Skip to content
Crypto Almanac Daily
E
Wallets

Electrum

Best for open-source verification

Source code:Public repositoryDocumentation:OpenSecurity page:Not identifiedPublisher:Electrum TechnologiesRubric:v2.0 · verified 9 Aug 2026
Last verified August 9, 2026
Confidence ARubric v2.0Verified August 9, 2026
8.8
out of 10
Open account
Scorecard

How it rates

Key custody & openness · 35%10.0
Cost transparency · 5%10.0
Product openness · 25%8.0
Publisher transparency · 20%8.0
Public documentation surface · 15%8.0
Pros
  • Source published in a public repository
  • Documentation open without an account
Cons
  • No dedicated security page identified 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% weight10/10 points · 10.0/10
Cost transparency · 5% weight10/10 points · 10.0/10
Product openness · 25% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10
Publisher transparency · 20% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10
Public documentation surface · 15% weight8/10 points · 8.0/10

A Bitcoin desktop wallet running since 2011, with multisig, hardware-wallet support, coin control and the option to connect to your own server.

Our assessment

Electrum has been shipping since 2011, which makes it older than most of the companies in this comparison. It is a Bitcoin-only desktop wallet with multisig, hardware-wallet integration, coin control and the ability to point at your own server instead of someone else's.

Longevity is evidence

Fifteen years of continuous open-source development, through multiple market cycles and at least one wave of targeted attacks on its server protocol, is the kind of track record that cannot be bought or accelerated. Any weakness in a wallet this old and this widely used would have surfaced long ago.

Built for people who want control

Coin control, custom fee settings, multisig, watch-only wallets and support for connecting to your own Electrum server are all standard. Running your own server is the meaningful one: it stops a third party from learning which addresses belong to you, which is the main privacy leak in every light wallet.

Where the evidence thins

We found no dedicated security or vulnerability-disclosure page at a conventional address — the source is public and the project is well known to researchers, but the formal reporting channel is not published where a user would look. That is the only real gap in its score.

Who it suits

Electrum fits Bitcoin holders who want a stable, auditable desktop wallet with multisig and server independence, and who do not need a modern interface. Users who want the same power with better UTXO tooling should compare Sparrow; multi-chain users are in the wrong category entirely.

Alternatives

How rivals compare

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

Frequently asked

Does this score mean Electrum 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.