TL;DRPrivy was acquired by Stripe in June 2025 and is now integrated with Bridge's stablecoin platform, which raises vendor-lock-in concerns for embedded-wallet teams. The top Privy alternatives in 2026 are Openfort (open-source, native ERC-4337/7702, sub-100ms signing), Turnkey (TEE-based signing at 100–150 ms), and Thirdweb (all-in-one). Several former competitors have been acquired — Dynamic by Fireblocks, Web3Auth by MetaMask, Sequence by Polygon Labs — so verify independence before choosing. Openfort uses usage-based pricing and exportable keys, while Turnkey and Thirdweb suit different scale and feature points. Pick based on whether you need open infrastructure, the fastest signing, or a bundled toolkit.
Privy was acquired by Stripe in June 2025, marking a major shift in the embedded wallet landscape. Privy now operates under Stripe's umbrella, integrating with Bridge (Stripe's $1.1B stablecoin acquisition) to create a unified crypto and fiat payment platform. While this brings powerful payment capabilities, developers looking for Privy alternatives face questions about vendor lock-in and ecosystem dependency.
Why Developers Look for Privy Alternatives
Since Stripe's acquisition, developers have been evaluating Privy alternatives for several reasons:
- Stripe ecosystem lock-in: Privy is now deeply integrated with Stripe's infrastructure
- Open-source sovereignty: Privy uses proprietary TEE infrastructure that cannot be self-hosted
- Smart account limitations: Privy relies on third-party integrations (Alchemy, Zerodev) for smart accounts rather than native support
- Performance requirements: Privy's 175ms signing latency may not meet performance-critical use cases
- Pricing at scale: $299/month for 2,500 MAUs (plus a 499-MAU free tier) can escalate quickly for growing applications, whereas usage-based alternatives charge per operation
What to Look for in a Privy Alternative
When evaluating alternatives, consider these key criteria:
| Criteria | Why It Matters |
|---|---|
| Key Management | Open-source vs proprietary determines your sovereignty and audit capability |
| Smart Account Support | Native ERC-4337/7702 support vs third-party integrations affects feature depth |
| Signing Performance | Sub-100ms signing is critical for real-time UX (games, trading) |
| Authentication Flexibility | Can you use your own auth provider (Auth0, Firebase) or are you locked to their system? |
| Vendor Lock-in | Can you export keys and migrate users if needed? |
| Pricing Model | Usage-based (pay per operation) vs MAU-based affects economics depending on your user behavior |
What are the Best Privy Alternatives?
The best Privy alternatives in 2026 are Openfort, Turnkey, and Thirdweb.
- Openfort is the top choice for developers who need open-source infrastructure (OpenSigner), native smart account features, and sub-100ms signing without vendor lock-in.
- Turnkey excels at low-level programmable signing infrastructure with the fastest TEE-based performance (100–150 ms).
- Thirdweb offers an all-in-one platform if you want bundled tools beyond just wallets.
Note: Several former competitors have been acquired—Dynamic is now part of Fireblocks, Web3Auth is part of MetaMask/Consensys, and Sequence is part of Polygon Labs. These acquisitions may affect their independence and strategic direction.
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. Our platform offers Opensigner for embedded wallets with self-hostable key management, plus TEE backend wallets for secure server-side key storage—enabling permissions, automatic transactions, and programmatic wallet operations. On top of that, Openfort includes built-in blockchain infrastructure like paymasters that enable gasless transactions out of the box, something many competitors require you to build or source separately.
Why Choose Openfort Over Privy
- If you're concerned about Stripe ecosystem lock-in after the acquisition, Openfort is fully open-source with exportable keys
- If you need faster signing (200ms median vs Privy's 175ms) for real-time applications
- If you want native smart accounts with built-in session keys, gas sponsorship, and policy engines—not third-party integrations
- If you need server-side wallet automation with TEE backend wallets for permissions and automatic transactions
- If you want to use your own auth provider (Auth0, Firebase, any OIDC) instead of Privy's authentication
Comparison Table: Openfort vs. Privy
| Feature | Openfort | Privy |
|---|---|---|
| Open Source | ✅ OpenSigner (MIT) | ❌ Proprietary |
| Signing Speed | 200ms median | 175ms median |
| Key Management | Opensigner + TEE Backend Wallets | TEE (Proprietary) |
| Smart Wallets | ✅ Native (4337, 7702) | ⚠️ Third-party integrations |
| Authentication | Any OIDC Provider | Socials / Email / Wallets |
| Pricing | Usage-based (per operation) | Free 1,000 MAUs, then $299/mo |
| Gasless Transactions | ✅ Built-in Paymasters | ⚠️ Basic |
| Vendor Lock-in | ❌ None (Exportable) | ⚠️ High (Stripe ecosystem) |
| Parent Company | Independent | Stripe |
| Server/Backend Wallet | ✅ Backend Wallet | ✅ Server Wallet |
| Permission Model | On-chain (session keys) | Off-chain (policy API) |
Scaling Considerations
Openfort uses transparent usage-based pricing where an operation is defined as creating a wallet or sending a transaction. You only pay for what you actually use, which means applications with many registered users but lower transaction volumes aren't penalized the way MAU-based models penalize them. Privy, on the other hand, charges based on monthly active users—free under 499 MAUs, then $299/month for up to 2,500 MAUs (Core tier), with usage-based billing kicking in above 10,000 MAUs, 50,000 monthly signatures, or $1M monthly transaction volume. As your user base grows, Privy's costs escalate regardless of how many transactions those users perform. Openfort's approach is fairer and more transparent: if your users aren't transacting, you aren't paying.
Why developers choose Openfort
Developers choose Openfort when they want Privy-like smooth onboarding but demand open-source infrastructure, faster signing, and native smart account features without vendor lock-in. Openfort's combination of Opensigner for embedded wallets, TEE backend wallets for server-side automation, and built-in paymasters for gasless transactions means teams get a complete wallet stack without stitching together multiple vendors. The usage-based pricing model also means you can scale confidently knowing costs stay proportional to actual usage—especially important now that Privy is part of Stripe.
2. Turnkey
Turnkey offers secure, programmable key management infrastructure built by the team that created Coinbase Custody. Turnkey supports 7702 smart accounts and provides a full suite of auth methods (though custom JWT/OIDC is not supported, and custom email templates, custom domains, and SMS authentication are only available on custom tiers). Turnkey focuses primarily on company and treasury-based wallets, with the Pro tier limited to 2,000 wallets and features like key quorum designed for enterprise customers. Gasless transactions are only available on custom plans.
Why Choose Turnkey Over Privy
- If you need fast signing (100–150 ms vs Privy's 175ms)
- If you want to build your own wallet stack with complete control
- If you're building for AI agents or high-frequency automated signing
- If you prefer usage-based pricing over MAU-based
Comparison Table: Turnkey vs. Privy
| Feature | Turnkey | Privy |
|---|---|---|
| Signing Speed | 100–150 ms | 175ms |
| Security | TEE (Verifiable) | TEE (Proprietary) |
| Pricing | $0.10/sig PAYG; $99/mo Pro at $0.05/sig; Enterprise as low as $0.0015/sig | $299/mo Core (2.5k MAU) |
| Wallet Cap | 100 free / 1,000 PAYG / 2,000 Pro / unlimited Enterprise | Up to 10k MAU on Scale |
| Key Management | TEE (Nitro Enclaves, verifiable) | TEE (SSS shard recombine) |
| UI Components | Available | ✅ React hooks |
| Server Wallet | ✅ Server Signing | ✅ Server Wallet |
Scaling Considerations
Turnkey charges $0.10 per signature on pay-as-you-go (up to 1,000 wallets), $0.05 per signature on the $99/month Pro tier (up to 2,000 wallets), and as low as $0.0015 per signature with unlimited wallets on Enterprise custom plans.
- High transaction volume: Turnkey is often more economical than Privy for apps with many transactions per user
- AI agents & automations: Both Turnkey and Privy offer strong off-chain policy APIs for server-side operations. Turnkey's policy engine is enforced inside the TEE at signing time with full remote attestation — particularly robust for autonomous systems.
Why developers choose Turnkey
Teams choose Turnkey when they want to build their own version of Privy from the ground up, maintaining full control over both UX and security. Turnkey gives you the cryptographic primitives and signing infrastructure, and you build everything else on top. This approach requires significantly more engineering investment compared to solutions like Openfort or Privy, but it gives maximum flexibility. It's worth noting that Turnkey doesn't include blockchain infrastructure like paymasters for gasless transactions—you'd need to source that separately.
3. Thirdweb
Thirdweb offers a full stack of web3 tools, including embedded wallets ("In-App Wallets"), smart accounts, and contract deployment. Their approach is "all-in-one" rather than specialized.
Why Choose Thirdweb Over Privy
- If you want bundled tools beyond just wallets (contracts, payments, indexing)
- If you prefer a generous free tier for getting started
- If you want ecosystem wallets for multi-app identity
Comparison Table: Thirdweb vs. Privy
| Feature | Thirdweb | Privy |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Full Stack Platform | Onboarding Focus |
| Smart Accounts | ✅ Native | ⚠️ Third-party |
| Contract Tools | ✅ Extensive | ❌ |
| Pricing | Generous free tier | $299/mo at 2.5k MAU (499 free) |
| Ecosystem Wallets | ✅ Multi-app identity | ✅ Cross-app |
| 700+ Chains | ✅ | ✅ |
| Server Wallet | ✅ Engine (self-hostable) | ✅ Server Wallet |
| Permission Model | On-chain (smart wallets) | Off-chain (policy API) |
Scaling Considerations
Thirdweb's generous free tier makes it cost-effective for early-stage projects. If you're already using Thirdweb for contracts and RPC, the wallet comes as part of the package.
For server-side operations, Thirdweb offers Engine (self-hostable backend) with on-chain permissions via smart wallets, while Privy uses off-chain policy APIs.
Why developers choose Thirdweb
Developers choose Thirdweb when they want a single vendor for their entire web3 stack—contracts, wallets, payments, and RPC—rather than assembling specialized tools from multiple providers. The trade-off is that generalist platforms like Thirdweb may lack the depth of a specialized wallet provider. For example, Thirdweb doesn't include the same level of paymaster infrastructure for gasless transactions or granular policy engines that dedicated wallet solutions like Openfort offer.
4. Dynamic
Dynamic was acquired by Fireblocks in 2025. Dynamic offers a polished wallet connection UI widget with strong multi-chain support (EVM, Solana, Cosmos).
Post-Acquisition Considerations
- Strategic uncertainty: As part of Fireblocks, Dynamic's roadmap may shift toward enterprise use cases
- Potential benefits: Access to Fireblocks' security infrastructure
- Potential risks: Less focus on startup/developer experience
Comparison Table: Dynamic vs. Privy
| Feature | Dynamic | Privy |
|---|---|---|
| UI Philosophy | Polished Widget | Headless / Custom |
| Multi-chain | ✅ EVM, Solana, Cosmos | ✅ EVM, Solana, BTC |
| Pricing | $249/mo (5k MAU) | $299/mo (2.5k MAU) |
| Parent Company | Fireblocks | Stripe |
| Smart Accounts | ⚠️ Third-party | ⚠️ Third-party |
| Server Wallet | ✅ Server Wallet | ✅ Server Wallet |
| Permission Model | Off-chain (basic) | Off-chain (strong) |
Why developers choose Dynamic
Teams choose Dynamic for its polished, plug-and-play UI widget that offers a premium login experience across multiple chains. The Fireblocks acquisition brings institutional-grade security infrastructure, though it may also shift Dynamic's focus toward enterprise use cases. One limitation to keep in mind: Dynamic doesn't provide its own blockchain infrastructure like paymasters for gasless transactions, so you'll need to integrate that separately if your application requires sponsored gas.
5. Web3Auth
Web3Auth was acquired by MetaMask/Consensys. Web3Auth popularized MPC-based social logins, allowing users to sign in with Google or social accounts.
Post-Acquisition Considerations
- MetaMask integration: Expect deeper integration with MetaMask's ecosystem
- MPC limitations: Slower signing due to MPC ceremony (~500ms+)
- Strategic direction: May focus more on MetaMask Snaps ecosystem
Comparison Table: Web3Auth vs. Privy
| Feature | Web3Auth | Privy |
|---|---|---|
| Key Tech | MPC TSS | TEE |
| Signing Speed | ~500ms+ (MPC) | 175ms |
| Pricing | $69/mo (3k MAU) | $299/mo (2.5k MAU) |
| Parent Company | MetaMask/Consensys | Stripe |
| Smart Accounts | ❌ Not native | ⚠️ Third-party |
| Key Management | MPC TSS | TEE (SSS shard recombine) |
| Server Wallet | ⚠️ Limited | ✅ Server Wallet |
Why developers choose Web3Auth
Web3Auth remains one of the most affordable options for basic social login functionality at $69/month. However, it's important to understand that Web3Auth is an auth-only solution—it handles key management but doesn't include smart accounts, gas sponsorship, or paymaster infrastructure. You'll need to integrate additional vendors for those capabilities, which adds complexity and cost. The MetaMask acquisition may further narrow its focus toward the MetaMask ecosystem.
6. Sequence
Sequence was acquired by Polygon Labs for $125M in January 2026. Sequence is a gaming-focused wallet infrastructure with Unity/Unreal SDKs.
Post-Acquisition Considerations
- Polygon focus: Sequence is now part of Polygon's "Open Money Stack" initiative for stablecoin payments
- Gaming strength: Remains the only verified EVM wallet solution on Unity Asset Store
- Multi-chain questions: May prioritize Polygon ecosystem over other chains
Comparison Table: Sequence vs. Privy
| Feature | Sequence | Privy |
|---|---|---|
| Target | Games | Consumer Apps |
| Game SDKs | ✅ Unity, Unreal | ❌ |
| Marketplaces | ✅ Built-in | ❌ |
| Parent Company | Polygon Labs | Stripe |
| Smart Wallet | ✅ Native | ⚠️ Third-party |
Why developers choose Sequence
Game studios choose Sequence because it offers a complete gaming-specific wallet stack with Unity and Unreal SDKs, built-in marketplace support, and indexers optimized for in-game asset management. The Polygon Labs acquisition brings additional infrastructure but may prioritize the Polygon ecosystem over other chains. For non-gaming use cases, Sequence's gaming-focused design may be more than you need, and alternatives like Openfort offer broader wallet infrastructure with built-in paymaster support for gasless transactions across any chain.
7. Coinbase Smart Wallet (Base Ecosystem)
The Coinbase Smart Wallet provides passkey-enabled smart wallets optimized for the Base ecosystem.
Comparison Table: Coinbase vs. Privy
| Feature | Coinbase Smart Wallet | Privy |
|---|---|---|
| Ecosystem | Base-optimized | Multi-chain |
| Passkeys | ✅ Native | ✅ |
| Cost | Free | Paid SaaS |
| Customization | Low | High |
| Lock-in | Coinbase ecosystem | Stripe ecosystem |
| Server Wallet | ✅ CDP Wallet | ✅ Server Wallet |
| Permission Model | On-chain (Smart Wallet) | Off-chain (policy API) |
Why developers choose Coinbase Smart Wallet
Apps building primarily on the Base chain choose Coinbase Smart Wallet to tap into Coinbase's existing user base and leverage passkey-based authentication at no cost. The trade-off is limited multi-chain support and low customization—it's designed for the Base ecosystem first. For server-side operations, Coinbase offers CDP Wallet with on-chain permissions. If you need multi-chain support, gasless transactions via paymasters, or deeper wallet customization, a solution like Openfort provides more flexibility.
Building In-House
Building your own onboarding stack is the ultimate alternative to Privy.
Pros
- Total Customization: Build the exact flow you want
- No SaaS Fees: No monthly per-user costs
- Complete Ownership: Full control over security model
Cons
- Complexity: Handle MPC/TEE security, recovery flows, cross-device sync
- Maintenance: 3-6 months to build, ongoing security patches
- Opportunity Cost: Engineering time not spent on your core product
For a deeper dive, check out our guide on building vs buying wallet infrastructure.
Conclusion
Privy remains a solid choice if you're building on Stripe's ecosystem and want deep stablecoin payment integration.
However, if you need open-source sovereignty, faster signing performance, native smart account capabilities, or want to avoid ecosystem lock-in, Openfort provides the infrastructure you need to grow without limits. With Opensigner for embedded wallets, TEE backend wallets for server-side automation, and built-in paymasters for gasless transactions, Openfort delivers a complete wallet stack with transparent, usage-based pricing where you only pay per operation.
The embedded wallet market has consolidated around major players (Stripe, Fireblocks, MetaMask, Polygon). For teams that value independence and flexibility, open-source alternatives are more important than ever.
Get started with Openfort — usage-based pricing, no credit card required. See also: Web3Auth alternatives, Turnkey alternatives, MetaMask alternatives.