A practical checklist for checking a crypto custody claim

Start with the exact promise

Practical checklist · not an audit of another provider

Save the terms and the page that says assets are segregated, held in custody or available for withdrawal. Record the date, the legal entity and the product name. A promise about an exchange account may not apply to a lending or yield product offered under the same brand. Use the FTX record as a reason to ask precise questions, not as proof that another platform has committed the same misconduct.

Ask who can move the assets

Practical checklist · not an audit of another provider

Look for an explanation of affiliated-party access, lending permissions and customer consent. Distinguish a contractual promise from a technical restriction and from an independent assessment of either. If a platform points to a reserve report, record its date, liabilities covered and exclusions. Do not fill missing information with an assumption that a large balance proves every obligation is covered.

Check protection separately

Practical checklist · not an audit of another provider

For a European service, start at the relevant official regulator or ESMA resource and verify both the named provider and the activity. An entry, a group affiliation and a guarantee against losses are different things. Keep unresolved questions in a short written log. If a loss has already occurred, retain transaction records and use official reporting channels rather than paying someone who promises to release or recover funds.

Build a custody evidence sheet

Practical checklist · not an audit of another provider

Use six fields for each product: contracting entity; exact custody promise; asset holder; people or affiliates able to transfer assets; dated evidence; unanswered question. For a reserve report, add its reporting date and whether customer liabilities and borrowed assets are included. Write 'not disclosed' when a field is missing. An affiliate-access exception belongs in its own row even if the headline says segregated. The result is a comparison of documented arrangements, not a safety score or a substitute for an audit.

EU authorisation check after July 2026

Practical checklist · not an audit of another provider

For EU custody services, check the actual contracting provider after the end of the MiCA transitional period on 1 July 2026. An old national registration is not proof of current MiCA authorisation. Match the authorised activity to the custody arrangement you recorded; authorisation does not establish the reserve figures or eliminate losses.

Sources, dates and limits

Checked 23 October 2026 against the March 2024 sentencing announcement and the June 2026 appellate opinion. The court opinion is reproduced by Justia; its court text, rather than the publisher's automated summary, is the evidence used here. Later discretionary appeals and individual bankruptcy distributions are outside this record.