Head to head — software wallets
Exodus vs Trust Wallet
These two get compared constantly and they are barely competing. One is the best-looking desktop wallet ever built; the other supports more chains than anything else on the market. The right answer depends entirely on where you actually use crypto.
- 50+ vs 100+ Networks supported
- 1–4% vs low Swap spread comparison
- $0 Staking platform fee on both
- Trezor Hardware pairing — Exodus only
They are solving different problems
The reason this comparison keeps getting written is that both are free, non-custodial, multi-chain and popular. The reason it usually gets written badly is that they are not really alternatives — Exodus is a desktop application with a companion phone app, Trust Wallet is a phone application with a browser extension, and that difference shapes everything else about them.
Exodus optimises for comprehension. Big readable addresses, an explained network selector, a genuinely good portfolio view, and the smoothest onboarding of any desktop wallet we have tested. It is the wallet we would put in front of someone who has never held crypto, because they will finish setting it up.
Trust Wallet optimises for coverage. More than a hundred chains handled properly, in-app staking for roughly twenty assets at no platform fee, and the lowest overall fee profile of the full-featured mobile wallets. It is the wallet you install when something you hold is not supported anywhere else.
| Wallet | Our grade | NZ landed | Staking in-app | Interface score | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exodus Exodus Movement · official site | BBB 7.8/10 | Free (spread on swaps) | Native, no platform fee | ||
| Trust Wallet Trust Wallet · official site | BBB 8.0/10 | Free (0.85–1% swap fee) | In-app, ~20 assets, $0 fee |
| Property | Exodus | Trust Wallet |
|---|---|---|
| Primary platform | Desktop | Mobile |
| Non-custodial | Yes | Yes |
| Open source | Mostly closed | Core libraries open |
| Networks supported | 50+ | 100+ |
| In-app staking | Yes, $0 platform fee | Yes, $0 platform fee |
| Swap cost | ≈1–4% spread | Lowest of the category |
| Hardware wallet pairing | Trezor | Limited |
| Portfolio tracking built in | Yes, genuinely good | Basic |
| Browser extension | Yes | Yes |
| Transaction simulation | No | No |
| BIP39 phrase portability | Yes | Yes |
The fee gap is the biggest practical difference
Both wallets are free to install and free to send — you pay only the blockchain's network fee, which neither wallet keeps. Both charge nothing on staking beyond the validator's commission. So the money is made in exactly one place, and that is where they diverge sharply.
Exodus's built-in exchange spread has been reported anywhere from roughly 1% to 4% depending on the pair and its liquidity. Trust Wallet has the lowest overall fee profile of the full-featured mobile wallets. On a NZ$500 swap the difference is a few dollars and nobody should care. On a NZ$10,000 swap, four percent is NZ$400, which is four hardware wallets.
The reason people pay it is that the spread is embedded in the quoted rate rather than presented as a fee. You see an exchange rate, you accept it, and the margin was inside the number. This is not unique to Exodus — it is how nearly all in-wallet swapping works, including MetaMask at 0.875% and Phantom at 0.85% — but Exodus's range is the widest of the mainstream wallets.
The habit to build, whichever wallet you use: before accepting an in-wallet swap, look up the pair's market rate. If the gap is meaningful, do it on an exchange and withdraw. Our fees guide shows how to separate the network fee, the route cost and the wallet's cut.
Chain coverage: does it actually matter to you?
Trust Wallet's 100-plus chains against Exodus's 50-plus sounds decisive and often is not. If everything you hold is Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana and a few major tokens, both wallets cover you completely and the number is irrelevant.
It becomes decisive the moment you hold something outside the mainstream. At that point your options are Trust Wallet, or a chain-specific wallet from a small developer nobody has audited, or leaving the asset on an exchange. The first is clearly the best of those three, and it is the reason Trust Wallet ends up installed on a lot of phones belonging to people who did not set out to use it.
There is a cost to that breadth, and it is not theoretical. A wallet that can interact with a hundred chains and hundreds of thousands of tokens gives you far more opportunities to approve a malicious contract — which is the single most common way software wallet users lose money. Neither of these wallets simulates transactions the way Phantom does, so on both you are your own last line of defence. See our drains guide.
The upgrade path argument
Exodus pairs with Trezor hardware wallets. Trust Wallet's hardware support is limited. If you expect your balance to grow to the point where you buy a device — and if it does, you should — starting on Exodus means adding hardware without changing the software you already know. That is a genuine long-term advantage that does not show up on a feature comparison.
Pick one
Which, for which kind of person
- You do most of your crypto at a computer rather than on a phone
- You want one attractive place to see your whole portfolio without a separate tracking app
- You are new to this and want the software least likely to let you make a mistake
- You expect to buy a Trezor eventually and want to keep the same interface
- You do not swap often, so the spread rarely applies to you
- You are setting a wallet up for a family member who needs it to be obvious
- Your crypto life happens on your phone
- You hold assets on chains nothing else supports properly
- You stake several different assets and want it in-app at no platform fee
- You swap regularly and the fee difference compounds
- You want core libraries you can inspect rather than a fully closed wallet
- You use dApps and want the same wallet in a browser extension
What neither of them is
Both wallets are capped at BBB in our grading, and it is worth being explicit about why, because it applies equally to both and to every other software wallet.
The private key lives on an internet-connected device. That is the definition of a hot wallet and it is the whole limitation. Malware on that machine, a malicious browser extension, an infostealer, a phrase photographed and synced to a cloud account — all of those reach a software wallet and none of them reach a hardware wallet, where the key never leaves a secure chip and the device's own screen shows you what you are signing.
So the real recommendation on this page is not Exodus or Trust Wallet. It is: use whichever suits you for the balance you actually transact with, keep that balance at the level of "annoying to lose", and put anything you would call savings behind a device. In New Zealand, where Cryptopia was hacked for roughly NZ$30 million and Dasset's liquidation found about NZ$6.3 million of customer cryptoassets missing, the case for getting savings out of anyone else's hands and out of a phone is not hard to make.
Our hardware versus software page works through the thresholds, and how many wallets you need covers running a savings wallet and a spending wallet without them merging.
Exodus vs Trust Wallet FAQ
Common questions
Which is better, Exodus or Trust Wallet?
They are built for different people. Exodus is a desktop-first wallet with the best interface in crypto and a portfolio view worth using, and it pairs with Trezor hardware. Trust Wallet is mobile-first with the broadest chain coverage anywhere and the lowest fees. If you sit at a computer and want one beautiful place to see everything, Exodus. If your crypto life happens on your phone across many chains, Trust Wallet.
Which has lower fees, Exodus or Trust Wallet?
Trust Wallet, clearly. Both are free to install and free to send, so the difference is in swaps: Trust Wallet has the lowest overall fee profile of the full-featured mobile wallets, while Exodus's built-in exchange spread has been reported anywhere between roughly 1% and 4% depending on the pair. On a NZ$5,000 swap that gap can be well over NZ$100. Neither charges a platform fee on staking. Our fees guide breaks down all three layers of cost.
Can either connect to a hardware wallet?
Exodus supports Trezor devices, which is a genuinely useful combination — you keep the best desktop interface while the keys sit in an EAL6+ certified secure element. Trust Wallet's hardware pairing is much more limited, so upgrading from it to cold storage generally means changing wallets rather than adding a device. If you expect to buy a hardware wallet eventually, that is a point in Exodus's favour.
Which is safer?
Trust Wallet, marginally, and for a reason people do not expect: its core libraries are open source while most of Exodus is closed. Both are genuinely non-custodial with keys held on your device. Both are hot wallets, so both are capped in our scoring by the fact that the key lives on an internet-connected machine. Trust Wallet's much larger token surface makes approval drains more likely, so in practice the safer one is whichever you use more carefully.
Can I use both?
Yes, and plenty of people do — they are complementary rather than competing. A common arrangement is Exodus on the desktop as the portfolio view and the place you actually transact from with a Trezor attached, and Trust Wallet on the phone for the chains and tokens Exodus does not cover. Just keep the balances deliberate: decide what each wallet is for and do not let one quietly become the other. See how many wallets you actually need.
Next in this cluster