Crypto inheritance tools

A new industry has grown around one question: what happens to my crypto when I die? Wallets, custody providers and independent services now ship “inheritance” features, and the market changes quickly. This page maps the categories and gives the questions to ask, it never endorses a product, because the right choice depends on your situation and the terms change.

Why crypto is different from “digital legacy”

Generic digital legacy tools (the kind that pass on emails, photos or profiles) do not usually solve technical access to a self-custody wallet by themselves: a seed phrase or private key is not an account Google or Apple can hand over.

General digital legacy features do not automatically provide technical access to a self-custody wallet and cannot reconstruct missing key material. Depending on the provider, they can give access to selected notes, files, backups or other account data in which wallet-related information is stored; check per provider which data actually becomes accessible and treat it as potentially sensitive. They can still be part of a broader plan, for example for inventory, instructions or account information.

Crypto inheritance needs crypto-aware mechanisms: features that can carry keys, shares or guidance to the right people. And one thing no tool changes: who legally inherits. A technical access mechanism does not by itself determine who is legally entitled. Some contractual, trust, beneficiary or custodial structures can, however, have legal consequences; therefore have the chosen structure assessed separately under the applicable law.

The categories

1. Wallet-maker inheritance features. Some hardware and software wallet providers offer “inheritance” or “recovery” options: successor activation, guardians, social recovery or recovery subscriptions. They vary in custody model (who holds the keys), trigger verification (what proves the owner has passed away), and cost. Related mechanisms are covered in options for passing on crypto and smart-contract wallets.
2. Dead man’s switches and encrypted vaults. Independent services that release stored guidance (or the secrets themselves) to chosen contacts after a period of inactivity. Depending on the implementation, inactivity may lead to a notification, release of information, activation of a recovery process or another preset action; check exactly what the trigger does and who is involved. The service is also a single point of failure if it disappears.
3. Multisig and guardian structures. Wallets where several keys or trusted guardians must cooperate (2-of-3, social recovery). Cryptographic by design, harder to lose, the technical wallet keeps functioning according to the configured signing threshold; for a usable estate plan, the authorised people need to be able to find out which keys are required and how to execute the procedure safely.
4. Password managers with emergency access. Managers that can release vault contents after a delay or upon a trusted contact’s request. A password manager can hold references, account details or wallet passwords; if recovery seeds or private keys are actually stored there, they must be treated as highly sensitive key material. After a death, technical access and legal authority are separate. A password manager may technically release access to stored data according to its configured emergency-access mechanism. That does not by itself determine who is legally authorised to use that data or the crypto; that authority must be established separately.
5. Custodian-style arrangements. Exchanges and custody firms with inheritance processes or account structures for successors. Their regulatory status, licences, protections and applicable procedure differ by provider, legal entity and jurisdiction; check these with the competent supervisory authority.

What to check before trusting any tool

• Who holds the secrets, and what happens to them when the trigger fires? Custody by the service is different from self-custody, and each has different risks.
• What is the trigger, and can it be tested? Inactivity timers, verified succession events and support requests are very different mechanisms. A tool you cannot test is a plan you cannot trust.
• Does it change legal ownership? Not by itself. A technical access mechanism does not by itself change legal ownership, but some contractual, trust, beneficiary or custodial structures can have legal consequences; have this assessed separately. If anyone claims a tool “bypasses inheritance,” that is a warning sign, not a feature.
• What happens if the company disappears or changes its terms? Crypto history is full of services that shut down.
• What does it cost, and what happens if payments stop?
• Can your family actually use it? The least technical heir should be able to follow it, with the secret-free summary in hand.
• Who else can see your secrets? Support access, breach history and share distribution all matter.
• Does it fit with your will, your executor and your summary? A tool that fights your documents is worse than no tool.

General considerations

• A technical tool should not be treated as a replacement for clear estate documentation and a suitable arrangement for the people who will need to act later. Which roles and formal documents are needed should be checked against the current rules of the relevant jurisdiction.
• Secrets are preferably not placed directly in a will, see crypto in a will.
• Test whatever you choose periodically and after material changes; an annual test can be a practical regular reminder, with the person who would actually use it.
• An unexpected or unexplained request for a full seed phrase, private key or other secret material is a serious warning sign. Do not share such details with customer service, legal or tax professionals, or during a first intake. Specialist technical wallet recovery can sometimes require specific secret material; then only share the minimum needed after it has been agreed in advance in writing what is required, why, who gets access to it and how it will be transferred and processed securely. See scams targeting crypto estates.

The mechanisms behind these tools are compared neutrally in options for passing on crypto, and the full method that ties them together is in crypto inheritance planning.