Shortlist comparison

Compare institutional custody providers

Compare up to four custody-category providers side by side. Evidence-reviewed fields are separated from unverified directory research.

Choose providersEvidence Index

1 provider shortlisted. Unknown values stay unknown and do not imply a negative finding.

Request introductions
Comparison fieldCopperEvidence reviewed
Profile
Directory categoryDigital Asset Custodians
Custody modelCustodial
Directory verificationunverified
Research statusPrimary-source evidence reviewed
Regulatory jurisdictions
  • Switzerland / multi-jurisdiction
Regulators / authorities
  • Entity-specific regulators
Regimes / permissions
  • Switzerland / entity-specific
  • Registration/permissions vary by entity
Documented services
  • Custody
  • Settlement
  • Trading
Security certifications
  • SOC 2
Regulatory evidenceCopper publishes regulatory registrations for specific entities, including Switzerland; permissions must be checked against the entity used for the mandate.
Security evidenceCopper has published SOC 2 Type II assurance for its digital-asset custody environment.
Asset protection evidenceCopper provides institutional custody and collateral-management architecture; legal segregation and insolvency treatment should be confirmed for the selected entity.
Procurement caveatRegulatory permissions and asset-protection mechanics vary by Copper entity and jurisdiction.

Shortlist summary

Copper — Digital Asset Custodians — evidence reviewed
Important: Compare output is a research aid. Confirm current licences, assurance reports, insurance, asset segregation and contractual terms directly with each provider before onboarding.