Quick Facts
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Best fit clients | Custodial and non-custodial wallet providers across mobile, browser and hardware. |
| Best jurisdictions | Custodial: same as custody. · Non-custodial: many models avoid licensing. |
| License types involved | VASP, custody licenses (custodial); none in many cases (non-custodial) |
Who is this for?
Custodial and non-custodial wallet providers across mobile, browser and hardware. The licensing requirement turns on activity scope and customer geography — see the jurisdictions and licence-stack notes below.
What licences does a crypto wallet need?
The licence stack depends on activity scope and customer geography. The starting set for this service vertical is: VASP, custody licenses (custodial); none in many cases (non-custodial). Each component covers a distinct regulated activity — exchange, custody, payment, advisory, brokerage, issuance — and several models stack two or three together. Read the services hub for the full glossary and the regulation guides for the underlying frameworks.
Best jurisdictions for crypto wallet
The credible shortlist is below. Each card opens a full country page with the regulator, capital, timeline and process detail.
Common pitfalls
- Wrong jurisdiction first. Founders pick the cheapest or fastest, then discover banks won’t onboard them. Banking-friendly jurisdiction first, then optimise;
- Underestimating substance. Resident directors and substantive offices are not optional. Paper presence fails first examination;
- Treating banking as bolted-on. A licence without a working bank account is unusable. Banking strategy is part of jurisdiction selection;
- Ignoring year-one supervision. External audit, AML refresh, MLRO continuity. Calendar from day one;
- Single-jurisdiction thinking. Real operators run multi-jurisdictional structures. Plan two-to-three years out, not one engagement at a time.