Rabby: software wallets rating breakdown
The best EVM wallet, and the direct refutation of MetaMask. MIT-licensed — genuinely free, forkable, commercially usable. Its audits sit in the repository where you can read them. It simulates every transaction and shows you the exact balance changes before you sign, which is the single most useful anti-drainer feature in existence. And its swap fee is 0.25%, published — less than a third of MetaMask's.
The best EVM wallet, and the direct refutation of MetaMask. MIT-licensed — genuinely free, forkable, commercially usable. Its audits sit in the repository where you can read them. It simulates every transaction and shows you the exact balance changes before you sign, which is the single most useful anti-drainer feature in existence.
How the score is built
Each criterion is scored 0–10 and weighted. The median column is the middle score across every entry in this ranking, so a row reads as a position rather than a number.
| Criterion | What we measured | Weight | Score | Category median | Rank | Weighted gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Security model and open code | — | 30% | 9 | 8 | 2 of 17 | +0.30 |
| Privacy | — | 20% | 7 | 5 | 4 of 17 | +0.40 |
| Transaction transparency | — | 15% | 10 | 5 | 1 of 17 | +0.75 |
| Swap cost | — | 15% | 8 | 5 | 7 of 17 | +0.45 |
| Recovery and portability | — | 10% | 9 | 9 | 1 of 17 | 0.00 |
| Networks | — | 10% | 8 | 7 | 4 of 17 | +0.10 |
Measured 14 July 2026 · weights and method · decided by transaction transparency, worth +0.75 points against the median
Security model and open code: 9/10
Non-custodial, MPC or custodial — and where the key actually sits on your device. Then the licence, as it stands today rather than as folklore remembers it: several well-known wallets have quietly moved to source-available terms that are not open source. Audits count only when the firm is named and the report is public.
Scored 9 of 10 against a category median of 8, which places it 2nd of 17 among software wallets on this criterion. At a 30% weight that is 0.30 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 10, the worst 2.
Privacy: 7/10
The most underrated question in this category: which RPC endpoint does the wallet talk to out of the box, and who owns it? If the default RPC is operated by the wallet’s own vendor, that vendor sees the IP address behind every balance check and every transaction, and can link it to your addresses. We read the default configuration and the privacy policy, and we quote the clause. Can you point it at your own node, and how hard is it?
Scored 7 of 10 against a category median of 5, which places it 4th of 17 among software wallets on this criterion. At a 20% weight that is 0.40 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 10, the worst 2.
Transaction transparency: 10/10
Does the wallet simulate the transaction and show you the actual outcome before you sign it, and does it warn you about known drainer contracts? The same question as clear signing on a hardware device, asked of software.
Scored 10 of 10 against a category median of 5, which places it 1st of 17 among software wallets on this criterion. At a 15% weight that is 0.75 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 10, the worst 3.
Swap cost: 8/10
The built-in swap is how most free wallets are paid. We record the published service fee — and when a wallet does not publish one at all while still taking a cut of the spread, that silence is the finding and it is scored as one.
Scored 8 of 10 against a category median of 5, which places it 7th of 17 among software wallets on this criterion. At a 15% weight that is 0.45 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 10, the worst 1.
Recovery and portability: 9/10
Standard BIP39, and whether the seed restores in another wallet. A wallet you cannot leave is a custodian with extra steps.
Scored 9 of 10 against a category median of 9, which places it 1st of 17 among software wallets on this criterion. At a 10% weight that is exactly level with the median of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 9, the worst 3.
Networks: 8/10
Which chains genuinely work, from the wallet’s own documentation.
Scored 8 of 10 against a category median of 7, which places it 4th of 17 among software wallets on this criterion. At a 10% weight that is 0.10 points above the median contribution of the weighted total. The best score in the category is 9, the worst 2.
Other measurements
- privacy policy
- not published SOURCED
Its nearest neighbours in this ranking
Questions about this score
Is Rabby better than MetaMask?
+
On the things this rating measures, yes: a genuinely open licence, published audits, pre-signing transaction simulation that shows what a contract call will do, and a swap fee a third of MetaMask's. MetaMask has more integrations and greater name recognition; those are the arguments for it, and they are not security arguments.
What does transaction simulation actually prevent?
+
Signing something that does the opposite of what you expect. Simulation runs the transaction against current state and shows the resulting balance changes before you approve, which turns an unreadable contract call into a plain statement of what you are about to lose or gain — the single most effective defence against approval-based drains.