Bitledger · Comparison
Bitledger vs. Coinpanda: the same DeFi wallets, two results
Four wallets with liquidity pools, lending, cross-chain and liquid staking, imported into both tools under the same conditions. Here is what came out without manual work, which transactions were classified wrongly, and where Coinpanda is the better choice. Bitledger was measured again after fixes; how it did on the same day as Coinpanda is under the first table.
At a glance
| Bitledger | Coinpanda | |
|---|---|---|
| Measured on | 29 October 2026 | 25 October 2026 |
| Test wallets imported | 4 of 4 | 3 of 4 |
| Correct in the sample (15 transactions per wallet) | 98.3% (59 of 60) | 51.7% (31 of 60) |
| Transactions recognised | 99% | not measured |
| Holdings match the chain | 2 of 4 wallets checked | not measured |
Rates cover the wallets whose chain the provider offers; a failed import counts as 0 of 15. Recognised transactions and holdings could only be counted where the free plan offers an export or its own holdings check; otherwise the cell says “not measured”. Bitledger on 25 October 2026, measured on the same day as the others: 61.7% (37 of 60) in the sample.
What Coinpanda classified differently
| Transaction | Coinpanda | Correct would be | Effect |
|---|---|---|---|
| The whole wallet on Ink (wallet A) | Import failed (“Error”, 0 transactions), also after a new sync | 317 transactions | – |
| EURe inflow from a cross-chain swap (wallet C) | Booked twice: once under the new and once under the old token contract | One acquisition of 620.37 EURe | CHF 574 |
| Withdrawal from Coinbase (wallet B) | Booked as an inflow from a third party | The holder's own funds from the exchange, not income | CHF 4 |
Per wallet
Wallet A: Lending and borrowing on Aave, liquidity in and out, bridges to the holder's own address
| Bitledger | Coinpanda | |
|---|---|---|
| Correct in the sample (of 15) | 15 | import failed |
| Transactions recognised | 100% | import failed |
| Holdings match the chain | yes | import failed |
Coinpanda: Import failed (“Error”, 0 transactions, the same after a new sync).
Wallet B: Lending and borrowing on Aave with WETH, WBTC and stablecoins, swaps
| Bitledger | Coinpanda | |
|---|---|---|
| Correct in the sample (of 15) | 14 | 14 |
| Transactions recognised | 99.5% | not measured |
| Holdings match the chain | no | not measured |
Bitledger: Holdings: ETH dust differs by USD 0.004; wrong in the sample: a spam airdrop booked as income (CHF 0).
Wallet C: Aave with a euro stablecoin, liquid staking (osGNO), cross-chain swaps
| Bitledger | Coinpanda | |
|---|---|---|
| Correct in the sample (of 15) | 15 | 4 |
| Transactions recognised | 96.6% | not measured |
| Holdings match the chain | yes | not measured |
Wallet D: Cross-chain assets from Bitcoin, Ethereum and BNB Chain, LP tokens, liquid staking
| Bitledger | Coinpanda | |
|---|---|---|
| Correct in the sample (of 15) | 15 | 13 |
| Transactions recognised | 100% | not measured |
| Holdings match the chain | no | not measured |
Bitledger: Holdings: −0.21 ZETA, one credit from the protocol is missing.
Features
| Bitledger | Coinpanda | |
|---|---|---|
| Report for the Swiss tax return (CHF) | yes | CHF selectable, report not checked |
| Tax value at 31 December shown | yes | not measured |
| Price list of the Federal Tax Administration (ESTV) | Noted in the report, prices from CoinGecko | not measured |
| Note on professional trading (circular 36) | yes | not measured |
| Reason shown for every classification | yes | not measured |
| Holdings checked against the chain | yes | not measured |
| Price for up to 1,000 transactions a year | not measured | not measured |
Where Coinpanda is better
- Most correct transactions on Arbitrum (14 of 15) and ZetaChain (13 of 15) on 25 October, more than Bitledger that day (10 and 12).
- Links every transaction to the block explorer with its full hash.
- Hides spam tokens such as RAIN by default.
All five tools side by side, and how we tested: The full comparison