Overview Leaderboard Methodology
Industry Report

Mobile Crypto Wallets

Smartphone applications for storing, sending, receiving, and interacting with cryptocurrencies and Web3 dApps, often providing seed phrase control and integrated swap features.

Brands tracked: 37
Brands analyzed: 37
Last updated: 2026-04-23
Model: OpenAI GPT-5
Prompts: 287
Total responses: 1,470
Top Brand Overall?
Trust Wallet
87/100

Highest overall AI Visibility Score in this industry.

LBA Leader?
Coinbase
81

Highest score on the LBA metric in this industry.

Authority Leader?
Trust Wallet
92

Highest score on the Authority metric in this industry.

TOM Leader?
Trust Wallet
98

Highest score on the TOM metric in this industry.

Trust Wallet is the default answer in AI responses for Mobile Crypto Wallets

Trust Wallet and MetaMask together dominate AI responses for Mobile Crypto Wallets. Both brands consistently surface unprompted, with the model treating them as the default answers for most category queries. Brands outside the top two face a structural disadvantage: users are usually given these two before the model even considers alternatives.

Brand Leaderboard All 37 Mobile Crypto Wallets brands ranked

Ranked by overall AI Visibility Score (smoothed geometric mean of LBA, Authority, and TOM with an LBA-based floor on Authority and TOM, see methodology). Click any brand for the full report.

# Brand LBA Authority TOM Overall
1
Trust Wallet
trustwallet.com
 74
92
98
87
2
MetaMask
metamask.io
 79
76
89
81
3
Coinbase
coinbase.com
 81
57
84
73
4
Exodus
exodus.com
 73
47
80
65
5
Phantom
phantom.app
 80
37
52
54
6
Ledger
ledger.com
 81
10
61
39
7
BlueWallet
bluewallet.io
 65
10
60
36
8
Trezor
trezor.io
 79
8
41
32
9
Rabby Wallet
rabby.io
 56
14
33
30
10
Sparrow Wallet
sparrowwallet.com
 66
7
21
23
11
Zengo
zengo.com
 63
6
23
23
12
Rainbow
rainbow.me
 58
7
17
20
13
Argent
argent.xyz
 76
8
8
18
14
Cake Wallet
cakewallet.com
 72
7
7
18
15
Edge
edge.app
 72
7
7
18
16
Muun
muun.com
 45
5
21
18
17
OKX
okx.com
 71
7
8
18
18
1inch
1inch.io
 68
7
7
17
19
imToken
imtoken.com
 68
7
7
17
20
Keplr
keplr.app
 65
6
7
17
21
Uniswap
uniswap.org
 68
7
7
17
22
Atomic Wallet
atomicwallet.io
 63
6
6
16
23
Mycelium
mycelium.com
 64
6
6
16
24
BitPay Wallet
bitpay.com
 58
6
6
15
25
Blockchain.com Wallet
blockchain.com
 59
6
6
15
26
Guarda
guarda.com
 61
6
6
15
27
Ronin Wallet
roninchain.com
 61
6
6
15
28
SafePal
safepal.com
 62
6
6
15
29
Coin98 Wallet
coin98.com
 54
5
5
14
30
Coinomi
coinomi.com
 58
6
6
14
31
Electrum
electrum.org
 50
5
8
14
32
Enjin Wallet
enjin.io
 57
6
6
14
33
Solflare
solflare.com
 58
6
6
14
34
TokenPocket
tokenpocket.pro
 57
6
6
14
35
Backpack
backpack.app
 52
5
5
13
36
MathWallet
mathwallet.org
 52
5
5
13
37
Klever Wallet
klever.io
 28
3
3
8

How is this calculated? Methodology

Every brand in this leaderboard is scored against the same set of 287 shared Mobile Crypto Wallets prompts. The same prompts, same model, same iterations. So differences in scores reflect actual differences in AI visibility, not differences in measurement.

Overall AI Visibility Score
Smoothed geometric mean of LBA, Authority and TOM. Authority and TOM are floored at LBA × 0.1 before the geometric mean (the same floor used in the per-metric cards above, so brand cards and the composite tell the same story). Formula: composite = ((LBA + 5)(Authority + 5)(TOM + 5))^(1/3) - 5. The floor keeps brands the model clearly recognises but doesn't yet recommend from collapsing to zero, while a single genuinely weak metric still pulls the composite down. Full methodology.
Shared industry prompts
For Authority and TOM, all brands in the industry are scored against the same 287 category prompts (e.g. "best SEO tools for agencies"). This makes brand-to-brand comparisons valid - everyone faces identical inputs. LBA prompts are per-brand because they ask brand-specific questions.
Latent Brand Association (LBA)
5 brand probes + 1 control prompt, each run 5 times in recall mode (no web search). LBA = quality × meta × stability × share × recognition × 100. Read the full LBA methodology →
LLM Authority
50 organic category prompts (discovery, comparison, problem and transactional intents), each run once in recall mode and once in retrieval mode. Score = frequency × log-decayed prominence × intent weight, then 50/50 averaged across the two modes. Read the full Authority methodology →
Top of Mind (TOM)
15 high-volume discovery prompts (sourced from Keywords Everywhere search-volume data), each run 5 times in pure recall mode (no web). Score = frequency × (0.5 + 0.5 × log-prominence), volume-weighted. Read the full TOM methodology →