Dfns has built a strong reputation as a security-first "Wallet-as-a-Service" provider, using MPC (Multi-Party Computation) to secure assets for fintechs and banks. Their focus on compliance and API-first infrastructure makes them a favorite for institutional use cases. However, for developers building consumer applications, games, or high-frequency trading apps, Dfns can sometimes feel "heavy," expensive, or lacking in the higher-level features (like smart accounts and UI kits) needed to ship quickly.
If you are looking for alternatives that offer similar security guarantees but with more developer-friendly tools, open-source components, or better pricing for scale, here are the top choices in 2025.
1. Openfort
Openfort (that's us 👋) is an open-source wallet infrastructure solution that provides powerful wallet capabilities to abstract crypto complexity for both users and developers. Its platform allows developers to plug and play any signer (including OpenSigner) and contract they prefer, simplifying the whole vertical use case—from cross-app ecosystems and AI agents to fintech and DeFi.
Key Features
- If you're currently using Dfns and hitting limits around integration speed (building your own transaction construction logic), need a ready-to-use UI, or want gas sponsorship and session keys out of the box.
- Open source, Self-hosting option, Vendor neutrality: Openfort's signer infrastructure (OpenSigner) is open-source and self-hostable. Unlike Dfns's closed-source MPC nodes, Openfort allows you to audit and own your security stack. Learn more about how to avoid wallet vendor dependency.
- Concrete example: You are building a consumer app where users need to sign transactions instantly. With Dfns, you manage the MPC ceremony and transaction parsing. With Openfort, you use our SDK to spin up a smart account that handles the signing, gas sponsorship, and recovery in one line of code.
Comparison Table: Openfort vs. Dfns
| Feature | Openfort | Dfns |
|---|---|---|
| Tech | SSS / Smart Account | MPC |
| Open Source | ✅ (OpenSigner) | ❌ (Proprietary) |
| Smart Accounts | ✅ Native & Modular | ❌ (Signer only) |
| Gas Sponsorship | ✅ Native Paymaster | ❌ (Build yourself) |
| UI Components | ✅ Headless & UI Kits | ❌ API Only |
| Self-Hostable | ✅ Yes | ❌ No |
| Pricing | MAU + Usage | Monthly + Usage |
| Target | Developers / Games | Banks / Fintech |
Scaling Considerations
- High User Volume, Low Transaction Volume: Openfort's free tier (1k MAUs and 500 transactions) is perfect for growth. Dfns typically has a higher barrier to entry with minimum monthly fees suited for enterprise contracts.
- Transaction Orchestration: Dfns focuses on key management and often requires you to integrate a separate provider for transaction infrastructure. Openfort orchestrates the entire stack—keys and transactions—simplifying your vendor management and integration.
- Low User Volume, High Transaction Volume: Openfort's smart account infrastructure allows for transaction batching, which can save significant gas costs on-chain. Dfns signs individual transactions, leaving the gas optimization logic to you.
Why developers choose Openfort
Developers choose Openfort when they want institutional-grade security without the institutional-grade friction. They switch to Openfort to ship faster with a complete stack.
2. Turnkey
Turnkey uses TEEs (Secure Enclaves) instead of MPC. Turnkey is the closest direct competitor to Dfns in terms of "API-first key management".
Comparison Table: Turnkey vs. Dfns
| Feature | Turnkey | Dfns |
|---|---|---|
| Security | TEE (Enclaves) | MPC |
| Speed | ✅ < 100ms | ⚠️ Slower |
| Pricing | Usage-based | Monthly / Usage |
| Complexity | High (Low level) | High (Low level) |
Scaling Considerations
Turnkey is faster.
- Performance: TEE signing is practically instant. MPC requires network roundtrips between nodes.
Why developers choose Turnkey
For high-frequency signing where latency matters (e.g., trading bots).
3. Privy
Privy (acquired by Stripe) is for consumer apps. If you are using Dfns to build a consumer wallet, Privy is the productized alternative.
Comparison Table: Privy vs. Dfns
| Feature | Privy | Dfns |
|---|---|---|
| Product | Full Wallet UI | Key API |
| Onboarding | ✅ Social / Email | ❌ Build yourself |
| Integration | React SDK | Backend API |
| Focus | B2C | B2B |
Scaling Considerations
Privy is a frontend product.
- Speed: You can integrate Privy in an afternoon. Dfns takes weeks.
Why developers choose Privy
To launch a consumer app without building a wallet backend.
4. Web3Auth
Web3Auth (acquired by Metamask) is the "retail" MPC provider.
Comparison Table: Web3Auth vs. Dfns
| Feature | Web3Auth | Dfns |
|---|---|---|
| Target | Consumer / Retail | Enterprise / Fintech |
| Auth | Social Login | API Keys |
| Cost | Affordable | Enterprise |
| Network | Open | Closed |
Scaling Considerations
Web3Auth is for mass market.
- Cost: Web3Auth is significantly cheaper for consumer use cases.
Why developers choose Web3Auth
For social login at scale.
Building In-House Wallet Product
Building your own MPC stack is extremely hard.
Pros
- Sovereignty: You own the nodes.
- Cost: No vendor fees.
Cons
- Risk: If you screw up the math or the ops, funds are gone.
- Effort: It takes a team of cryptographers.
For a deeper dive into the trade-offs, check out our guide on building vs buying wallet infrastructure.
FAQ
1. Is Dfns custodial? Dfns is non-custodial in design (key shares are split), but you rely on their infrastructure to coordinate the signing.
2. Can I use Openfort with Dfns? Yes. You can use Dfns to hold the key and Openfort to power the smart account.
3. Why is Openfort better for developers? Openfort provides the UI, the gas sponsorship, and the smart account logic that Dfns leaves up to you to build.
Conclusion
Dfns is a strong choice for banks and fintechs needing pure MPC infrastructure.
However, if you are a developer building a modern application that needs speed, smart features, and open-source flexibility, Openfort is the better partner.
Check out Openfort's documentation to learn more.