Fireblocks can be improved in terms of rates, as I consider it extremely expensive because it costs around five thousand dollars for up to a million dollars in transactional volume. The cost increases significantly as I conduct multiple transactions that exceed one million dollars in transactional volume annually. At the moment, I have no further thoughts on needed improvements outside of pricing. I chose a rating of seven out of ten mainly due to price, and I would say customer support could be improved further.
I think one feature that Fireblocks could add to make the product better is AI automation features. AI automation processes are working extensively now, and if they provided features for verifying whether a transaction is valid or not based on AML processing or transaction policy, it would be beneficial. Auditing and compliance are very important, and crypto law has become very strict based on different countries. If they improve that and the automation is handled by the AI system, implementing it in their platform would make it much easier to manage. Because currently, I also need to maintain the AML process manually on my system. Though Fireblocks SDK manages it through third-party systems such as Chainalysis, I still need to verify it again sometimes, ensuring that I follow all the rules and regulations of the AML process or KYC onboarding process.
Fireblocks already has a pipeline of new features to improve, such as migrating from one chain to another instantly, which they are already working on.
I think one area Fireblocks can improve is the cost barrier; the annual licensing fees are quite high for institutions and others. They need to reduce it to make it more accessible for more users. Regarding DeFi and smart contract interactions, interacting with new or obscure DeFi protocols via WalletConnect can sometimes be clunky, often requiring trial and error or manual workarounds. The smart contract UX could be improved; while core transfers are flawless, the interface for interacting with complex and non-standard contracts could be more streamlined for operational speed. This is an area I think Fireblocks can enhance.
One area that could be improved is the reconciliation methods. We need to ensure that our accounting aligns with what is displayed in the Fireblocks console, and currently, this process is somewhat manual.
Currently, we face issues using other technologies and operating systems since the documentation is very restrictive. Here, the bank uses Red Hat, and there's a lack of flexibility to adapt Fireblocks to various customer technologies. The backup process, in particular, is very rigid and can only use specific tools and versions.
We were using PHP, and the solution didn't have much support for it. For example, I needed to check the signature to ensure that it was safe and it was from them. I wasn't sure which key I was supposed to use, and there was no code. I had to guess how to make a code and use a key. If it didn't work, I don't know if the problem was with the code or the key. I found another person in their forums who also was using PHP. He seemed to have a PHP code, and I got that. I assumed that the code should be working and tried it with the right key. I found it, and it worked.
The tool has some restrictions on its API. When we do a transaction, the account balance doesn't get refreshed, and you need to call a separate API for that. It would be better if the balance gets auto-refreshed once the transaction runs.
Fireblocks offers comprehensive asset management by emphasizing security and stability in cryptocurrency transactions, leveraging features like confidential computing and user-friendly interfaces to safeguard private keys and streamline operations.Fireblocks is designed for efficient digital asset custody and transaction management, making it a choice for institutions focusing on fund management and secure custodial services. With its extensive documentation and responsive support, Fireblocks...
Fireblocks can be improved in terms of rates, as I consider it extremely expensive because it costs around five thousand dollars for up to a million dollars in transactional volume. The cost increases significantly as I conduct multiple transactions that exceed one million dollars in transactional volume annually. At the moment, I have no further thoughts on needed improvements outside of pricing. I chose a rating of seven out of ten mainly due to price, and I would say customer support could be improved further.
I think one feature that Fireblocks could add to make the product better is AI automation features. AI automation processes are working extensively now, and if they provided features for verifying whether a transaction is valid or not based on AML processing or transaction policy, it would be beneficial. Auditing and compliance are very important, and crypto law has become very strict based on different countries. If they improve that and the automation is handled by the AI system, implementing it in their platform would make it much easier to manage. Because currently, I also need to maintain the AML process manually on my system. Though Fireblocks SDK manages it through third-party systems such as Chainalysis, I still need to verify it again sometimes, ensuring that I follow all the rules and regulations of the AML process or KYC onboarding process.
Fireblocks already has a pipeline of new features to improve, such as migrating from one chain to another instantly, which they are already working on.
I think one area Fireblocks can improve is the cost barrier; the annual licensing fees are quite high for institutions and others. They need to reduce it to make it more accessible for more users. Regarding DeFi and smart contract interactions, interacting with new or obscure DeFi protocols via WalletConnect can sometimes be clunky, often requiring trial and error or manual workarounds. The smart contract UX could be improved; while core transfers are flawless, the interface for interacting with complex and non-standard contracts could be more streamlined for operational speed. This is an area I think Fireblocks can enhance.
One area that could be improved is the reconciliation methods. We need to ensure that our accounting aligns with what is displayed in the Fireblocks console, and currently, this process is somewhat manual.
Currently, we face issues using other technologies and operating systems since the documentation is very restrictive. Here, the bank uses Red Hat, and there's a lack of flexibility to adapt Fireblocks to various customer technologies. The backup process, in particular, is very rigid and can only use specific tools and versions.
We were using PHP, and the solution didn't have much support for it. For example, I needed to check the signature to ensure that it was safe and it was from them. I wasn't sure which key I was supposed to use, and there was no code. I had to guess how to make a code and use a key. If it didn't work, I don't know if the problem was with the code or the key. I found another person in their forums who also was using PHP. He seemed to have a PHP code, and I got that. I assumed that the code should be working and tried it with the right key. I found it, and it worked.
The tool has some restrictions on its API. When we do a transaction, the account balance doesn't get refreshed, and you need to call a separate API for that. It would be better if the balance gets auto-refreshed once the transaction runs.