Cobo vs Figment

Cobo structures its offering around three primary custody architectures: Cobo Custody, Cobo MPC Co-Managed, and Cobo Argus. The fully custodial branch operates as a traditional regulated custodian where Cobo manages private key storage, cold vaults, and on-chain settlement. For teams requiring sovereign control without single points of failure, the MPC solution uses threshold signature schemes to distribute key shares across the customer, Cobo, and an independent recovery party. The Argus solution extends custody logic directly to Ethereum virtual machine chains, enabling automated decentralized finance permissions, strategy automation, and role-based access to on-chain protocols without relinquishing core administrative rights.

Across these architectures, Cobo supports more than 80 layer-1 and layer-2 blockchains alongside thousands of fungible tokens and digital assets. This breadth covers major ecosystems including Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, Cosmos, Avalanche, and modern rollup networks. In addition to raw key management, Cobo integrates Wallet-as-a-Service APIs that let fintech applications, exchanges, and gaming platforms programmatically provision deposit addresses, automate withdrawal lifecycles, and handle sweeping operations across heterogeneous blockchain protocols without maintaining standalone full node fleets.

Figment delivers staking-as-a-service infrastructure designed specifically for institutional asset managers, exchanges, custodians, and decentralized protocol foundations. The platform maintains active, monitored validator nodes across more than thirty leading proof-of-stake protocols, encompassing major networks such as Ethereum, Solana, Polkadot, Avalanche, Near, and various Cosmos application chains. Organizations can deploy dedicated private validator nodes or direct delegations toward public enterprise clusters depending on balance size and architectural preferences.

Beyond standard bare-metal validator operations, Figment equips institutional engineering teams with developer tooling, including robust API endpoints and webhooks for automated staking, validator lifecycle tracking, and programmatic rewards harvesting. The Figment App serves as a centralized operational dashboard, offering institutional clients granular visibility into active stakes, historical reward distributions, commission deductions, and node uptime metrics across multi-chain portfolios.

For enterprise platforms embedding staking into consumer or custodial products, Figment acts as the underlying execution layer. Custody providers and financial institutions integrate Figment staking infrastructure directly into their existing custody environments without transferring control of funds, maintaining a clean technical separation between key storage and transaction validation.

Pricing at Cobo follows institutional convention rather than a uniform retail rate card. Costs are determined through commercial proposals based on chosen custody models, monthly transaction volumes, developer API thresholds, and total assets under custody. Fully custodial cold-storage setups generally incur recurring asset-based basis-point fees paired with standard transaction processing charges. In contrast, the MPC Wallet-as-a-Service tier often blends fixed monthly infrastructure licensing tiers with variable consumption fees pegged to active monthly wallet addresses, API call volumes, or signature generations.

Network transaction fees for deposits, transfers, and sweeping remain subject to underlying blockchain conditions. Cobo allows administrators to configure automated gas management and transaction acceleration routines across supported networks. Withdrawals undergo structured multi-step approvals based on organizational policies before broadcast to the network. Organizations running high-throughput payment gateways or exchange deposit sweeping can optimize gas expenditures through Cobo batching routines, though high on-chain congestion will naturally elevate base network settlement costs regardless of internal infrastructure efficiency.

Figment utilizes a protocol commission model where fees are typically deducted directly from gross on-chain staking rewards rather than invoiced as flat monthly infrastructure costs. Standard protocol commission rates vary across supported blockchains, reflecting individual network tokenomics, hardware requirements, and custom client volume tier agreements. For dedicated institutional validator clusters, customized fee agreements or software-as-a-service infrastructure fees may apply depending on technical configuration, custom service level agreements, and support requirements.

Because Figment does not custody digital assets, all principal deposits and generated staking rewards settle directly to client-controlled wallet addresses or whitelisted institutional custody accounts according to protocol rules. Figment does not apply proprietary withdrawal charges, spread markups, or liquidity exit penalties beyond native network transaction fees and protocol commission percentages agreed in enterprise contracts.

Yield realization timelines, unbonding schedules, and payout frequencies depend strictly on the underlying network protocol mechanics. For instance, Ethereum rewards distribute on-chain according to consensus rules, while networks like Cosmos or Polkadot enforce native unbonding windows ranging from two to four weeks. Stakers must account for these native blockchain rules when modeling portfolio liquidity.

Cobo builds its security posture on independent technical certifications, hardware security modules, and advanced cryptography. The provider maintains SOC 2 Type II attestation and adheres to ISO 27001 data management protocols. Within its MPC infrastructure, key shares are generated and held across isolated environments, ensuring no single entity possesses the complete private key at any stage during generation, signing, or rotation. Hardware isolation mechanisms and secure enclaves further restrict unauthorized extraction of sensitive runtime memory or cryptographic components.

Organizational governance is enforced through a granular rule engine. Administrators can construct conditional approval workflows involving multi-person quorums, geographic restrictions, IP address allowlists, time locks, and per-token spending limits. Smart contract interactions can be restricted to verified protocol contracts, blocking arbitrary smart contract executions. For disaster recovery, Cobo provides clear disaster contingency protocols, allowing clients to reconstruct key pairs independently if primary service connectivity becomes compromised, though recovery speed depends on client key share integrity.

Security architecture at Figment centers strictly on non-custodial operations, ensuring that clients retain full ownership and administrative control over their cryptographic private keys and staking withdrawal credentials at all times. Figment operates validation nodes and signs blocks on behalf of delegators, but never maintains access to funds or holds authorization to transfer principal assets out of client-managed custody vaults.

To mitigate technical and operational vulnerabilities, Figment maintains independent SOC 2 Type II compliance and ISO 27001 certifications covering its infrastructure management and operational workflows. Node deployment utilizes distributed cloud and bare-metal environments across diverse geographical data centers, incorporating robust hardware security modules, multi-region failover, and active anti-DDoS mitigations to sustain high validator uptime and prevent double-signing events.

Figment provides commercial slashing coverage policies for eligible institutional clients, designed to protect against potential financial losses resulting from validator downtime penalties or accidental infrastructure errors. While these operational measures significantly diminish technical failure risks, delegators still operate within the broader regulatory and software failure risks inherent to public distributed consensus protocols.

Headquartered in Singapore and founded in 2017, Cobo operates globally while navigating jurisdictional compliance mandates. The company maintains regulatory registrations in relevant operating hubs and enforces comprehensive Know Your Business screening before provisioning production environments. Prospective clients must submit verifiable corporate formation documents, ownership charts, and compliance identity verifications for authorized signatories and system administrators. Organizations domiciled in sanctioned regions or non-compliant jurisdictions are excluded from onboarding under global anti-money laundering frameworks.

Enterprise clients receive structured technical support through dedicated account managers, engineering integration channels, and round-the-clock emergency escalation pathways. Cobo provides software development kits across major programming languages, detailed REST API documentation, and staging sandbox environments for integration testing. While developer resources are robust, routine inquiries require navigating enterprise ticketing systems, making real-time troubleshooting reliant on the specific service tier negotiated in the commercial service agreement.

Headquartered in Canada and operating globally, Figment structures its products to comply with international enterprise standards, serving hedge funds, venture funds, registered investment advisers, public companies, and global fintech institutions. The company maintains strict enterprise onboarding workflows, executing standard Know Your Customer and anti-money laundering due diligence before provisioning dedicated validator infrastructure or enterprise API services.

Customer support for enterprise clients includes dedicated technical account managers, specialized integration engineers, and around-the-clock infrastructure monitoring. Service level agreements provide intended to provide response times, proactive incident notifications, and scheduled operational reviews, catering specifically to institutional expectations that standard retail community channels cannot satisfy.

Comprehensive tax and accounting support represents a core component of the platform. Figment provides downloadable, auditable reporting tools that export reward histories, cost-basis calculations, and protocol event logs in formats compatible with major institutional crypto accounting platforms, easing quarterly financial reporting and internal audit requirements for corporate treasuries.

Engaging an institutional custodian involves balancing operational flexibility against counterparty exposure. In the full custody tier, digital assets depend directly on custodian solvency, operational controls, and segregated legal structures. In the co-managed MPC model, counterparty risk is distributed across separate key share participants, preventing any single entity from executing unauthorized transfers. However, governance risks persist if client-side signing credentials or internal access controls are compromised by operational lapses. Business continuity requires maintaining strict internal discipline around off-site key share backups, routine credential rotation cycles, and authorized signing quorums. Institutional administrators must also implement secondary approval layers and network allowlists to protect programmatic API endpoints from unauthorized exploitation during routine daily operations.

Delegating to Figment validators mitigates operational node failure risks through enterprise-grade DevOps, but it does not eliminate systemic blockchain network vulnerabilities. All proof-of-stake delegators remain exposed to smart contract bugs, sudden hard forks, and native protocol governance changes that could alter yield rates or unbonding periods. While Figment provides commercial slashing protections under qualified institutional contracts, such policies cover specific operational faults rather than market-wide asset depreciation or underlying blockchain consensus failures.

Organizations must evaluate native protocol lockup schedules and liquidity constraints before allocating balance sheet capital. Figment maintains redundant failover infrastructure and continuous monitoring to prevent validator double-signing and downtime penalties, yet market participants should account for protocol-level slashing conditions that arise from broader decentralized network events outside validator operational control.

Selecting an appropriate Cobo configuration depends on organizational transaction velocity, compliance mandates, and developer requirements. Traditional asset managers and family offices holding long-term digital asset reserves typically favor the full custody model for segregated balance-sheet accounting. Fintech applications, crypto exchanges, and gaming platforms requiring rapid address generation and continuous transactional throughput gravitate toward the MPC Wallet-as-a-Service integration. Meanwhile, active treasury teams executing decentralized yield strategies find the Argus smart contract governance system tailored for role-based on-chain authorization. Organizations should evaluate their internal signing operations, programmatic API needs, and key custody preferences before finalizing a specific technical deployment. Combining multiple architectures is also feasible for institutions managing both long-term reserves and dynamic decentralized finance operations.

Clients engaging Figment can choose between delegating directly to Figment public validator addresses or deploying dedicated, single-tenant validator nodes. Delegating to public validators allows institutions to activate staking quickly across multiple assets with minimal technical overhead, paying standard commission rates deducted from rewards. Dedicated nodes cater to larger asset managers requiring bespoke operational rules, custom MEV extraction policies, zero-commission internal routing, or specific geographic validator placement to satisfy internal compliance standards.

Choosing the appropriate architecture depends on an organization's balance sheet size, regulatory parameters, and developer integration capabilities. High-volume funds often prefer dedicated infrastructure to maintain isolated signer authority and tailored uptime SLAs, whereas multi-asset treasuries may utilize shared validator infrastructure across dozens of supported ecosystems simultaneously without configuring unique hardware nodes.