# Octav vs Zerion: Which Sees More of Your Wallet

> Zerion is fast and cheap but misses half a complex wallet. Octav decodes the full portfolio: DeFi, options, perps and Solana, with top benchmark coverage.

- **URL:** https://octav.fi/blog/octav-vs-zerion
- **Published:** 2026-07-25
- **Updated:** 2026-07-27
- **Author:** Octav Team — Portfolio Intelligence for Digital Assets
- **Topic:** Benchmarks & Comparisons
- **Tags:** comparison, api, benchmark
- **Source:** Octav, Practical guides on crypto NAV reporting, multi-chain portfolio management and digital asset APIs, from the team behind Octav.

---
Zerion is the fastest and cheapest full-portfolio option in our
[nine-provider benchmark](/crypto-portfolio-api-benchmark). It is also the one
with the biggest accuracy catch: on the same wallets, it scored **48 on
coverage** — it resolves under half of a complex wallet. For a plain spot wallet
that is invisible. For anything holding real DeFi, it means the number is wrong.

Octav scored **100 on coverage** on the identical wallets, and is the only
provider tested that also decodes **options, perps and Solana DeFi**. When the
portfolio has to be right, that gap is the whole story.

<VersusLogos opponent="Zerion" logo="/providers/zerion.png" />

## What Zerion is good at

Credit where due: Zerion is a polished consumer wallet and a genuinely fast,
cheap API — it topped the benchmark on cost (99) and performance (92). If your
holdings are spot tokens on major chains, it will serve you and you will never
notice its limits.

## The catch: it misses more than half of a complex wallet

Coverage measures how much of a wallet a provider actually resolves. Zerion's 48
means that on an active wallet — lending, LP, staking, perps, options, Solana
DeFi — more than half of the value can simply be absent from the response. It
does not error. It returns a smaller, confident, wrong number.

Two accuracy failure modes show up when a tracker leans on a token-list view of
a wallet instead of decoding positions:

- **Missing positions.** Whole sectors and chains go unresolved. This is what a
  coverage score of 48 looks like in practice.
- **Double-counting receipts.** A DeFi position leaves a receipt or wrapper
  token in the wallet — an aToken, an LP token, an LST. If a tracker counts that
  receipt *and* the underlying value it represents, the same money is booked
  twice. Octav resolves each receipt to its underlying position, so it is
  counted once, correctly — never as two holdings.

Between them, the result is a net-worth figure you cannot trust for reporting,
tax or a product, because you cannot tell which lines are missing and which are
doubled.

## Octav vs Zerion, by the numbers

From the [benchmark scorecard](/crypto-portfolio-api-benchmark):

| | Zerion | Octav |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Coverage | 48 | **100** |
| DeFi decoding | 100 | **100** |
| Options / perps / Solana DeFi | Partial | **Full** |
| Cost efficiency | **99** | 54 |
| Performance | **92** | 40 |
| Best for | Fast, cheap spot wallets | Accurate decoded portfolios |

Zerion wins on cost and speed; Octav wins on the one thing a portfolio has to be
— complete and correct. See the full three-way in
[Octav vs DeBank vs Zerion](/octav-vs-debank-vs-zerion).

## The same data in the API or the app

Everything the Octav API returns is in the app too, free to use at
[pro.octav.fi](https://pro.octav.fi/). Search any address and read the full
decoded portfolio across every chain it touches.

![The Octav app decoding a wallet across 48 chains and dozens of protocols — the same data the API returns](./images/octav-pro-board.jpg)

One wallet, 48 chains, every protocol position resolved individually and counted
once — Aave, Yearn, Euler, Uniswap, Hyperliquid. That is the difference between a
coverage of 100 and a coverage of 48.

## Which should you pick?

- **Zerion** — a fast, cheap consumer wallet for simple, spot-heavy holdings.
- **Octav** — when the wallet holds real DeFi, options, perps or Solana and the
  number has to be right, as an API to build on or a free app to look at.

The benchmark harness is open and the weights are published, so you do not have
to take our word for coverage 48 versus 100 — [re-run it](/crypto-portfolio-api-benchmark)
on your own wallets, or just check one at [pro.octav.fi](https://pro.octav.fi/).