--- title: Crypto wallet and custody development url: "https://www.unknowngravity.com/en/servicios/crypto-wallet-and-custody-development" site: Unknown Gravity published: "2026-08-09T11:42:18+00:00" modified: "2026-08-09T11:42:18+00:00" language: en-US section: "Home > Crypto wallet and custody development" --- # Crypto wallet and custody development > A corporate wallet is how a company holds and moves its digital assets. What separates it from a personal wallet is not the interface but the control model: who can sign a transaction, how many approvals are required above a given amount, and how access is recovered when someone leaves the organisation. MULTISIG OR MPC, BASED ON WHAT YOU MUST PROVE APPROVALS AND LIMITS BY TRANSACTION SIZE RECOVERY DOCUMENTED AND REHEARSED [Book a meeting](/en/meeting) A corporate wallet is how a company holds and moves its digital assets. What separates it from a personal wallet is not the interface but the control model: who can sign a transaction, how many approvals are required above a given amount, and how access is recovered when someone leaves the organisation. ## 01 / What makes a corporate wallet different from a personal one? A corporate wallet is the system a company uses to hold and move its digital assets. The difference from a personal wallet is not the screen: it is control. Who can sign a transaction, how many approvals are needed above a certain amount, and what happens the day the person holding the key leaves. A personal wallet assumes a single owner who can do everything. A company cannot work that way: it needs separation of duties, a record of who authorised what, and a recovery plan that does not depend on one individual. ## 02 / Self-custody or third-party custody: the decision everything else follows from ### Self-custody Your organisation controls the keys. You get full autonomy and no dependence on a provider staying in business, but you take on the operational risk in full: key management, backups, procedures and training whoever operates it. ### Third-party custody A regulated provider holds the keys. You cut the operational burden and shift part of the risk, in exchange for depending on that provider, its timelines and its terms. ### Hybrid models In practice most companies end up in between: delegated custody for the bulk of the holdings and a self-managed wallet for day-to-day operations, with limits by amount. The right question is not which is better, but which part of the operation belongs where. ## 03 / Multisig and MPC: how control is divided There are two ways to ensure no single person can move funds alone: - **Multisig.** A transaction requires several signatures from a defined set, three of five for example. Who signed is recorded on the network itself, which makes auditing straightforward. In exchange, the configuration is public and the per-transaction cost is higher. - **MPC (multi-party computation).** The key never exists in one piece: it is generated in shares that combine only to sign. From outside, the transaction looks single-signature, which is cheaper and simpler, but the split of control is not recorded on-chain and has to be evidenced another way. The choice depends on what you need to prove, and to whom. ## 04 / What is rarely designed and always ends up mattering The wallet usually works on day one. The problems arrive later: - **People change.** A signer leaves. Without a procedure to replace signers, funds get stranded or control stays with someone who is no longer there. - **Recovery.** What happens when a device is lost. That answer has to be written down and rehearsed before it is needed, not on the day it happens. - **Limits and approvals.** A thousand-euro transaction and a million-euro one should not follow the same path. - **Bookkeeping.** Every movement has to be explainable: who requested it, who approved it, and against which entry it posts. - **Third-party assets.** If you hold assets that are not yours, in the European Union that is a crypto-asset service subject to authorisation under MiCA. It is a line worth drawing before designing anything. ## 05 / How we approach it ### Control model first, technology second Before choosing between multisig and MPC you have to answer who authorises what, under which limits, and with what evidence. That conversation determines the architecture; doing it the other way round means rebuilding. ### On proven components Wallet cryptography is a poor place to innovate. We build on established libraries and providers, and develop the control, approval and integration layer, which is where the real work sits and what separates one implementation from another. ### With procedures written and tested Recovery and signer replacement are documented and rehearsed during the project. A backup that has never been restored is not a backup. FAQ ## Frequently asked questions **Self-custody or a custody provider?** It depends on how much operational risk you can carry and how much autonomy you need. The usual answer combines both: a regulated provider for the bulk of the holdings and a self-managed wallet with limits for daily operations. What does not work is deciding before defining who signs and under which approvals. **Do I need authorisation to custody digital assets?** Holding your own company's assets requires no authorisation. Holding them on behalf of third parties does: in the European Union that is a crypto-asset service under the MiCA Regulation and requires authorisation as a provider. The line is drawn by whose assets they are, not by the technology used. **Can it integrate with the systems we already run?** Yes, and that is usually the point of the project. Movements should appear in the accounts with their reference and approval, and requests should be raised from wherever the team already works. That integration layer is normally the bulk of the development. This page is informative. It is not legal, tax or investment advice, and it does not replace a case-by-case review. The rules cited change: check the current version on [BOE](https://www.boe.es) and [EUR-Lex](https://eur-lex.europa.eu).