Turnkey has introduced a powerful paradigm for secure, programmable key management using TEEs (Trusted Execution Environments). It provides low-level primitives that allow developers to build secure wallets. However, Turnkey is an infrastructure provider, not a full wallet stack. Developers often find themselves spending weeks building the "rest of the wallet" (smart accounts, paymasters, UI, auth) on top of Turnkey's raw keys.
If you are looking for alternatives that offer similar security but with a more complete, developer-friendly stack, 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 Turnkey and hitting limits around development speed (building your own smart account infra), need a ready-to-use UI/SDK, or want a solution that handles 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 comparable to Turnkey's security model but fully self-hostable. You own the stack. Learn more about how to avoid wallet vendor dependency.
- Concrete example: You want to launch a fintech app with embedded wallets next week. With Turnkey, you'd be building the auth and transaction construction logic. With Openfort, you plug in our SDK, configure your smart account policies, and go live.
Comparison Table: Openfort vs. Turnkey
| Feature | Openfort | Turnkey |
|---|---|---|
| Product Level | Full Wallet Stack | Key Infrastructure API |
| Open Source | ✅ (OpenSigner) | ❌ (Proprietary TEE) |
| Smart Accounts | ✅ Native & Modular | ❌ (Build yourself) |
| Gas Sponsorship | ✅ Native Paymaster | ❌ (Build yourself) |
| UI Components | ✅ Headless & UI Kits | React |
| Authentication | Any OIDC Provider | Passkeys / API |
| Session Keys | ✅ Native Support | ✅ Programmable |
| Self-Hostable | ✅ Yes | ❌ No |
| Pricing | MAU + Usage | Usage (Per Signature) |
Scaling Considerations
- High User Volume, Low Transaction Volume: Openfort's free tier (1k MAUs and 500 transactions) is generous. Turnkey charges per wallet/signature, which can add up if you have many users creating wallets but not transacting often.
- Transaction Orchestration: Turnkey provides the keys, but you are responsible for building or buying the transaction infrastructure (bundling, gas sponsorship). Openfort orchestrates both the keys and the transactions, saving you from integrating a separate "smart account" vendor.
- Low User Volume, High Transaction Volume: Turnkey is efficient for high-volume automated signing (bots). Openfort is optimized for user-driven transactions, with gas sponsorship and batching features that save money on-chain, which Turnkey doesn't handle.
Why developers choose Openfort
Developers choose Openfort when they want Turnkey-level security but don't want to reinvent the wheel. They choose Openfort to get a complete, production-ready wallet stack rather than just a key management API.
2. Privy
Privy (acquired by Stripe) is the leading embedded wallet product. Privy uses similar TEE technology to Turnkey under the hood but packages it into a complete product.
Comparison Table: Privy vs. Turnkey
| Feature | Privy | Turnkey |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Consumer Product | Developer Infra |
| Integration | React SDK | Raw API |
| Onboarding | ✅ Best-in-class | ❌ Build yourself |
| Auth | Social / Email | Passkeys |
| Pricing | MAU-based | Usage-based |
Scaling Considerations
Privy is a finished product.
- Time to Market: Privy gets you live in hours. Turnkey takes weeks/months of integration.
Why developers choose Privy
To ship a consumer app fast without worrying about the low-level crypto engineering.
3. Dynamic
Dynamic (acquired by Fireblocks) offers a polished wallet adapter and embedded wallet. Dynamic is another "product-layer" alternative to Turnkey's "infra-layer".
Comparison Table: Dynamic vs. Turnkey
| Feature | Dynamic | Turnkey |
|---|---|---|
| UI | ✅ Polished Widget | ❌ None |
| Multi-chain | ✅ EVM, SVM | ✅ EVM, SVM |
| Auth | Socials + Wallets | Passkeys |
| Pricing | SaaS | Usage |
| Maintenance | Managed | Self-managed logic |
Scaling Considerations
Dynamic handles the UI complexity.
- Focus: Use Dynamic if you need a frontend. Use Turnkey if you are building a backend wallet system.
Why developers choose Dynamic
For the beautiful UI and ease of integration.
4. Web3Auth
Web3Auth (acquired by Metamask) uses MPC (Multi-Party Computation) instead of TEEs. It's the main alternative security model to Turnkey.
Comparison Table: Web3Auth vs. Turnkey
| Feature | Web3Auth | Turnkey |
|---|---|---|
| Tech | MPC TSS | TEE (Enclaves) |
| Network | Distributed | Centralized (AWS) |
| Auth | Social Login | Passkeys / API |
| Cost | Affordable | Usage-based |
| Integration | SDK | API |
Scaling Considerations
Web3Auth is widely adopted.
- Security Model: Some prefer MPC (Web3Auth) over TEEs (Turnkey) for decentralization reasons.
Why developers choose Web3Auth
For robust social login support and MPC security.
5. Dfns
Dfns is a direct competitor to Turnkey in the "Wallet-as-a-Service" infrastructure space. Dfns uses MPC and focuses heavily on security and compliance for banks and fintechs.
Comparison Table: Dfns vs. Turnkey
| Feature | Dfns | Turnkey |
|---|---|---|
| Tech | MPC | TEE |
| Target | Banks / Fintech | Crypto Native |
| Compliance | ✅ High (SOC2, etc) | ✅ High |
| Deployment | Cloud / On-prem | Cloud |
| Pricing | Enterprise | Usage |
Scaling Considerations
Dfns is enterprise-focused.
- Compliance: Dfns often wins with traditional financial institutions requiring specific MPC guarantees.
Why developers choose Dfns
For institutional-grade MPC security and compliance.
Building In-House Wallet Product
Using Turnkey is essentially building in-house, just outsourcing the HSM/Enclave part.
Pros
- Control: You build the exact logic you want.
- Security: Turnkey handles the hardest part (key storage).
Cons
- Effort: You still have to build 80% of the wallet (transaction construction, parsing, gas, nonce management).
For a deeper dive into the trade-offs, check out our guide on building vs buying wallet infrastructure.
FAQ
1. Is Turnkey custodial? Turnkey is "non-custodial" in the sense that they process signatures inside a TEE and claim they cannot access your keys. However, you rely on their infrastructure.
2. Can I use Openfort with Turnkey? Yes! You can use Turnkey as a "signer" and Openfort for the smart account infrastructure. This gives you Turnkey's security with Openfort's features.
3. Why use Openfort instead of just Turnkey? Because a key is not a wallet. Openfort gives you the smart account, the paymaster, the indexer, and the policy engine that you would otherwise have to build on top of Turnkey.
Conclusion
Turnkey is an incredible piece of infrastructure for teams that want to build everything from scratch.
However, if you want a complete wallet stack that gets you to market fast, with smart account superpowers and open-source flexibility, Openfort is the better choice.
Check out Openfort's documentation to learn more.