Coinbase Prime vs DFNS
How Coinbase Prime vs DFNS compare on our ratings, custodian specs, funding, pros and cons.
| Feature | ||
|---|---|---|
| Ratings | ||
| Our score | 4.1/5 | 3.5/5 |
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Security | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| Compliance | 4.0 | 2.5 |
| Asset support | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| Features | 4.5 | 4.0 |
| Support | 4.0 | 3.5 |
| Specs | ||
| Custody model | Not disclosed | MPC, HSM, Self-custody software |
| Clients | Not disclosed | Institutions, Corporates |
| Regulated | Yes | No |
| SOC 2 report | Yes | Yes |
| Insurance | Up to $320M commercial crime policy (insurer syndicate), shared by all Coinbase customers | $15M per year cyber, E&O and crime cover for DFNS itself (Beazley, Munich Re); DFNS holds no client assets |
| Staking | Yes | Yes |
| API access | Yes | Yes |
| Licenses & charters | NYDFS limited purpose trust charter (US), NYDFS BitLicense (US), CSSF MiCA CASP authorization (Luxembourg) | Not disclosed |
| MPC | Not disclosed | Yes |
| Cold storage | Yes | Not disclosed |
| Qualified custodian | Yes | No |
| Company | ||
| Founded | 2012 | 2020 |
| Headquarters | United States | France |
| Investors | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Strengths and weaknesses | ||
| Pros |
|
|
| Cons |
|
|
| Best for | Hedge funds that want custody and execution in one account, ETF sponsors and asset managers that need a New York trust company as custodian, Trading desks that route orders over FIX | Banks and licensed custodians building in-house custody, Fintechs embedding wallets and stablecoin payments, Institutions that must keep keys in their own HSMs or data centers |
Highlighted cells show the stronger value in each row. Data comes from each provider's site and public sources; check details before you sign up.

