Mass Adoption Is Only Meaningful If It Preserves the Core Values of Bitcoin: Interview with Trezor CEO

Over a relatively short period of time, the Bitcoin industry has come a long way — from an idea for a fairly narrow circle of enthusiasts to a global financial phenomenon. However, as the audience has expanded, institutional players and regulators have entered the crypto space, while users still overwhelmingly keep their assets on centralized platforms.

About whether the original ideas of Bitcoin — such as decentralization, independence from intermediaries, and control over one’s own funds — have been lost in this evolution, we spoke with Matej Žák, CEO of Trezor, a pioneer of hardware Bitcoin wallets and one of the main advocates of the self-custody model.

In this interview, we talk about how the industry has changed and how the hardware wallet market is maturing, as well as quantum threats, artificial intelligence, and why centralized platforms remain the main «entry point» into the world of crypto.

You joined Trezor in 2019 and have come a long way — from Product Manager to CEO. Yet even before that, you worked on projects connected to digital and tech innovation. How did your journey with Bitcoin begin?

Before joining Trezor in 2019, I worked on several tech and digital projects — mostly in product and innovation roles. That background gave me a practical sense of how good ideas are translated into real, usable tools — and how important it is to focus on what brings long-term value to people.

I first encountered Bitcoin as part of that exploration — not just as a technology, but as a shift in how we think about ownership, responsibility, and trust. The idea of individuals being able to verify and control their assets directly, without intermediaries, was something that immediately resonated with me.

When I joined Trezor, it felt like a natural extension of those values. And over time, as I moved from Product Manager to CPO to CEO, I’ve seen how powerful this model can be — when users have the tools and confidence to be fully in control. That principle continues to guide everything we do. We are a product driven company.

How do you assess the evolution of the crypto market over the years? In your view, has the industry drifted far from Satoshi’s original vision, or is this just a natural stage of its evolution?

The crypto market has changed a lot over the years — and that’s inevitable. As adoption grows, the ecosystem naturally becomes more complex. We now have a wide spectrum of participants: from individual users and developers to large financial institutions, each with different motivations and goals.

Some of that evolution clearly drifts away from Satoshi’s original vision — especially when we see increasing reliance on custodial platforms or closed, opaque systems. But at the same time, the core principles haven’t disappeared. In fact, we see a growing awareness around privacy, self-custody, and decentralization — especially in response to failures or overreach in more centralized parts of the system.

I see this as a necessary stage — not a betrayal, but a tension that’s always going to exist in an open ecosystem. What matters is that people still have the tools and the freedom to opt into the original vision — to hold their own keys, to verify, and to transact without permission.

Our role at Trezor is to make sure that path remains open — and accessible — no matter how the rest of the industry evolves.

Why do so many users still prefer centralized exchanges for storing their funds? Would it be fair to say that convenience — or even laziness — has won over the desire for true financial freedom? Peter Todd told us earlier that Bitcoin and non-custodial solutions are «for adults», since they require responsibility. Do you agree with that point of view?

There’s a reason centralized exchanges remain popular — they’re convenient, familiar, and often the default starting point. For many users, especially those new to crypto, that convenience outweighs the perceived complexity of self-custody. I wouldn’t call it laziness — it’s more about habits and mental models that come from traditional finance, where someone else is always in charge.

Peter Todd’s point is valid: self-custody does require a certain level of responsibility. But I don’t think it should be seen as something «only for experts» or «for adults». Our job — as a company and educators — is to reduce friction and help people feel confident stepping into that role.

At Trezor, we believe true financial freedom comes with understanding and control. That’s why we focus not just on building secure hardware, but on making the entire experience more intuitive — and on providing the education to back it up.

Do institutional players help the industry’s development and Bitcoin’s mass adoption — or do they actually contradict its original idea?

Institutional involvement in Bitcoin is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it brings visibility, infrastructure, and legitimacy — which can accelerate adoption and integration with the broader financial system. For many people, their first exposure to Bitcoin may now come through a regulated product or a familiar institution.

But on the other hand, there’s a risk that this convenience comes at the cost of the original principles: self-custody, decentralization, and individual control. If Bitcoin adoption happens only through custodial platforms or financial products, we end up recreating the same trust-based model that Bitcoin was designed to move away from.

So yes, institutions can support adoption — but the question is how. At Trezor, we believe it’s critical to ensure that users still have the option, and the understanding, to hold their own keys and verify things independently. Because mass adoption is only meaningful if it preserves the core values that made Bitcoin worth adopting in the first place.

A broader question — many believe that in the «freedom versus security» dilemma, most people have already made their choice by giving control of their personal data to corporations and governments. Do you agree?

It’s true that, in many areas of life, people have traded privacy for convenience — often without fully realizing it. Whether it’s social media, e-commerce, or even financial services, centralized platforms have normalized a model where control over personal data is handed over in exchange for ease of use.

But I don’t think the choice is final — or irreversible. The fact that Bitcoin exists, and continues to grow, shows that there’s still a strong demand for systems that don’t rely on trust in institutions. And when people experience even a small breach of that trust — a hack, a blocked account, a frozen withdrawal — they often start looking for alternatives.

At Trezor, we see that shift happening all the time. Once users understand that they can take back control — not just of their money, but of their digital identity and data — it’s often a transformative moment. The challenge is to make that option visible, accessible, and usable for more people.

How do you personally define the right balance between security, convenience, and privacy?

Security, privacy, usability that need to be in balance. Famous sentence in the industry: Security that comes at a cost of usability, comes at the cost of security. Or in other words, if the user experience sucks badly, user are more likely to make mistakes. And we are here to navigate that fine balance to make sure users are secure but the products are super easy to use (as they are).

How is the hardware wallet segment evolving today? What does competition look like, and is the user base of such devices growing or becoming more niche?

The hardware wallet segment is maturing — and becoming more diverse at the same time. We’re seeing increased interest from both newcomers who want a safer entry point into crypto, and from experienced users looking for advanced control and flexibility.

The market itself is expanding, but not uniformly. Some users still opt for simple custodial apps, while others are moving toward more robust self-custody. What’s encouraging is that awareness around private key ownership is growing — especially in light of recent events where centralized platforms failed to protect user assets.

Education plays a big role here. Through initiatives like Trezor Academy and the Trezor Expert program, we’re helping more people build confidence in using self-custody tools — not just buying them. That’s an important part of making this space more inclusive and sustainable.

As for competition, we welcome it. It means more people are thinking seriously about security. At Trezor, we continue to prioritize open-source hardware, transparency, and verifiability over speed or flashy features. That approach may not be the fastest to scale, but it builds the kind of long-term trust we believe this space needs.

So while some might still see hardware wallets as niche, we see them becoming more essential — especially as people realize that true ownership in crypto means holding your own keys, not just holding a balance.

How are hardware wallets themselves evolving? What development vectors do you see for this product category — and where is Trezor focused right now?

As more people enter the world of crypto, the need to keep digital assets truly secure becomes clearer. Online platforms and apps may offer convenience, but they also introduce risks — from hacks to frozen withdrawals. That’s why hardware wallets matter. And today, they’re no longer just niche tools for tech-savvy users. They’re evolving into intuitive, accessible devices that anyone can use — offering not just secure offline storage, but a full self-custody experience: from staking and swapping to mobile access and education, all without giving up control.

At Trezor, we see three main vectors driving this evolution. First, usability — removing friction so more people feel confident using self-custody tools. That’s why we introduced features like wireless connectivity and a large touchscreen in Trezor Safe 7.

Second, openness — we’re committed to open-source hardware and software. That transparency lets users and security experts verify how everything works. It’s not about asking for trust — it’s about making trust unnecessary.

And third, education — because no tool is truly secure if people don’t know how to use it. Through initiatives like Trezor Academy and Trezor Expert, we’re helping users around the world build that confidence.

Our focus now is to keep bridging the gap between usability and sovereignty — making it easier for people to take control of their crypto, with tools they understand and trust.

Could you share some numbers — how many users does Trezor currently have? Are they mostly retail clients, or do you also work with institutions in some form?

We’ve sold over 2 million devices globally, and the vast majority of our users are individual, retail clients. That aligns with our core mission — empowering people to take control of their digital assets directly, without relying on third parties.

While our products are sometimes used by professionals or within institutional settings, we don’t offer institutional custody solutions. Our focus remains on self-custody tools designed for individuals — tools that are open-source, transparent, and verifiable.

How do you view the current trends in crypto regulation across Europe? Many lawmakers treat self-custody as something «dangerous» or even suspicious. Do you think this segment will eventually be regulated?

We’re seeing a growing regulatory focus on crypto across Europe, and that in itself isn’t a bad thing. Clear rules can help protect consumers and create a more stable environment for innovation. But the concern arises when self-custody — the most transparent and empowering part of the ecosystem — is misunderstood or treated with suspicion.

Self-custody doesn’t mean hiding or avoiding responsibility. On the contrary, it’s about taking full ownership — something that aligns with many of the EU’s own digital sovereignty principles. Unfortunately, because it operates outside of traditional financial intermediaries, it’s sometimes seen as harder to regulate, and therefore «risky» by default.

Whether or not self-custody will be regulated directly remains to be seen. What’s important is that regulators distinguish between different types of actors in the space — and recognize that tools like Trezor are designed to remove reliance on third parties, not enable abuse.

At Trezor, we’re open to dialogue and support smart regulation — but we also believe it’s crucial to preserve the individual’s right to hold and manage their own assets, independently and securely.

Despite the war, Ukraine remains one of the most active countries in terms of crypto adoption. Do you have any plans or initiatives aimed at the Ukrainian community?

We don’t currently run market-specific campaigns in Ukraine, but we engage with the local community through media and conferences. During the war, we donated over €1 million in bitcoin to support humanitarian aid for Ukrainians.

Recently, Trezor introduced its new device, the Trezor Safe 7. It is stated that it is already equipped with technologies designed to counter future quantum threats. What exactly does this mean and how is it implemented? And what other features does the new wallet have?

Quantum computing is still a developing field, but at Trezor we believe in staying ahead of the curve — especially when it comes to long-term security. With Trezor Safe 7, we’ve laid the groundwork for future resilience by supporting key generation based on SLIP-21, a standard that’s compatible with emerging quantum-resistant cryptographic schemes.

This doesn’t mean we’re claiming «quantum-proof» protection today — no one can. But it does mean that once the time comes to adopt quantum-safe algorithms, users won’t need to migrate to new hardware. Their Trezor Safe 7 will already be ready.

Beyond that, the device includes several upgrades focused on usability and accessibility. It’s our first hardware wallet with a large color touchscreen and wireless connectivity. It also ships with the auditable TROPIC01 secure element — a custom chip that allows both strong physical protection and open verification, something that’s traditionally been mutually exclusive in this space.

The goal with Trezor Safe 7 wasn’t just to add more features — it was to remove friction for users, while staying true to the principles of open-source, transparent, and independent self-custody.

Everyone seems to be talking about AI right now. Do you plan to integrate AI-driven solutions into Trezor’s operations or products?

Absolutely — AI is becoming as foundational today as the internet was two decades ago. Ignoring its potential would be shortsighted. At Trezor, we’re already using AI across multiple areas: from programming and content creation to research and customer support. It’s a powerful tool that helps us work more efficiently, but we remain mindful of where and how we use it — especially when it comes to privacy and security, which are core to our mission.