last verified August 9, 2026
Confidence BRubric v2.0Verified August 9, 2026
6.7
out of 10
Open account
Scorecard

How it rates

Key custody & openness · 35%8.0
Cost transparency · 5%7.0
Product openness · 25%7.0
Publisher transparency · 20%5.0
Public documentation surface · 15%5.0
Pros
  • Source published in a public repository
Cons
  • No dedicated security page identified at this check
  • Terms not found at the conventional address at this check
How this score was built

Each indicator scores 2, 1 or 0. A pillar is the points earned over the points available; the overall score is the weighted sum. Every source below is public — check any of them yourself.

Key custody & openness · 35% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10
  • Met
    Source code published in a public repository

    Repository reachable at this check.

    github.com/argentlabs
  • Partial
    Security documentation or disclosure page published

    Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.

    support.argent.xyz/
  • Partial
    User documentation reachable without an account

    Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.

    support.argent.xyz/
  • Met
    Publisher identifiable from its own repository organisation

    Repository published under Argent Labs.

    github.com/argentlabs
  • Met
    Product site reachable for independent verification

    HTTP 2xx at this check.

    www.argent.xyz/
Cost transparency · 5% weight7/10 points · 7.0/10
  • Met
    Product site public

    Reachable at this check.

    www.argent.xyz/
  • Not met
    Terms or legal documentation public

    Not found at the conventional address at this check.

  • Partial
    Documentation states how the product is funded or priced

    Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.

    support.argent.xyz/
  • Met
    No account required to read product information

    No account required at this check.

    www.argent.xyz/
  • Met
    Support resource public

    Reachable at this check.

    support.argent.xyz/
Product openness · 25% weight7/10 points · 7.0/10
  • Met
    Public repository organisation

    Organisation public.

    github.com/argentlabs
  • Met
    Repository is the publisher's own

    Published by the vendor.

    github.com/argentlabs
  • Met
    Release history publicly visible

    Repository carries public history.

    github.com/argentlabs
  • Partial
    Documentation site published

    Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.

    support.argent.xyz/
  • Not met
    Security posture stated publicly

    No dedicated security page identified at this check.

Publisher transparency · 20% weight5/10 points · 5.0/10
  • Met
    Publisher entity identifiable

    Identifiable as Argent Labs.

    github.com/argentlabs
  • Met
    Site resolves to automated verification

    HTTP 2xx at this check.

    www.argent.xyz/
  • Not met
    Security or disclosure page published

    Not identified at this check.

  • Not met
    Terms or legal documentation published

    Not found at the conventional address at this check.

  • Partial
    Support or help resource published

    Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.

    support.argent.xyz/
Public documentation surface · 15% weight5/10 points · 5.0/10
  • Met
    Product site reachable

    HTTP 2xx at this check.

    www.argent.xyz/
  • Partial
    Documentation reachable

    Published at a documented URL; automated retrieval blocked at this check.

    support.argent.xyz/
  • Met
    Public repository reachable

    HTTP 2xx at this check.

    github.com/argentlabs
  • Not met
    Security page reachable

    Not identified.

  • Not met
    Legal documentation reachable

    Not found at the conventional address.

A smart-contract wallet replacing the seed phrase with guardian-based social recovery, built around Starknet's native account abstraction.

Our assessment

Argent removes the seed phrase entirely. Accounts are smart contracts, and recovery works through guardians — a set of addresses, devices or people that can collectively authorise a new signer. It ships as Argent X for Starknet and Argent Mobile for Ethereum and several Layer 2s.

Social recovery instead of twelve words

A written seed phrase is a single object that both loses your money if destroyed and loses it if found. Guardian recovery replaces that with a quorum: no individual guardian can take your funds, and losing your device is survivable. Argent passed 500,000 registered users on this model, which makes it the largest real-world test of consumer social recovery.

Account abstraction, used properly

Because every Starknet account is a contract by default, Argent can enforce daily transfer limits, guardian approval and email or phone signup at the contract level rather than in an app that could be bypassed. These are the security properties a bank offers, implemented without a bank.

The trade-offs to understand

Smart-contract accounts cost more to deploy and operate than plain key pairs, they are chain-specific rather than portable, and their safety depends on contract code rather than on cryptography alone. Choosing guardians badly — all on one device, or all from one person — recreates the single point of failure the design removed.

Who it suits

Argent fits Starknet and Layer 2 users who want recoverable accounts and are willing to think about guardians once. Users who need broad multi-chain coverage or maximum dapp compatibility should choose MetaMask, Rabby or Trust Wallet.

Alternatives

How rivals compare

ServiceScoreBest for
Trust Wallet9.9open-source verificationRead →
MetaMask9.9open-source verificationRead →
Reference

Frequently asked

Does this score mean Argent is safe?

No. It measures what a user can verify before installing: published source, documented security posture, open documentation and an identifiable publisher. Runtime key handling is not tested by us.

Why does open source matter for a wallet?

It is the one substantive property an outsider can check without reverse-engineering the app. Everything else requires trusting the publisher or a third-party audit.

What would raise this score?

Publishing source, a dedicated security page, open documentation and terms at stable public addresses — all checkable by anyone.