Bitcoin Forum

I created this topic to leave our feedback, compliments, suggestions and dissatisfactions about the main BTC wallets (BTC Only or not), in order to exchange ideas on what needs to be added and/or improved in them.

For example, if you really like a wallet, but it is not open source, you can highlight this point here, or if you think that some function within your wallet does not make sense, you can mention that.

Another example: I think the XYZ wallet is very safe, but it does not have the option to set fees manually (sat/vbyte), instead, the fee options offered by the wallet are either too high or too low (bitcoin wallet for android).

There are varieties of wallets out there. Some that suits what ever need we pursue. But what matters the most is to use only wallets that are safe and secured. This is more reasons it's adviced to use an open source wallet.  When it comes to the safety of our coins as a Bitcoiner, you should use only reputable wallets.
For me. Electrum still stands the best. That's because, when I had newly started my journey as a Bitcoiner, I used Mycelium wallet as my hot wallet which i taught was safe not until I started having so many issues. Most times, the wallet fails to update my balance for days then I'm forced to reimport my seed phrases. There fees were not adjustable and were always different compared to other wallets. So I just moved on to learning electrum and then began using it. Since Ive been using electrum, I haven't experienced any problem like I did before.

Mycelium is safe based on my experience the only issue that I experienced on using Mycelium is a sync issue it keeps syncing preventing the balance from updating. Another issue with Mycelium it doesn't support bump fees or RBF transactions and has no open-source code. We did the same thing moving to the Electrum wallet Mycelium does not have many features the same as the Electrum wallet like bump fee even though the Mycelium has a bump fee the function is different in Mycelium it is CPFP but for Electrum it is RBF.

Another wallet that I like is Bitcoin Core the only problem is it doesn't have a lite version just like Electrum if you want Bitcoin Core to be used to its full function you need to download the whole blockchain to be able to use most of the commands/parameters available on the full node. The only downside of this is you need a big space or HDD but you can still able to use Bitcoin core and pruned node with limited function. Have you ever heard someone hacked with a Bitcoin core wallet? Electrum has faced phishing issues in the past.

There are wallets that have all the basic features for security and convenience, so instead of posting here that "i like and use this wallet, but it is not open source", switch to open source and recommended wallets. Electrum is a well reviewed and recommended wallet and has most of the features a bitcoiner needs, however, its Android version lacked some features previously, but now you can sign and verify BTC messages on Electrum Android and also use coin control, though you cannot customize tx fees yet fees on Android.

Bitcoin wiki and bitcoinops compatibility have lists of some wallet comparisons that may be useful for those who want to see the basic features.

You did not specifically mention whether you mean Android wallets or all Bitcoin wallets, but the usage is what determines what you are looking for. If you want to use it for holding Bitcoin, wallet need to support the basics such as customizing fees, open source code, coincontrol, and if you want to use it for daily payments, then support the Lightning Network. is what you will be looking for.

Mobile wallets are usually for small, daily payments, and the option to use Bitcoin is limited due to transaction fees, so better support for the Lightning Network and sidenets should be the direction of developers.

Things I miss:
Better support for L2 and sidechains.
Better support for miniscripts.
Better privacy options.

BlueWallet is a great wallet that I recommend to newbies every single time.

While Blue Wallet has multi-wallet support, I wish they had better multi-wallet support for sort of power users. Their multi-wallet support is just bad UX-wise if you have dozens of hot wallets, but I understand because making the UX Electrum-like would add a lot of unnecessary bloat for a feature that only a small minority would use.

The only option that I have always wanted to see and there is no wallet for that yet is the option to let the use easily take advantage of the Bitcoin smart contract system. That is the Bitcoin script language not the shittoken creation that unfortunately "smart contract" is usually translated into.

For example if you wanted to create a smart contract with a condition (OP_IF family), maybe even some nested conditions (OP_IF inside an OP_IF ;)), use a locktime (like OP_CLTV) and a couple of public keys and check sig ops you'll have to write such a script manually then bend over backwards to sign it and maybe get an address out of it and send some funds. That is only if you are lucky and haven't made a mistake and locked your coins forever!

An easy to use GUI that helps you create these smart contracts and verifies them behind the scene can be very helpful. Although writing something like that has its own complexities and requires a very good understanding of the Bitcoin script language that in certain places has "special" behavior!

Miniscript is receiving more attention and development is continuing, almost the most wallet that supports Miniscript https://github.com/AreaLayer/FireBolt you can try it. There is also https://min.sc
I see that some Lightning wallets have started exploiting Bitcoin's Taproot Upgrade to enhance privacy and user experience, but we need to wait about a year to see more use cases.

Electrum android has limited features compared to the desktop versions, if we assume the Electrum android as hot wallet and meant to be used on a day-to-day basis then it should have more flexibility, the only two important things that miss out for now is to set the fees manually, like we can't enter our own desired fee rate on electrum android while its possible in desktop version.

Another thing is that still it doesn't have coin control feature to individually select UTXOs for our transactions.

Am I correct in assuming that you were referring to the Android version of Electrum ^{[the latter has both of these bump fee features on its desktop version]}?
^{- I find it strange that users don't get the same set of features on all of the platforms!}

---

@Forsyth Jones

• For Electrum, I'd add Taproot support ^{[for some reason, they hate it when someone asks them about it]}, custom entropy and spaced address displays.
• For Stack Wallet, I'd add PSBTs, RBF, CPFP, custom entropy, Taproot, and spaced addresses.
  ^{- I hope they'll improve its custom node implementation (last time I checked, it was quite buggy).}

Coin control feature has been added to Electrum on Android in version 4.5.0.

To use Coin control on Electrum Android, you simply go to the Addresses/coins tab and for each address you will see the list of utxo's under it, and you can freeze the utxo's you don't want to spend, and whichever utxo is left unfrozen will be used in the tx you want to make.

I also noticed this on their github, but I think they may already be working on it, I heard that they also showed interest in adding support for descriptors.

What I'd add to Electrum (which I think is impossible to happen, as the devs have no interest in this at all) is support for address types all in the same wallet (just like in Bitcoin Core).

At electrum, if I want to create a p2sh-segwit, segwit, etc. wallet, I have to import the seed again to change the script/derivation path, which I think is unnecessary.

Another thing I'd add to Electrum is the function of importing private key directly into a standard wallet, so the imported key would be saved in the same electrum wallet file (not from the same seed!), just like in bitcoin core, I think There is no need to create a new import wallet file just for this.

After the last update v6.5.8 three days ago, I think Bluewallet is almost perfect as an open source Bitcoin wallet. BlueWallet wallet developers continue to pay attention to several suggestions submitted by users.
Until now, I don't know what I need from the Bitcoin wallet I use because all the features available are quite impressive.

XYZ Wallet? I don't guarantee it is a safe wallet like you said because I haven't used it before. From what I searched for the wallet, I didn't get much information.

XYZ Wallet is just an example name, it'd be any other wallet.

Bluewallet is an exceptional wallet, I've never seen a wallet as good for both Android and iOS as it is!

I am writing for ALL Bitcoin Wallets I have ever tested out.

It would be very cool if there was a Bitcoin Wallet out there that had small '?' buttons next to almost EVERY thing Wallet related so for any thing the user does not understand there would be a brief explanation plus a much more detailed one.

For example.  When creating a Seed you are only typically told to write it down.  Many write it down on a piece of paper they would never take care of.  Others take a screen shot of it.  Some store it in their Mail account.  Or on Google Drive.  Or what ever else.

If there was a small '?' button to offer an explanation as to what actual safe storage of a Seed means.  Or maybe a drawn explanation to show you images of what good storage versus bad storage means.  Et cetera.

Electrum warns you to never disclose it, or type it in a website, or store it electronically in general; it also tells you to save it on paper and with the correct order. That's the only wallet software I can think of that I'd recommend it to a newbie. I just checked Sparrow and it does not warn enough for a newbie, but I'd never suggest it in the first place. It contains a lot of complicated terminology like "script types", "policy types", "keystores" etc., that would confuse them. Bitcoin Core is another newbie unfriendly wallet, and it neither supports a seed phrase standard.

Are you sure that it is possible to freeze individual UTXOs of an address on Electrum Android?

I am using ver 4.5.3, and all I can see is the option to freeze the entire address not particular UTXOs as you said in it.

If possible please post a screenshot to see if I am not seeing the options.

Z-tight is right.
Since version 4.5.0, you can freeze coins in the android version as well and that was mentioned in the release note.


As you can see in the following image, "Addresses" option has been changed to "Addresses/Coins".

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2024/03/14/JHdhJ.jpeg


And here is the drop-down menu in which you should select "Coins".

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2024/03/14/JHXzW.jpeg

If you were referring to generating various types of addresses within a wallet, I agree, but it's worth mentioning that importing the private keys of these addresses while specifying their script types could also count as some kind of support for the above thing.

You have a point, but perhaps the developers wanted to separate the less-secured ones from the rest.

Good thing that you mentioned this... I'm quite disappointed to see some Android wallets seem to have no protection against taking screenshots on their seed creation pages!

We can call that coin control but it's not the best version of it. Sure, you can control which UTXOs to spend by freezing those that you don't want to use. But if I have 100 UTXOs on the same address, I would have to freeze 99 to be left with the one I wish to use. This isn't the best solution. It reminds me of Ledger Live's bad coin control feature. In LL, the software highlights all UTXOs by default, and you have to go through the entire list to untick those you don't want to use.

Instead of having to freeze what you don't want to spend, they should have allowed users to click and select those they wish to include in their transactions.

What comes to mind now is that 99% of wallets only offer a single form of backup: via the BIP39 recovery phrase, which in itself is a complete backup that will restore your wallet and coins.

However, we must take the following into consideration: most wallets don't make it clear which derivation path they use, and depending on the wallet the user uses to restore the wallet, they will restore addresses from another derivation path in which their UTXO is not allocated.

Therefore, it'd be better if the most popular wallets considered descriptor support, so that users with technical knowledge can describe to the wallet exactly which derivation path the wallet should restore.

Another alternative would be more than one backup alternative, such as an exportable keystore encrypted with a user-defined password, where in this file you would specify the derivation path, public keys, WIFs, xprivs and everything necessary to restore the wallet in the future.

Visit this site and you will get what I am saying: https://walletsrecovery.org/ (The specified information is out of date)

Popular wallets show the derivation paths somewhere in their settings, but you are right about this. For instance, I was surprised that Trezor Suite didn't display the derivation paths for bitcoin accounts until recently. Luckily, we do have sources like WalletsRecovery, and you can always google the issue, and chances are that you will find the information somewhere. Asking support is another way to find out.

Most of the wallets we use and recommend on this forum use standard derivation paths and one or two alternatives. It's with closed-source and untrusted wallets where problems with unknown derivation paths appear. And those shouldn't be used in the first place.

My preferred BTC wallet is Passport 2 which unbeatable in my view  , but, as one can understand, it must be paired with some software companion  for which Sparrow  is used by me. The only thing I would wish for Sparrow right now is the option for OP_RETURN payment, which I would use to store some valuable (for me) text on blockchain. But, unfortunately,  craigraw still remains reluctant (https://github.com/sparrowwallet/sparrow/issues/97) for adding this feature to Sparrow.

You can use Electrum in the meantime to create your OP_RETURN transactions. Passport Foundation supports the Electrum Wallet. Some older posts I found on the forum related to the subject say that you can use OP_return in the GUI, it's not available from the console.

If that's not you who requested the feature on Sparrow's GitHub, try doing it. They might add it in the future if they notice there is enough interest.

I'm aware of the  availability of OP_RETURN in Electrum by using this script instead destination address in the payment field . But unfortunately Electrum  can't be paired with Passport via QR code. The only option is to pare them via PSBT file. This is one of the reasons for my Sparrow bias. I will wait, as it seems that craigraw is gradually shifted to the OP_RETURN-mindedness.

That is unfortunate. The Electrum wallet supports QR codes, but probably only as a way to import addresses and keys. Seeing how popular Passport has become, the Electrum devs will surely add the missing functionality at some point in the future.

Anyways, I believe you are a privacy advocate and you run your own node. Sparrow offers more in the privacy department than Electrum.

Even if they make it clear (which most of them do) the user still needs to investigate to figure out their derivation path. Not to mention that sometimes people forget what  wallet they were using in first place.

This means a better solution to fix this problem is to change the BIP39 algorithm itself not wallets. That way we can address a couple of shortcomings in this algorithm and add extra features. It could be some extra bits at the beginning that would increase the word count in each mnemonic by one but could contain a lot of information including the derivation path.

Yes, I myself can find out where the UTXO are without difficulty, as the best known are M/0, M/0H, M/44H/, M/49H..., M/84 and 86 (few support the last 4 scripts together).

Bitcoin Core (legacy wallet) and Electrum use derivation paths from the beginning of bip32. Recently Bitcoin core adopted the BIP39 standard (without mnemonic).

At the time, I tried to restore the wallet created in bitcoin core through xpriv on Electrum, out of curiosity and I was unable to do so. Even getting the derivation patch right.

Regarding the shortcomings of BIP39, electrum already contains a seed indicating the version number in the seed itself indicating what type of addresses to generate, but only it uses its own standard. Which I don't technically get how it works and how the electrum seed version is better than the BIP39 as they claim.

---

https://electrum.readthedocs.io/en/latest/seedphrase.html#motivation

It's pretty straight forward. You compute HMACSHA512 of the normalized mnemonic with "Seed version" as HMAC key and then check the first couple of bits of the result to determine the version. Based on that version you derive a different type of address.

During seed generation, this version is found through brute forcing. Behind the scene Electrum generates 132 bits of entropy then computes the version as I explained, it if is of the type you wanted it is accepted; otherwise the entropy is incremented and the loop continues until it is.

It is better than BIP39 because the user doesn't have to manually tell the wallet what type of addresses it should derive from the given mnemonic.

I agree.  Sparrow is not very beginner friendly and would confuse them very badly.

Do you know these sort of 'chat bubbles' you get on many Applications the first time you install?  They usually explain what each button does.  I think such an implementation of helpful tips would help so much.

Electrum and Sparrow wallets are great bitcoin wallets for me but they are not perfect.
For both of them I would add additional support for Liquid assets L-BTC and L-USDT, and for Sparrow wallet could also add Lightning network and mobile version.
For multicoin wallets like Unstappable biggest problem I have is no coin control, and that is must have feature for me.

Bitcoin is also not so beginner friendly  :P
I don't see anything complicated to understand with Sparrow, and it's better to learn the difference from start between running your own node and using server from other people.
However, if someone wants a dead simple wallet I would suggest Aqua wallet, even senior citizens can use it easily.

That's a feature of BIP39, though, not a bug. And I'd say that it is trivial to know which type of address you used, given the wallet software and a search engine.  :P

I agree. I'm absolutely in favor of knowing the implications of using a third party to serve your transactions. However, it does contain a lot of technical terminology like "script type" that a newbie doesn't need to know. Electrum was a pretty easy to learn, speaking out of experience. Sparrow was better as an upgrade, but I wouldn't have picked this up since day 1, as I did with Electrum.

Every famous open-source crypto wallet lacks a UI/UX design and some of them don't have applications for smartphones. I personally use Electrum and its mobile app is terrible, and far from intuitive. Windows app looks like an old application from Windows XP times.
Long story short, every Bitcoin wallet needs to do more UI/UX research and create more intuitive design and they need good smartphone app. I would also love to see timelock feature on crypto wallets because it's sometimes hard to HODL and locking your bitcoin for years is the best way for those who lack self-control.

It seems to me that bitcoinwallets lack the functions that blockchain.com / blockexplorer.com, bitcoinfees.earn.com websites provides, such as a transaction explorer, mempool weight, bitcoin fees and time to confirm a transaction. It would be nice to have similar information in the adjacent tabs of the bitcoin wallet, but I think that it would “weight down” the wallet and make it bulky and clumsy, which combine applications become.

I would like to see this in bitcoin wallets, rather than looking for the necessary information on third-party websites, which, as we know, don't hesitate to collect information about visitors.

In all LN wallets for mobile devices, I would be happy to see an option which is currently present in Blixt only: persistent online mode (https://blixtwallet.github.io/features#option-experiments). It is necessary for incoming payments, so I find it weird that not each mobile wallet provides this option. I used to think it is impossible at all, but if it is realized in Blixt, so I think it must be possible in other wallets, too.

In Blixt itself, I miss non-taproot addresses for incoming onchain transfers. Not every wallet can send bitcoins to P2TR addresses yet.

Trezor Suite has the best UI in my opinion, but when it comes to UX, Electrum and Bitcoin Core are more objective. It has the Send, Receive button, I just think that both Electrum and Bitcoin core should return to having dynamic QR Codes, when changing the amount or description the QR is instantly updated instead of clicking on "create new receiving address" and a new QR Code.

About Electrum's retro UI, this pleases me, because remembering graphical interfaces from the XP era is very nostalgic, electrum reminds me of those password managers like Keepass.

Well, Sparrow has an integrated block explorer (https://sparrowwallet.com/features/), do you already know it?

It is more like lack of feature and I wouldn't call it a bug either. We could consider it as a shortcoming of BIP39.

As for knowing the address type, it is not as trivial as you think for newbies who don't even know there are different types of addresses. It is best to make things easier for end users anyway, specially when it is so easy to implement (like what Electrum has done).

Electrum mobile has improved well over the past two years. Previously the Gap in features between the mobile and desktop version was very wide, but that gap has closed down significantly
For the retro look on the desktop version, it seems fitting with other things like the forum and Bitcoin core as well.

While Bitcoin is a modern currency and future of the money, its wallets luck modernity and that's strange. Bitcoin wallets look very old, I mean, their visual aspect and user experience standards don't meet the modern demand, instead, they are mostly created for developers who don't care about visual side and functionality is the most important factor.
For example, Sparrow, that looks way better than Electrum, seems to be harder to use then Electrum because of probably a bad infrastructure but looks more modern than Electrum.

By the way, I'll ask here, who created this app? https://play.google.com/store/apps/dev?id=5750589945930020869

Answering you about the link, it seems to be the schildbatch wallet, it's known by the old guard because of the developer's name: Andreas Schildbatch, it was the first mobile wallet that existed and I consider it one of the safest. However, the schildbacth wallet is limited in features that I consider essential, such as customizing fees, this has already been suggested on the project's github, but the developer considers it advanced and that this is a wallet for beginner users.

Commenting on what I think about the UI of wallets like Electrum and Sparrow, as I said, these wallets are more suitable for experienced users who don't care about UI issues, however some wallets like Ledger that have a modern and beautiful UI, have several options that I consider useless, such as the buy button, exchange button and the essential send and receive buttons are mixed between these buttons, I think the main function of a self-respecting wallet is to send and receive, there is no need to invent trends.

I believe that a user who has never used a ledger finds it strange to see a bunch of buttons and it takes time to find the send and receive button, in addition, both the send and receive buttons, when clicking on them, go through a useless verification process, why complicate things? If I click on receive, I want the address to appear immediately so I can copy and check the address on the device. So UI isn't everything, it's essential that the wallet has a good UX too.