Family law
Hidden crypto in divorce
Crypto does not show up on a bank statement, which is exactly why it gets left off a financial affidavit. It does show up on a public ledger. Once you have an address, you can document what it held, what it was worth on the date that matters, and where the money went.
Read this first: nobody can search the blockchain by name
There is no tool, including this one, that takes a spouse's name and returns their wallets. Any service promising that is selling something it cannot deliver. The address comes from discovery: exchange records, tax returns, bank transfers to an exchange, devices, interrogatories. On-chain analysis begins the moment you have one, and from there it often finds the rest.
Where the address usually comes from
Exchange records
A subpoena to a fiat exchange returns account holder identity, deposit and withdrawal history, and the on-chain addresses used.
Tax returns
The digital asset question on a federal return, and any reported disposition, establishes that holdings existed and roughly when.
Bank statements
Transfers to a known exchange are visible in ordinary financial discovery and date the entry into crypto.
Devices and backups
A wallet application, a seed phrase backup, or an exchange app on a shared device, subject to the rules on access in your jurisdiction.
Interrogatories
Asking about digital assets by name, including specific chains and exchanges, rather than a general question about property.
Value it as of the date that matters
Equitable distribution turns on what something was worth on a particular day, not what it is worth today. Crypto makes that acute: a wallet can be worth one figure at separation and a very different one at trial. Pick the date of separation, the date of a transfer, or the date of filing, and WalletDNA computes the balance held on that day and its USD value, from archive block data on EVM chains or a full history replay on Bitcoin and Litecoin, priced from a stated source. The price selection is disclosed rather than assumed, because that is the assumption opposing counsel will test.
The valuation saves with the report and prints as its own page in the PDF, alongside an Excel workpaper if your expert wants to check the arithmetic.
What the ledger tends to show
A balance that leaves before a filing date
Transfers out of a wallet clustered shortly before separation or filing are visible with their exact timestamps. The report shows what moved, when, and to where, which is the shape of a dissipation argument.
Transfers to an exchange
Where funds reach a fiat exchange, the account holder can usually be identified through legal process. WalletDNA grades these leads in three evidence tiers so you know which are dated direct deposits and which are inferred, before you draft the subpoena.
Movement between wallets the same person controls
Funds shuffled between addresses stay on the ledger. Following the flow outward from a known address commonly surfaces further addresses worth asking about in a deposition.
A wallet that looks dormant but is not
Put an address under monitoring and you get an email within the hour of the next transaction. Useful between the date of separation and trial, when a quiet wallet suddenly is not.
Proving who controls a wallet
A common dispute in family law is not where funds went but whose wallet it is. WalletDNA can send a signing link: the holder signs a challenge message with the wallet's own key, and the signature is verified cryptographically, with the proof, method and timestamp embedded in the report. It works on Ethereum and every EVM chain, Bitcoin, Litecoin, Solana and Tron. It is useful in both directions, to establish control and to rebut a claim of it.
Built for the file
Group every report, trace and monitored wallet under a client matter with a matter number, run a conflict check before opening one, add your commentary, put your firm and bar number on the PDF, and export the matter as one branded file. Your sign-off binds to the report's exact content state and is superseded automatically if anything changes, so a signed exhibit is what you actually reviewed. Anyone holding the report can confirm it is unaltered at walletdna.com/verify, without an account.
Questions
Can a spouse actually hide cryptocurrency in a divorce?
They can try. Crypto is easy to move and does not appear on a bank statement, so it is often left off a financial affidavit. What it is not is invisible. Every transaction on a public blockchain is permanent and readable by anyone. The difficulty is never reading the ledger, it is connecting a wallet address to the person. That link normally comes from discovery, not from the chain.
How do I find out which wallets my spouse controls?
From the record, not from the blockchain. The usual sources are exchange account records obtained by subpoena, tax returns reporting digital asset transactions, bank statements showing transfers to an exchange, device or cloud backups containing a wallet app, and the responses to interrogatories that ask about digital assets by name. Once you have an address from any of those, on-chain analysis takes over.
What can WalletDNA tell me once I have an address?
What the wallet holds now, what it held on a specific date, every counterparty it transacted with, whether funds moved to an exchange where the account holder can be identified through legal process, and whether the balance was moved out shortly before a filing date. Each finding cites the transactions behind it, so the other side can check it.
Can you value the wallet as of the date of separation?
Yes, and this is usually the point in a family law matter. Pick any date and WalletDNA computes the balance held on that day and its USD value, from archive block data on EVM chains or a full history replay on Bitcoin and Litecoin, priced from a stated source. The valuation saves with the report and prints as its own page in the PDF.
Does WalletDNA search for wallets my spouse has not disclosed?
No, and be wary of any service that says it does. There is no lawful search of the blockchain by name. WalletDNA analyzes addresses you already have and follows the money outward from them, which frequently surfaces further addresses the same person controls. Discovery of the first address remains a matter for legal process.
Is this admissible?
That is for the court, and it depends on the jurisdiction and how the evidence is presented. What WalletDNA provides is a report built to survive scrutiny: a published and versioned scoring methodology, every finding traceable to public on-chain data the other side can reproduce, a SHA-256 content hash so the document can be shown to be unaltered, and an optional analyst sign-off bound to the exact content state. Opposing counsel can check the hash at walletdna.com/verify without an account.
Not legal advice
WalletDNA produces blockchain analysis, not legal advice, and nothing here creates an attorney-client relationship. What may lawfully be obtained in discovery, and how digital assets are divided, varies by jurisdiction. Admissibility is determined by the court.
Start with one address
Free to run, across 18 chains. If the matter goes further, the same report carries the valuation, the sign-off and the export.
Analyze an address