Privacy is often presented as a built-in feature of cryptocurrencies, but in practice, a large part of your privacy depends on the software wallet you use. Even on transparent blockchains, wallet design choices can significantly affect how much information you leak about your activity.
This page focuses on software wallets designed for users who want stronger privacy guarantees, without assuming deep technical knowledge. It is written for users who want to understand how privacy works, what trade-offs exist, and how to choose tools more consciously.
If your main priority is simplicity and ease of use, our ranking of beginner-friendly software wallets will likely be a better fit. If you want a broad framework for evaluating wallets in general, you can also consult our “Choose a software wallet” guide.
Best Software Wallets for Privacy – Ranking Overview
The ranking below is based on our Privacy Score, a global score that strongly prioritizes privacy-related features, while still enforcing minimum standards for security, reliability, and usability.
This table is meant as a quick overview. Each wallet is reviewed in detail further down the page.
| Rank | Wallet | Privacy Score | Main supported coins | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sparrow Wallet | 92 / 100 | Bitcoin | Advanced Bitcoin users focused on privacy |
| 2 | Electrum | 90 / 100 | Bitcoin | Power users who want full control |
| 3 | Wasabi Wallet | 86 / 100 | Bitcoin | Users looking for CoinJoin integration |
| 4 | Specter Desktop | 84 / 100 | Bitcoin | Hardware wallet users running their own node |
| 5 | Bitcoin Core | 82 / 100 | Bitcoin | Users prioritizing sovereignty and trust minimization |
| 6 | Phoenix Wallet | 74 / 100 | Bitcoin (Lightning) | Private everyday Bitcoin payments |
| 7 | Frame | 72 / 100 | Ethereum | Ethereum users seeking better privacy hygiene |
| 8 | BlueWallet | 71 / 100 | Bitcoin, Lightning | Simple wallet with optional node setup |
| 9 | Edge Wallet | 70 / 100 | Multichain | Multichain users exploring privacy strategies |
A note on coins and privacy
Most blockchains that operate like Ethereum are natively transparent. Transactions, balances, and interactions with smart contracts are publicly visible, which makes strong on-chain privacy difficult to achieve.
Frame and Edge Wallet are included in this ranking to cover Ethereum and multichain use cases, because many users already operate in those ecosystems. However, even with careful configuration and good wallet hygiene, privacy on Ethereum-like chains remains significantly more limited than what can be achieved on Bitcoin with dedicated privacy tools.
These wallets should therefore be seen as privacy-aware compromises, not as solutions offering maximal privacy.
Privacy-focused cryptocurrencies such as Monero or Zcash offer stronger privacy guarantees at the protocol level. However, their wallet ecosystems are more limited and their use cases differ significantly. For that reason, they are discussed later on this page but are not the primary focus of this ranking.
What Makes a Software Wallet Good for Privacy?
A privacy-oriented software wallet reduces information leaks at several levels.
At the network level, privacy depends on how the wallet connects to the blockchain. Wallets that support Tor or I2P, or allow users to connect to their own node, reduce reliance on third-party servers and limit metadata exposure such as IP addresses.
Tor (The Onion Router)
A network that routes traffic through multiple relays to hide the user’s IP address. When used with compatible wallets, Tor reduces the ability of servers to associate transactions with a real-world identity.
At the transaction level, tools like coin control and UTXO management allow users to decide exactly which coins are spent. This helps avoid unnecessary links between transactions and addresses.
UTXO (Unspent Transaction Output)
On Bitcoin, funds are represented as individual outputs rather than account balances. Managing UTXOs carefully is essential for preventing unwanted links between transactions.
Coin control
A wallet feature that allows users to manually choose which coins or UTXOs are spent in a transaction. Proper coin control can significantly reduce address clustering.
Data minimization also matters. Wallets that avoid analytics, telemetry, or cloud synchronization by default reduce the risk of behavioral tracking.
Finally, transparency plays an important role. Open-source wallets make it easier to verify what the software actually does and reduce the risk of hidden data collection.
Wallet Reviews – Detailed Overviews
Sparrow Wallet
Privacy Score: 92 / 100
Main blockchains: Bitcoin
Platforms: Windows, macOS, Linux
Hardware wallet compatibility: Yes (Ledger, Trezor, Coldcard, BitBox)
Network privacy: Tor supported, not enabled by default
Wallet type: Non-custodial
Launch year: 2020
Sparrow Wallet achieves the highest score in this ranking because it combines deep on-chain privacy controls, transparent transaction construction, and strong network-level options without relying on third-party infrastructure.
Its coin control and UTXO management tools are among the most advanced available in a consumer wallet. Users can label UTXOs, manually select inputs, and understand exactly how each transaction affects their privacy. Sparrow also supports connections to personal Bitcoin nodes and integrates Tor, allowing users to significantly reduce metadata leaks.
Rather than hiding complexity, Sparrow exposes privacy-relevant decisions clearly. This design choice explains both its excellent score and its steeper learning curve.
Network privacy:
Tor support via local proxy. Requires Tor to be running on the system (Tor Browser or system Tor service). Tor usage must be enabled in settings; not enabled by default. Supports connections to personal Bitcoin nodes and onion services.
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Best-in-class coin control and UTXO management | Requires technical understanding |
| Tor and custom node support | Desktop only |
| Fully open source | Bitcoin-only |
| Excellent hardware wallet integration | |
| Transparent transaction construction |
Best suited for
Advanced Bitcoin users who want maximum control over their privacy.
Electrum
Privacy Score: 90 / 100
Main blockchains: Bitcoin
Platforms: Windows, macOS, Linux, Android
Hardware wallet compatibility: Yes (Ledger, Trezor, Coldcard, KeepKey)
Network privacy: Tor supported via configuration
Wallet type: Non-custodial
Launch year: 2011
Electrum scores highly thanks to its mature architecture, strong transaction control, and long-standing reliability. It offers manual coin selection, PSBT support, and flexible networking options that allow privacy-conscious users to minimize reliance on public servers.
While Electrum does not enforce privacy by default, it gives knowledgeable users the tools they need to configure their setup properly, including Tor usage and custom server selection. Its longevity and security track record contribute significantly to its strong score.
Network privacy:
Tor supported via SOCKS5 proxy configuration. Requires an external Tor service running on the device. Users must manually configure the proxy and, optionally, connect to a personal Electrum server or onion address.
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Proven security track record | Interface feels outdated |
| Advanced coin control and PSBT support | Privacy features not enabled by default |
| Open source | Bitcoin-only |
| Wide hardware wallet compatibility |
Best suited for
Power users who want flexibility and reliability with full control over privacy settings.
Wasabi Wallet
Privacy Score: 86 / 100
Main blockchains: Bitcoin
Platforms: Windows, macOS, Linux
Hardware wallet compatibility: Yes (Ledger, Trezor)
Network privacy: Tor integrated and enabled by default
Wallet type: Non-custodial
Launch year: 2018
Wasabi Wallet is a Bitcoin desktop wallet designed with a strong focus on transaction-level and network-level privacy. It scores highly in our system thanks to its default Tor integration, solid coin control features, and support for privacy-enhancing transaction formats.
While Wasabi was historically known for its integrated CoinJoin implementation, the official CoinJoin coordination service is no longer provided by default. However, Wasabi continues to support PayJoin (BIP78), a collaborative transaction format where both the sender and the receiver contribute inputs to a payment. This breaks common blockchain analysis heuristics and improves privacy without relying on a coordinator or mixing infrastructure.
PayJoin does not provide the same level of anonymity as CoinJoin, but it offers a lightweight and effective privacy improvement for everyday payments, especially when combined with Tor and careful coin selection. This more conservative, peer-to-peer approach explains why Wasabi remains relevant for privacy-focused users, even though its role has evolved.
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Tor enabled by default | No CoinJoin by default anymore |
| PayJoin (BIP78) support | Requires compatible payees |
| Good coin control tools | Desktop only |
| Open source | Bitcoin-only |
| Clear privacy-oriented design |
Best suited for
Bitcoin users who want strong network privacy and PayJoin-based transaction privacy without relying on CoinJoin infrastructure.
Specter Desktop
Privacy Score: 84 / 100
Main blockchains: Bitcoin
Platforms: Windows, macOS, Linux
Hardware wallet compatibility: Yes (Ledger, Trezor, Coldcard, BitBox)
Network privacy: Node-first, Tor via node configuration
Wallet type: Non-custodial
Launch year: 2019
Specter Desktop is designed primarily for users who operate hardware wallets and personal Bitcoin nodes. Its privacy strength lies in minimizing third-party dependencies rather than providing automated privacy tools.
While it offers less on-chain privacy automation than Sparrow or Wasabi, its node-first architecture and strong hardware wallet support contribute to a solid privacy score.
Network privacy:
Primarily node-based. Network privacy depends on the connected Bitcoin node. Tor support is available if the node itself is configured to use Tor or exposed as an onion service. No one-click Tor option in the wallet alone.
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Excellent hardware wallet support | Limited mobile usability |
| Node-first design | Fewer automated privacy tools |
| Open source | Bitcoin-only |
| Clear security model |
Best suited for
Users managing Bitcoin through hardware wallets and personal nodes.
Bitcoin Core (Wallet)
Privacy Score: 82 / 100
Main blockchains: Bitcoin
Platforms: Windows, macOS, Linux
Hardware wallet compatibility: No
Network privacy: Native P2P, Tor optional
Wallet type: Non-custodial
Launch year: 2009
Bitcoin Core provides maximum sovereignty by connecting directly to the Bitcoin network without intermediaries. From a network privacy perspective, this is a strong foundation.
However, its built-in wallet lacks advanced coin control ergonomics and user-friendly privacy tools, which limits its overall score despite its excellent trust model.
Network privacy:
Native Tor support available but not enabled by default. Requires configuring Bitcoin Core to use Tor or run as an onion service. Wallet privacy depends entirely on node configuration.
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| No reliance on third-party servers | Basic wallet features |
| Full protocol validation | Poor UX |
| Open source | No hardware wallet support |
| Native network connectivity |
Best suited for
Users prioritizing sovereignty and trust minimization over usability.
Phoenix Wallet
Privacy Score: 74 / 100
Main blockchains: Bitcoin (Lightning)
Platforms: Android, iOS
Hardware wallet compatibility: No
Network privacy: Lightning-based, no Tor integration
Wallet type: Non-custodial
Launch year: 2020
Phoenix Wallet improves privacy indirectly by using the Lightning Network, which reduces the amount of transaction data published on-chain. This makes it effective for everyday payments with lower public visibility.
However, Lightning does not provide full anonymity, and Phoenix offers limited on-chain privacy controls, which explains its mid-range score.
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Reduced on-chain visibility | Limited on-chain privacy tools |
| Non-custodial Lightning wallet | No Tor by default |
| Smooth user experience | Not suitable for large transfers |
Best suited for
Users making frequent Bitcoin payments with reduced on-chain exposure.
Frame
Privacy Score: 72 / 100
Main blockchains: Ethereum
Platforms: Windows, macOS, Linux
Hardware wallet compatibility: Yes (Ledger, Trezor)
Network privacy: Custom RPC, no Tor integration
Wallet type: Non-custodial
Launch year: 2019
Frame is included to address Ethereum-specific use cases. It offers better control over RPC connections and local data than most Ethereum wallets, which improves privacy hygiene.
That said, Ethereum is natively transparent, and even with careful configuration, Frame cannot match the privacy levels achievable on Bitcoin with dedicated tools.
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Better RPC control than most Ethereum wallets | Ethereum is natively transparent |
| Open source | No native Tor integration |
| Strong hardware wallet support | Limited privacy automation |
| Desktop-focused |
Best suited for
Ethereum users who want better privacy discipline, not anonymity.
BlueWallet
Privacy Score: 71 / 100
Main blockchains: Bitcoin, Lightning
Platforms: Android, iOS
Hardware wallet compatibility: No
Network privacy: No Tor integration
Wallet type: Non-custodial
Launch year: 2017
BlueWallet balances simplicity with optional privacy improvements. When connected to a personal node, it can significantly reduce reliance on third-party servers.
However, privacy features are not enforced by default, and coin control remains limited.
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Simple and accessible | Limited coin control |
| Optional node connection | Privacy not enabled by default |
| Bitcoin and Lightning support | Mobile-only |
| Clean interface |
Best suited for
Users seeking a simple wallet with optional privacy improvements.
Edge Wallet
Privacy Score: 70 / 100
Main blockchains: Multichain
Platforms: Android, iOS
Hardware wallet compatibility: No
Network privacy: No Tor integration
Wallet type: Non-custodial
Launch year: 2014
Edge Wallet focuses on security and usability rather than native privacy tools. It is included to cover multichain use cases, especially for users experimenting with privacy strategies involving intermediate assets such as Zano.
Using privacy coins can reduce on-chain traceability, but overall privacy still depends heavily on swap providers and off-chain correlations.
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Multichain support | No native privacy tools |
| Strong local encryption | No Tor or I2P |
| User-friendly interface | Reliance on third-party swaps |
| No KYC |
Best suited for
Multichain users exploring privacy-aware workflows with clear limitations.
How Our Privacy Score Works
The Privacy Score is calculated out of 100 points:
Privacy features – 35 points
We evaluate network-level protections such as Tor or I2P support, custom node connectivity, address reuse prevention, and the absence of analytics or telemetry.
Security – 25 points
This category evaluates how reliable a wallet is over time. We take into account audit history and public security assessments when available, including sources such as CertiK Skynet and Cert.live, alongside past incidents and update frequency. Clear documentation and conservative security practices help reduce the risk of user error. Privacy features only matter if the wallet itself can be trusted.
UTXO and coin control – 15 points
This includes manual coin selection, UTXO labeling, PSBT support, and transaction construction transparency.
Standards and compatibility – 10 points
We assess support for established standards, interoperability, and hardware wallet integration.
User experience (advanced users) – 10 points
The focus is on clarity, consistency, and transparency of advanced settings rather than simplicity.
Open source – 5 points
Fully open-source wallets receive the maximum score.
Bitcoin vs Ethereum: which ecosystem offers better wallet privacy?
From a wallet privacy perspective, Bitcoin currently offers stronger and more flexible privacy options than Ethereum, provided users are willing to be careful and use the right tools.
Bitcoin’s UTXO-based model makes it possible to control exactly which coins are spent in each transaction. With features like coin control, UTXO labeling, and CoinJoin, users can actively reduce address clustering and limit on-chain traceability. In addition, many Bitcoin wallets support personal nodes and Tor, which significantly improves network-level privacy.
Ethereum, by contrast, is account-based. All transactions from an address are publicly linked, balances are always visible, and interactions with smart contracts often reveal additional behavioral information. While some Ethereum wallets allow better control over RPC connections, the protocol itself remains highly transparent, and wallet-level privacy improvements are limited.
This is why most wallets at the top of this ranking are Bitcoin-focused. Ethereum-compatible wallets such as Frame are included to address real-world use cases, but they should be seen as privacy-aware compromises rather than privacy-maximal solutions.
Practical Privacy Recommendations for Software Wallet Users
Regardless of the wallet you use or whether you run your own node, certain practices consistently improve privacy. These recommendations apply to most software wallets and should be considered a baseline for privacy-conscious users.
Avoid mixing funds from different sources
Combining coins acquired through KYC exchanges with non-KYC funds in the same wallet makes it easier to link identities to on-chain activity. Keeping these funds separated reduces the risk of address clustering and behavioral analysis.
Use coin control whenever possible
Coin control allows you to choose which coins are spent in a transaction. This helps prevent unnecessary links between addresses and limits the ability of third parties to reconstruct transaction histories.
Minimize address reuse
Reusing addresses makes it easier to associate multiple transactions with the same user. Privacy-focused wallets usually generate a new address for each transaction, and this behavior should be preserved whenever possible.
Pay attention to transaction timing
Repeated transactions following predictable patterns can reveal behavioral information, even when addresses change. Varying transaction timing helps reduce this type of correlation.
Be cautious with third-party services
Swaps, bridges, and other external services can observe both entry and exit points of transactions. Even when on-chain privacy is improved, off-chain correlations may still exist. Choosing services carefully and understanding their role is essential.
Running Your Own Node: Privacy Benefits and Trade-offs
Running your own node is one of the most effective ways to improve privacy, but it is not mandatory and comes with real constraints.
Why running your own node improves privacy
When a wallet connects to public servers, those servers can observe address queries, transaction broadcasts, and sometimes IP-related metadata. Over time, this can leak information about wallet activity.
Using your own node removes this dependency. Your wallet queries local data, validates transactions independently, and broadcasts them without relying on third-party infrastructure. This significantly reduces metadata exposure and improves privacy by design.
The trade-offs of running a node
Running a node requires disk space, bandwidth, and initial synchronization time. It also involves ongoing maintenance, such as updates and occasional troubleshooting.
While modern tools have simplified node management, running a node still demands a minimum level of technical comfort and long-term commitment.
If you don’t run your own node
Not running a node does not automatically mean poor privacy, but it increases the importance of network hygiene.
In this case, using Tor consistently becomes critical. Tor helps hide your IP address and reduces the ability of external servers to correlate wallet activity with a real-world identity. Wallets that minimize data requests and avoid analytics also provide a meaningful privacy advantage.
Privacy-Focused Cryptocurrencies and Technologies
Some privacy improvements go beyond the wallet itself and rely on the underlying network or additional technologies.
Privacy-focused cryptocurrencies such as Monero are designed to hide transaction amounts, senders, and recipients by default. Zcash offers optional privacy features based on zero-knowledge proofs. These networks can provide stronger privacy guarantees than transparent blockchains, but they also come with trade-offs in terms of adoption, tooling, and regulatory scrutiny.
On Bitcoin, second-layer solutions like the Lightning Network can reduce on-chain visibility by moving many transactions off the main blockchain. While Lightning does not provide full anonymity, it can significantly limit the amount of public transaction data exposed.
At the network level, tools such as Tor1 and I2P help mask IP addresses and reduce the ability of third parties to link transactions to a physical location or identity.
On Ethereum, some Layer 2 solutions aim to improve privacy by batching transactions or reducing on-chain data exposure, although privacy remains more limited compared to networks designed specifically for that purpose.
Is using an anonymous crypto wallet legal?
In most jurisdictions, using a non-custodial or privacy-focused software wallet is legal. These tools are neutral by design and primarily enable users to control their own funds.
Legal issues usually arise from how cryptocurrencies are used, not from the wallet software itself. Regulations tend to focus on custodial services and intermediaries rather than self-hosted wallets.
Does a privacy wallet make you anonymous?
No software wallet can guarantee full anonymity. Privacy wallets reduce data exposure and make blockchain analysis more difficult, but they do not eliminate all forms of correlation.
User behavior, network configuration, and external services all play a role. Privacy should be understood as risk reduction, not invisibility.
Final Thoughts
There is no single best software wallet for privacy that works for everyone. Privacy depends on your goals, your technical comfort level, and the trade-offs you are willing to accept.
A good wallet is only one part of a broader privacy strategy. Understanding how transactions work, how networks propagate data, and how different tools interact is just as important.
If your priorities differ, you may want to explore our other software wallet rankings or our in-depth guide on how to choose a software wallet based on your specific needs.
Ready to Take Control of Your Crypto?
Go deeper into self‑custody, software wallets, hardware wallets, and practical guides.
Java‑certified engineer and P2PStaking CEO, I secure validators across Solana, Polkadot, Kusama, Mina, and Near. My articles reflect hands‑on wallet ops and real recovery drills so you can set up self‑custody safely, step by step.
