--- content_id: 206 content_type: product-comparison status: publication-ready language: en title: "MetaMask vs Trust Wallet in 2026: Which Multichain Wallet Fits Which User?" slug: metamask-vs-trust-wallet-2026-multichain canonical: https://wallet.terenval.com/comparisons/metamask-vs-trust-wallet-2026-multichain/ data_captured: 2026-10-02 feature_check: 2026-10-03 last_reviewed: 2026-10-03 publisher: Terenval --- # MetaMask vs Trust Wallet in 2026: Which Multichain Wallet Fits Which User? > Editorial disclosure: Terenval publishes this comparison and may be one of the products discussed. Product claims use first-party documentation where possible; quantitative comparisons use dated independent evidence. ## Direct answer MetaMask and Trust Wallet are both self-custody multichain wallets, but they remain different in emphasis. Trust Wallet advertises support for 100+ blockchains across mobile and browser-extension products. MetaMask has expanded beyond its EVM roots and now documents native Bitcoin and Solana alongside Ethereum and major EVM/L2 networks. The useful decision is not simply “which supports more chains?” but which product supports the exact ecosystems, recovery model and dApp workflow a user needs. ## Dated quantitative evidence Trust Wallet stated support for 100+ blockchains; MetaMask current documentation includes native Bitcoin and Solana alongside Ethereum/EVM networks. ## Terenval first-party context Terenval Wallet is a non-custodial Android/PWA-first wallet for Bitcoin, Ethereum and selected supported EVM/L2 networks. Use the article below to see where it fits and where it does not. [Open Terenval Wallet](https://wallet.terenval.com/?lang=en) · [Supported networks](https://wallet.terenval.com/info/supported-networks/) · [Security](https://wallet.terenval.com/info/security/) > **Editorial disclosure:** This comparison uses first-party MetaMask and Trust Wallet documentation. Terenval appears only as a third-option benchmark after the neutral comparison. **Feature check:** 3 October 2026. MetaMask and Trust Wallet are both self-custody multichain wallets, but they remain different in emphasis. Trust Wallet advertises support for 100+ blockchains across mobile and browser-extension products. MetaMask has expanded beyond its EVM roots and now documents native Bitcoin and Solana alongside Ethereum and major EVM/L2 networks. The useful decision is not simply “which supports more chains?” but which product supports the exact ecosystems, recovery model and dApp workflow a user needs. ## Comparison at a glance | Criterion | MetaMask | Trust Wallet | | --- | --- | --- | | Custody | Self-custody | Self-custody | | Network approach | Ethereum/EVM heritage plus native Bitcoin and Solana | Broad multichain catalog; 100+ blockchains advertised | | Custom EVM networks | Core part of MetaMask workflow | Broad chain support; verify exact current list | | Mobile | Supported | Supported | | Browser extension | Supported | Supported | | Bitcoin | Native Bitcoin documented | Supported | | Solana | Supported in current MetaMask model | Supported within broad multichain scope | ## Network breadth needs context Trust Wallet's “100+ blockchains” figure is a useful breadth indicator, but it is not a permanent guarantee that every network remains supported. Trust Wallet announced the sunset of multiple networks effective 15 September 2026. This is a good example of why current first-party support pages should outrank old reviews. MetaMask's network story has changed substantially as well. A comparison written when MetaMask was “EVM only” would now be incomplete because the wallet documents native Bitcoin and Solana. Its EVM custom-network model still matters to users who work with chains that may not be preconfigured. ## Platform and dApp use MetaMask has a strong browser-dApp identity and remains a common interface for EVM applications. Trust Wallet combines mobile use with a browser extension and a broader consumer multichain product surface. For users who mainly interact with desktop DeFi, extension behavior may matter more than raw mobile convenience. For users holding many chain-specific assets, broad built-in coverage may reduce setup friction. Both products retain the same fundamental self-custody boundary: a connected dApp can still request dangerous signatures or approvals. Network breadth does not make a protocol trustworthy. ## Recovery and migration Before moving from one wallet to another, users should test whether the expected Bitcoin, Solana and EVM accounts are reproduced. A mnemonic can be valid in both products while address discovery, derivation paths and supported account models differ. Migration should be verified by public addresses before meaningful funds are moved. ## Terenval as a narrower third option Terenval is not a challenger on raw network count. Its current production set lists Bitcoin, Ethereum, BNB Smart Chain, Optimism, Arbitrum One, Base, Polygon, ZKsync Era, Linea and Scroll. A user whose needs fit entirely inside that set can compare Terenval using the same criteria: recovery, network clarity, approvals and mobile/PWA workflow. That benchmark is useful precisely because it avoids pretending every user benefits from maximum chain breadth. - MetaMask Help — Networks: https://support.metamask.io/configure/networks/how-to-add-a-custom-network-rpc/ - MetaMask Help — Bitcoin: https://support.metamask.io/configure/networks/bitcoin/ - Trust Wallet: https://trustwallet.com/ - Trust Wallet — September 2026 sunset notice: https://trustwallet.com/blog/product/trust-wallet-to-sunset-support-for-multiple-networks-on-september-15-2026 - Terenval — Supported Networks: https://wallet.terenval.com/info/supported-networks/ Re-check network lists and platform support before every update. No single wallet is declared the universal winner. ## Sources and evidence - https://support.metamask.io/configure/networks/how-to-add-a-custom-network-rpc/ - https://support.metamask.io/configure/networks/bitcoin/ - https://trustwallet.com/ - https://trustwallet.com/blog/product/trust-wallet-to-sunset-support-for-multiple-networks-on-september-15-2026 - https://wallet.terenval.com/info/supported-networks/ ## Related comparisons - [Phantom vs Terenval Wallet: Solana-First Multichain vs Bitcoin/EVM Focus](https://wallet.terenval.com/comparisons/phantom-vs-terenval-wallet-solana-multichain-bitcoin-evm/) - [MetaMask vs Rabby: EVM Networks, Transaction Safety and dApp UX](https://wallet.terenval.com/comparisons/metamask-vs-rabby-evm-networks-transaction-safety-dapp/) - [Rabby vs Terenval Wallet: EVM Power Wallet vs Bitcoin + EVM Mobile Wallet](https://wallet.terenval.com/comparisons/rabby-vs-terenval-wallet-evm-power-vs-bitcoin-evm-mobile/) - [Trust Wallet vs Coinbase Wallet: Network Coverage, Login Models and Self-Custody](https://wallet.terenval.com/comparisons/trust-wallet-vs-coinbase-wallet-network-login-self-custody/) Editorial policy: https://wallet.terenval.com/editorial-policy/