A head-to-head comparison of Trust Wallet and MetaMask — pricing, the features that actually differ, and which one fits which use case.
The most used mobile crypto wallet — 100+ blockchains in one open-source, non-custodial app
The most widely used self-custody browser wallet for EVM chains
These are the 3 capabilities where the two tools genuinely diverge — the rest of their feature sets overlap.
| Capability | Trust Wallet | MetaMask |
|---|---|---|
| Hardware Wallet Support | No | Yes |
| Non Evm Chains | Yes | Via Snaps |
| Snaps Extensibility | No | Yes |
| Feature | Trust Wallet | MetaMask |
|---|---|---|
| Self Custody | ✓ | ✓ |
| Hardware Wallet Support | ✗ | ✓ |
| Evm Chains | ✓ | ✓ |
| Non Evm Chains | ✓ | Via Snaps |
| Mobile App | ✓ | ✓ |
| Browser Extension | ✓ | ✓ |
| In App Swap | ✓ | ✓ |
| Nft Support | ✓ | ✓ |
| Snaps Extensibility | ✗ | ✓ |
| Multi Sig | ✗ | ✗ |
Both tools are free to use — costs come from network or usage fees.
Trust Wallet
Free
MetaMask
Free
MetaMask
Custom
Watch out: Binance ownership raises data privacy concerns despite non-custodial architecture.
Watch out: Default Infura RPC leaks your IP and wallet activity to Consensys — always set a custom RPC.
Trust Wallet edges ahead on our editorial score (4.3/5), but these tools aren’t straight substitutes. Pick Trust Wallet when 100+ chains natively — widest blockchain coverage of any consumer wallet matters most to your workflow; pick MetaMask when universal dapp compatibility — every evm dapp supports metamask first is the priority. The deciding factor is usually the trade-off you can least afford — Trust Wallet means accepting that binance ownership raises data privacy concerns despite non-custodial architecture, while MetaMask means default infura rpc leaks your ip and wallet activity to consensys — always set a custom rpc.
Trust Wallet carries the higher editorial rating (4.3/5 vs 4.2/5), but they solve different problems. Trust Wallet is the stronger pick when you need 100+ chains natively — widest blockchain coverage of any consumer wallet. MetaMask wins when universal dapp compatibility — every evm dapp supports metamask first.
Both tools are free to use, with costs coming from network or usage fees rather than subscriptions.
Trust Wallet's main limitation is that binance ownership raises data privacy concerns despite non-custodial architecture. For MetaMask, default infura rpc leaks your ip and wallet activity to consensys — always set a custom rpc. Weigh these against how you actually plan to use the tool.
In most cases yes — many teams run both, using each where it's strongest. Since Trust Wallet leads on 100+ chains natively — widest blockchain coverage of any consumer wallet and MetaMask on universal dapp compatibility — every evm dapp supports metamask first, the two are often complementary rather than mutually exclusive.