Which decentralized identity platforms are ready for business use in 2026?

Quick answer: Decentralized identity lets a person keep digital credentials in their own wallet and prove facts without a central database. The best decentralized identity platforms for 2026 are Microsoft Entra Verified ID, Truvera, walt.id, Trinsic, Indicio, MATTR, SpruceID, cheqd, Hyperledger Identus and Privado ID. Most publish no price.

By Spotsaas Editorial Team. Published 11 November 2026. Every price and fact below was read on the vendor page linked next to it on that date.

Decentralized identity is a way of proving who you are, or what you are allowed to do, without handing a copy of your details to every company that asks. The idea is simple. An organization you trust gives you a signed digital credential. You keep it in a wallet on your phone. When someone needs proof, you show only what they need, and they check the signature themselves.

This guide explains the idea in plain words, ranks ten named platforms with a “best for” line each, shows every price we could read, and says honestly where the technology is not yet ready for an enterprise buyer.

What is decentralized identity? A plain introduction

Today most of your identity lives in other people’s databases. Your employer holds your work account. A shop holds your customer account. A social network holds the login you use everywhere else. Decentralized identity moves the proof into your hands. Four terms cover almost everything you will read:

• DID (decentralized identifier): an identifier that a person or organization creates and controls, without asking a central registry. The W3C Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs) v1.0 standard became a W3C Recommendation on 19 July 2022. It opens with this line: “Decentralized identifiers (DIDs) are a new type of identifier that enables verifiable, decentralized digital identity.”
• Verifiable credential: a digital version of a document such as a diploma, a driver’s licence or an employee badge, signed by whoever issued it. The W3C Verifiable Credentials Data Model v2.0 became a W3C Recommendation on 15 May 2025. It defines three roles: the issuer asserts the claims, the holder keeps the credential, and the verifier checks it.
• Identity wallet: the app or service where the holder keeps credentials and chooses what to share. Microsoft’s wallet is Microsoft Authenticator, described in its Verified ID overview.
• SSI (self-sovereign identity): the older name for the same goal, where the person controls their own identity data. Most vendors now say “decentralized identity” or “digital credentials” instead.

Two further standards decide whether platforms can talk to each other: OpenID for Verifiable Credential Issuance (how a credential reaches a wallet) and OpenID for Verifiable Presentations (how a wallet shows it). The Decentralized Identity Foundation hosts much of the surrounding work.

What are the best decentralized identity platforms in 2026?

Here are ten named platforms, ranked. The order is our editorial judgment of how easy it is for a business buyer to start: a clear way in, support for current standards, and a stated audience. We read each vendor’s own pages on 11 November 2026. We did not run hands-on tests, so treat the order as a reading guide, not a benchmark.

Rank	Platform	Best for	Open source, per its own page	Price we could read
1	Microsoft Entra Verified ID	Organizations already on Microsoft Entra	Not stated	Included in Entra Suite, $12.00 per user per month
2	Truvera (Dock Labs)	Teams that want a self-serve start with a visible price	Not stated	Build plan $499 per month
3	walt.id	Engineering teams that want to self-host	Community Stack, Apache 2.0	Community free; Enterprise by quote
4	Trinsic	Businesses that need to accept many kinds of digital ID	Not stated	None published
5	Indicio	Travel, border and government credential projects	Not stated	None readable
6	MATTR	Mobile driver’s licence programs and large-scale acceptance	Not stated	None published
7	SpruceID	Government agencies	Not stated	None published
8	cheqd	Ecosystems that want a blockchain registry plus payments	Not stated	None readable
9	Hyperledger Identus	Teams with engineers who want no license fee	Yes, Apache 2.0	No price page; free licence
10	Privado ID	Apps that need privacy-preserving checks such as age verification	Yes, MIT/Apache	None published

1. Microsoft Entra Verified ID: best for organizations already on Microsoft

Microsoft’s documentation says Verified ID implements W3C DIDs and W3C Verifiable Credentials, and uses Microsoft Authenticator as the wallet. It also states that “Microsoft currently supports the did:web trust system,” which ties trust to a web domain you already own. That is simple to run but narrower than the full range of DID methods. If you already manage staff in Entra ID, see our Microsoft Entra ID (Azure AD) page.

2. Truvera (Dock Labs): best for a self-serve start

Dock Labs’ Truvera lets you issue credentials from a web app or API, launch a white-label wallet or use a wallet SDK, and set up an “ecosystem” of approved issuers and verifiers. Its pricing page offers a 30-day free trial and a published Build plan. The same page notes that the white-label mobile wallet needs a six-month commitment.

3. walt.id: best for engineering teams that want to self-host

walt.id sells developer kits for issuing, holding and verifying credentials. Its pricing page lists W3C VC, IETF SD-JWT and ISO mDL credentials, OID4VCI and OID4VP protocols, and the DID methods did:key, did:jwk, did:web and did:ebsi. It also lists an OIDC bridge for existing sign-in systems including Keycloak, Auth0, Okta and Entra ID. The Community Stack is open source under Apache 2.0; the Enterprise Stack is proprietary.

4. Trinsic: best for accepting many kinds of digital ID

Trinsic describes itself as a digital ID gateway: one API to accept IDs from mobile driver’s licences, national ID wallets and bank IDs. Its homepage, read on 11 November 2026, claims 83 countries and 78 ID providers integrated. Those are vendor figures we could not test. Spotsaas lists the company on its Trinsic page, with Trinsic alternatives alongside.

5. Indicio: best for travel, border and government projects

Indicio calls itself a verifiable credentials platform. Its products include Indicio Proven and the Holdr+ wallet, and its pages cover digital travel credentials, mDL verification under ISO 18013-5 and 18013-7, and EU wallet readiness. Its pricing page was password protected when we visited, so no price was readable.

6. MATTR: best for mobile driver’s licence programs

MATTR offers separate offerings for organizations that issue credentials and organizations that accept them, including mobile driver’s licences. Its pricing link redirected to the homepage, so we found no price.

7. SpruceID: best for government agencies

SpruceID positions its identity work around government: state-issued IDs, government wallets and sign-in gateways. Its /pricing address returned an error page. Expect a demo conversation.

8. cheqd: best for ecosystems that want a blockchain registry and payments

cheqd says its infrastructure is “built with blockchain and privacy technology,” claims full conformance with the W3C DID spec, and supports SD-JWT, W3C credentials, OpenID4VC and AnonCreds. Its cheqd Studio is a hosted service for DIDs, trust registries and payments. Its /pricing address returned an error page.

9. Hyperledger Identus: best for teams that will build their own

Hyperledger Identus is an open-source project with SDKs for Swift, TypeScript and Kotlin Multiplatform. Its docs list W3C DID, VC-JWT, AnonCreds and DIDComm V2 support. The cloud-agent code carries an Apache 2.0 licence and was last updated on 9 November 2026, per GitHub. You pay in engineering time, not license fees.

10. Privado ID: best for privacy-preserving checks in apps

Privado ID says it is open source under MIT and Apache licences, offers a web wallet, and uses zero-knowledge proofs, a way to prove a fact without revealing the underlying data. Its use cases include age verification and know-your-customer checks. Its /pricing address returned an error page.

What are the best blockchain-based identity platforms?

A blockchain is optional in decentralized identity. The W3C DID standard lists “databases of any kind, peer-to-peer networks, and other forms of trusted data storage” as places DIDs can be recorded, and Microsoft’s did:web method works through ordinary web domains. Among the ten above, these are the ones whose own pages mention a blockchain:

Platform	What its own page says
cheqd	Infrastructure “built with blockchain and privacy technology”
Privado ID	Credentials “secured by cryptography and the blockchain”
walt.id	Lists the did:ebsi method among several others, including non-blockchain methods such as did:key and did:web
Microsoft Entra Verified ID	Uses did:web, a web-domain method, not a blockchain

The pages we read for Trinsic, Indicio, MATTR, SpruceID and Hyperledger Identus did not mention a blockchain, so we make no claim either way. If blockchain is a hard requirement, start with cheqd and Privado ID, then check the current docs.

How do decentralized identity wallets work?

A wallet does three jobs. It creates the keys that prove the credentials are yours. It stores credentials from issuers. It builds a “presentation” when a verifier asks, ideally sharing only the fields requested. Wallets come in three forms: a vendor app such as Microsoft Authenticator or Indicio’s Holdr+, a white-label wallet a business brands as its own (Truvera offers one), or a phone-maker wallet. Trinsic’s homepage lists Apple Wallet, Google Wallet and Samsung Wallet among the sources it accepts IDs from, which shows how many separate wallets a verifier may meet.

What happens when someone loses their phone?

It depends on who holds the keys. In a non-custodial wallet, the keys sit on the person’s device and the vendor cannot see them. A lost phone means lost credentials unless there is an encrypted backup, so the issuer usually issues them again. In a custodial wallet, a provider holds the keys. Recovery is easy, but you are trusting the provider again.

For staff, reissue is simple: IT issues a fresh badge and revokes the old one. Ask each vendor: is there a backup, who can read it, and how long does reissue take?

What is a DID, and how do DID methods differ?

A DID has three parts, per the W3C DID standard: the letters “did”, a method name and a method-specific identifier, as in did:web:example.com. The DID points to a DID document. That small file lists the owner’s public keys, what each may do (log in, sign claims, encrypt) and any service addresses. The method decides where the document lives and who can change it.

Method	Where the document lives	Main weakness
did:web	On a web domain. did:web:example.com resolves to https://example.com/.well-known/did.json.	Trust rests on DNS and TLS. The did:web specification says DNS “presents many of the attack vectors” against the method.
did:key and did:jwk	Nowhere. The DID encodes a public key.	No key rotation, because the key is the identifier.
did:ebsi and ledger methods	A blockchain.	Adds a network to rely on.

What do the issuer, holder and verifier actually do?

Take an employment credential. The employer (issuer) signs it. The employee (holder) stores it. A partner company (verifier) asks for proof. The verifier runs four checks, none needing a call to the employer:

1. Is the signature valid, using the issuer’s public key found through its DID?
2. Does the verifier trust this issuer for this claim? Verifiers keep a list of trusted issuers, a trust registry, because a valid signature from a stranger proves nothing.
3. Has the credential been revoked?
4. Does the holder control it? The holder proves this with a signature from their own key.

The Verifiable Credentials Data Model v2.0 defines the credential’s shape. Checks 2 and 3 are where deployments differ most.

How do OpenID4VCI and OpenID4VP relate to the W3C standards?

The W3C documents say what a credential and an identifier look like. They say little about how a credential reaches a wallet or how a wallet shows it. Two OpenID standards fill that gap. Both carry W3C credentials, ISO mdoc (the licence format) and SD-JWT VC.

• OpenID4VCI 1.0 (Final, 16 September 2025) “defines an API for the issuance of Verifiable Credentials.” The issuer shows an offer, usually a QR code. The spec warns that in the pre-authorized code flow anyone holding the code could receive the credential, so it recommends a transaction code sent separately.
• OpenID4VP 1.0 (Final, 9 July 2025) defines “a protocol for requesting and presenting Credentials.” The verifier states its needs in a query language called DCQL.

Selective disclosure for the JSON-based format is an IETF standard, RFC 9901, published in November 2025. Ask any vendor which protocol versions it ships, because earlier drafts may not interoperate.

How does revocation work, and why is it the hard part?

A credential can be checked offline, which is the point. It also means the issuer cannot simply delete it. The main answer is the W3C Bitstring Status List, a Recommendation since 15 May 2025. The issuer gives each credential a position in a long row of bits. Setting a bit to 1 marks that credential as revoked. The row is published at a web address and holds 131,072 entries by default. Suspension is reversible.

Four problems stay open:

1. Freshness. Verifiers cache the list, so a revocation arrives late by the cache’s lifetime.
2. Privacy. Fetching the list reveals which issuer a verifier checks. The spec suggests Oblivious HTTP, which hides who is asking.
3. Small groups. The spec warns that when few credentials are issued, correlation is easier because there are fewer slots to hide among.
4. Uptime. The issuer must keep the list online for as long as its credentials live.

If access must end within minutes, such as when someone is dismissed, also end the session in your IAM system.

What are selective disclosure and BBS signatures?

A normal signature covers a whole document, so showing only part of it breaks the match. Selective disclosure lets a holder reveal one field, such as “over 18,” and hold back the rest. In SD-JWT, the issuer signs hashed claims, which are scrambled fingerprints, and the holder reveals only the ones it picks. The mdoc format works the same way. Both reuse the same issuer signature every time, so two verifiers who compare notes can tell it is the same credential.

BBS signatures avoid that. The issuer signs all claims once, and the holder makes a fresh proof for each verifier, so proofs cannot be linked. It is the most private and least settled option. The W3C BBS cryptosuite is a Candidate Recommendation Draft dated 10 September 2026. Its own text says it is inappropriate to cite it other than as work in progress. Zero-knowledge proofs, which Privado ID uses, prove a fact such as “over 18” without revealing the birth date at all.

What does EU Regulation 2024/1183 require, and from whom?

Regulation (EU) 2024/1183 changed the EU’s eIDAS rules to create the European Digital Identity Wallet (EUDI). We could not open the EUR-Lex legal text, so these points come from the Commission and the law firm Arthur Cox.

Who	What changes
Member States	Provide wallets to citizens by the end of 2026, per the Commission.
Banks and payment providers (use by citizens is “completely voluntary”)	Per Arthur Cox, they must accept the wallet by December 2027.
Firms legally required to identify customers	“Will be obliged to accept the wallet for authentication,” per the Commission.
Any company that asks wallets for data	Must register as a relying party in its Member State, per Arthur Cox.

Technical rules sit in the EUDI Architecture and Reference Framework. We could not confirm its format list, so check it before choosing a vendor.

Where do mobile driving licences (ISO 18013-5) fit?

A mobile driving licence (mDL) is a driver’s licence in a phone wallet. ISO/IEC 18013-5 defines its mdoc format and how a phone shares it with a nearby reader. It matters for face-to-face age or identity checks. Indicio lists ISO 18013-5 and 18013-7 verification.

How is decentralized identity different from IAM and CIAM?

It does not replace them. IAM and CIAM manage accounts that an organization holds. Decentralized identity manages proofs that a person holds. Most businesses will run both.

	IAM (workforce)	CIAM (customers)	Decentralized identity
Who holds the data	The employer’s directory	The brand’s customer database	The person, in a wallet
Core question	Can this employee open this app?	Can this customer log in and are they who they say?	Can this person prove one fact, such as age or qualification?
Typical standards	SAML, OIDC	OIDC, OAuth	W3C DIDs, W3C Verifiable Credentials, OID4VC
Examples on Spotsaas	Okta, Microsoft Entra ID, OneLogin, Ping Identity	Auth0, Alice Biometrics	The ten platforms above

The two worlds already connect. walt.id lists a bridge to Keycloak, Auth0, Okta and Entra ID, and Microsoft sells Verified ID alongside Entra. To learn the existing categories first, see our guides to IAM software, CIAM software, identity verification software and multi-factor authentication software, plus the posts on CIAM software and identity verification pricing.

If you are choosing between sign-in platforms today, these matchups are the useful ones: Auth0 vs Okta, Auth0 vs Microsoft Entra ID, Microsoft Entra ID vs Okta, Microsoft Entra ID vs OneLogin, Auth0 vs OneLogin, Okta vs OneLogin and Okta vs Ping Identity. For other options, see Okta alternatives, Auth0 alternatives and Microsoft Entra ID alternatives.

What does integration with existing IAM look like?

Three patterns cover most pilots. In a login bridge, the wallet proof sits behind a normal OIDC login, so apps see a standard token. walt.id lists a bridge to Keycloak, Auth0, Okta and Entra ID. In directory-fed issuing, your IAM directory stays the source of truth and issues credentials such as an employee badge, as Microsoft Entra Verified ID does alongside Entra ID. In check first, then issue, an identity verification vendor such as Onfido, Veriff or Sumsub checks a passport and selfie, and you then issue a reusable credential.

If you run Keycloak, an open-source IAM product, see Microsoft Entra ID vs Keycloak, Keycloak vs Okta and Keycloak alternatives. For identity checks, compare Onfido vs Veriff, see Onfido alternatives or open Persona.

How ready is each platform for enterprise use?

We tested none. This is what each vendor’s pages confirm, and what to test.

Platform	What its pages confirm	Test in a pilot
Microsoft Entra Verified ID	Authenticator wallet, did:web only	Does did:web satisfy partners?
Truvera	White-label wallet, 30-day trial	Six-month wallet commitment
walt.id	OID4VCI, OID4VP, OIDC bridge	Self-hosting effort
Trinsic	One API to accept many IDs	The IDs your customers hold
Indicio	mDL verification, EU readiness	Terms; no price readable
MATTR	Issuing and accepting offerings	Live programs to ask about
SpruceID	Government-focused	Fit outside government
cheqd	OpenID4VC, blockchain registry	Network dependency
Hyperledger Identus	DIDComm V2, Apache 2.0	Your own support load
Privado ID	Zero-knowledge proofs, open source	Enterprise support terms

How much do decentralized identity platforms cost?

Most do not say. Of the ten platforms, two publish a dollar figure, three are free to license as open source, and five publish nothing we could read. Prices below were read on 11 November 2026. Each shows a dollar sign with no currency code on a US English page, so we read them as US dollars.

Platform	What the page shows	Source, read 11 November 2026
Microsoft Entra Suite (includes Verified ID with Face Check)	$12.00 per user per month, paid yearly. The page does not give a stand-alone Verified ID price.	Microsoft Entra Verified ID page
Truvera (Dock Labs)	Trial: 30 days free. Build: $499 per month, with 250 production credentials a month. Scale: contact sales. The page shows two plan tables; the Truvera-branded table lists only Trial and Scale.	Dock pricing page
walt.id	Community Stack free under Apache 2.0. Enterprise Stack requires a license; no figure shown.	walt.id pricing page
Hyperledger Identus	Apache 2.0 licence, no pricing page	GitHub repository
Privado ID	Says open source under MIT/Apache; its /pricing address returned an error page	Privado ID homepage
Trinsic	No price published. Its /pricing address redirected to a contact page.	Trinsic pricing address
Indicio	No price readable. The pricing page is password protected.	Indicio pricing page
MATTR	No price published. Its pricing address redirected to the homepage.	MATTR pricing address
SpruceID	No price published. Its /pricing address returned an error page.	SpruceID homepage
cheqd	No price readable. Its /pricing address returned an error page.	cheqd homepage

Open source does not mean free to run. You still pay for hosting, security review and the engineers who maintain it.

Where is decentralized identity not ready for an enterprise buyer?

The technology works. The surrounding market is young. Six gaps matter when you plan a purchase:

1. The standards are new. DID v1.0 became a Recommendation in July 2022 and Verifiable Credentials v2.0 in May 2025. Vendors are still adding support for the newer rules.
2. Method support is uneven. Microsoft says it currently supports only did:web. A credential from one vendor may not work with another’s wallet.
3. Someone has to accept the credential. A credential helps only if the people you deal with can verify it. Trinsic exists largely because verifiers meet many different wallets.
4. Government rules are still landing. The European Commission’s page on Regulation (EU) 2024/1183 says Member States must provide EU Digital Identity Wallets to citizens by the end of 2026. Several vendors above, including Indicio, walt.id and cheqd, say they support these EU rules.
5. Pricing is opaque. Five of ten platforms published nothing we could read, so budgeting means sales calls.
6. Recovery and support are open questions. Ask every vendor what happens when an employee loses a phone, and who is accountable when a credential is wrongly revoked.

Our advice for most buyers: run a small pilot for one narrow job, such as proving employment status to a partner, before replacing any existing sign-in system.

Where should you not use decentralized identity yet?

• Replacing workforce single sign-on. IAM already does this well.
• Access that must end within minutes. Status lists lag by the length of the cache.
• Open sign-up with no trusted issuer. Verifiers must know whom to believe.
• Unlinkable proofs today. BBS is still a draft.

Good first uses are narrow: proving employment or a qualification to a partner, reusing a finished identity check, and age checks.

Frequently asked questions about decentralized identity

How we researched this list

We read each vendor’s own site and pricing address on 11 November 2026, plus the W3C, OpenID, European Commission and Electronic Frontier Foundation pages linked above. Where a vendor showed no price, we say so and do not estimate. Features describe what each vendor says it offers, not what we tested. Vendor figures such as Trinsic’s country count are the vendor’s claims. Standards pages we could not read were not cited. We could not open EUR-Lex or the ISO pages, so the EU points rest on the European Commission and the law firm Arthur Cox, and ISO 18013-5 is described through the OpenID specification that names it. Rankings are editorial and can change as platforms add features.