Skip to content
Crypto Almanac Daily
M
Wallets

MetaMask

Best for open-source verification

Source code:Public repositoryDocumentation:OpenSecurity page:PublishedPublisher:ConsensysRubric:v2.0 · verified 9 Aug 2026
Last verified August 9, 2026
Confidence ARubric v2.0Verified August 9, 2026
9.9
out of 10
Open account
Scorecard

How it rates

Key custody & openness · 35%10.0
Cost transparency · 5%10.0
Product openness · 25%10.0
Publisher transparency · 20%10.0
Public documentation surface · 15%10.0
Pros
  • Source published in a public repository
  • Dedicated security page published
  • Documentation open without an account
Cons
  • Several indicators could not be verified from public sources 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% weight10/10 points · 10.0/10
Publisher transparency · 20% weight10/10 points · 10.0/10
Public documentation surface · 15% weight10/10 points · 10.0/10

The default wallet for Ethereum and EVM chains, with published source, security disclosure, documentation and legal terms all reachable without an account.

Our assessment

MetaMask is the wallet most people mean when they say "crypto wallet", and it is one of only two here that passed every indicator we checked. Source code, security disclosure, user documentation and legal terms are all published and reachable without an account.

Ubiquity is a security property

Being the default has a real, unglamorous benefit: almost every dapp is tested against MetaMask first, so connection failures and signature edge cases get found by someone else before they reach you. Wallets with smaller user bases regularly hit integration bugs that MetaMask users never see.

Its weakness is the same as everyone's

MetaMask is a hot wallet in a browser extension. The keys sit on a machine that also runs everything else you do, which no amount of open source changes. Signature phishing rose sharply through early 2026 and the extension has added pre-execution checks and clearer warnings in response — but the structural answer is to pair it with a hardware wallet for anything you would mind losing.

Cost is where to read the small print

The wallet itself is free; the in-app swap carries a service fee on top of the underlying route, and the built-in fiat on-ramps price separately again. None of that is hidden, and our cost pillar is 5% of the score in this category precisely because a wallet's real cost is what it charges when you transact rather than what it charges to install.

Who it suits

MetaMask fits anyone using Ethereum and EVM chains who wants the widest dapp compatibility and fully auditable code. DeFi users who want transaction simulation before signing should look at Rabby; Solana users at Phantom; Cosmos users at Keplr.

Alternatives

How rivals compare

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

Frequently asked

Does this score mean MetaMask 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.