Crypto chart of accounts template
A starter chart of accounts for entities holding or transacting in digital assets, covering the accounts crypto activity actually needs and the ones teams most often leave out. Adapt it to your entity's existing structure rather than bolting it on alongside.
General information, not legal, accounting or tax advice. Account structure and treatment depend on your reporting framework and documented policies. Confirm with a qualified advisor.
About account codes
This template deliberately contains no account codes or numbers. Every entity numbers its own chart according to its own structure, its group reporting requirements and the constraints of its general ledger system, so a code invented here would be wrong everywhere. Insert your own numbering in the ranges your existing chart already uses: crypto asset accounts belong in your asset range, realised gains and losses in your income and expense ranges, and so on. What this template gives you is the set of accounts and the reasoning behind each one.
How to read and adapt the columns
- Account. The account name. Rename freely to match your existing conventions, but keep the distinctions intact: the separations in this list exist because the two things behave differently, not for tidiness.
- Type. One of asset, liability, equity, income or expense. This drives where the account lands in the statements and should not be changed when you rename an account.
- What it holds. The population of transactions that belong in the account. Use this as the posting rule: if a transaction does not fit the description, it belongs somewhere else, and if nothing fits, you are missing an account.
- Notes. The judgement or policy attached to the account, including where treatment depends on your framework or your documented policy. These are the points to settle once, write down, and then apply consistently.
- Add your own code column. Insert a code or number column at the left in the numbering scheme your general ledger already uses. Do not adopt a scheme from a template.
- Add a mapping column if you consolidate. Where a subsidiary chart differs from group, carry the group account alongside so the mapping is visible in the chart rather than held in someone's head.
Starter chart of accounts for crypto activity
| Account | Type | What it holds | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Digital assets held | Asset | The carrying amount of all digital assets the entity controls, at cost basis or fair value depending on the measurement basis applied. | The control account. Balances here must reconcile to the sub-ledger detail and to observable on-chain and exchange holdings at each cut-off. |
| Digital assets by wallet or venue | Asset | Sub-accounts of the control account, one per self-custodied wallet, exchange account or custody arrangement. | Keep these as sub-accounts rather than independent accounts, so the total still ties. Essential for per-venue reconciliation and for evidencing address ownership. |
| Digital assets, stablecoins or cash equivalents | Asset | Holdings the entity classifies separately from other digital assets because of their intended stability or use in settlement. | Whether such a holding may be presented as a cash equivalent depends on the framework and the instrument. Do not assume the label determines the classification. Confirm with your advisor. |
| Realised gain on digital assets | Income | Gains recognised on disposal, being proceeds less the cost basis relieved, where positive. | Kept separate from losses so the gross figures are visible. Netting at the account level hides the disposal activity behind a single number. |
| Realised loss on digital assets | Expense | Losses recognised on disposal, being proceeds less the cost basis relieved, where negative. | The counterpart to the gain account. The split between the two accounts is driven by the cost-basis method applied to each disposal. |
| Digital asset income | Income | Value received as staking rewards, mining rewards, airdrops and similar receipts, recognised at value on receipt. | The receipt value normally becomes the cost basis of the asset received, so the same value is not recognised twice on later disposal. Consider sub-accounts by income type where volumes justify it. |
| Impairment or remeasurement of digital assets | Expense | Period-end adjustments to carrying amount that are not disposals: impairment write-downs, or remeasurement movements under a fair value basis. | Which of these applies, and whether a write-down can be reversed, follows the framework and the classification of the asset. See IFRS and US GAAP. |
| Network and gas fees | Expense | Fees paid to a network to execute a transaction, where they are expensed rather than added to the cost of an asset. | A fee paid to acquire generally raises cost basis instead of landing here. Note also that a gas fee settled in the native token is itself a small disposal of that token. |
| Exchange and trading fees | Expense | Commissions and trading fees charged by exchanges, brokers and other venues, where expensed. | Kept separate from network fees because they are a service cost rather than a protocol cost, and because they are usually charged in fiat or in the traded asset. |
| Digital asset payable or custody obligation | Liability | Obligations to deliver digital assets, including customer balances held by a business that transacts on behalf of others. | Only relevant where the entity holds assets for third parties. If it applies, the distinction between own and customer assets must be maintained rigorously. |
The distinctions worth keeping
Two fee accounts, not one
Network fees and exchange fees are collapsed into a single account more often than any other simplification on this list, and it costs analytical visibility immediately. They have different drivers, they respond to different decisions, and one of them is frequently paid in the native token, which makes its settlement a disposal in its own right. Keep them apart.
Gross gains and gross losses
Recording realised gains and realised losses in one net account destroys the picture of disposal activity. Two accounts cost nothing to maintain when the postings come from a sub-ledger, and they let a reviewer see the gross movement behind a net figure.
Sub-accounts by venue, under one control account
Per-venue visibility is what makes the quantity reconciliation possible, but the venue accounts must roll up to a single control account. Independent accounts per wallet, with no parent, produce a balance sheet that nobody can tie to holdings.
Income at receipt value, carried as basis
The income account and the asset account are linked: the value recognised as income on receipt is the value the asset carries into the cost-basis ledger. Break that link and the same value is recognised twice, once as income and again as gain on disposal.
Putting it to work
A chart of accounts is only useful if postings arrive against it consistently. That mapping is what a crypto sub-ledger holds centrally: each event type routes to the same accounts every time, so a disposal always sends proceeds, basis relief and gain or loss to the same three places, and the period postings reaching the general ledger are already mapped. The standard posting patterns behind each account are set out in the journal entries guide, and the method that determines which lots a disposal consumes is covered in cost-basis methods.
Need help adapting this template to your ledger and close process? Review the scoped implementation service and its stated boundaries before requesting a conversation.
General information, not legal, accounting or tax advice. Account structure and treatment depend on your reporting framework and documented policies. Confirm with a qualified advisor.
FAQ
Why does the template not include account codes?
Because every entity numbers its own chart according to its existing structure, its group reporting and its general ledger system. Insert your own codes in the ranges your chart already uses. The template supplies the set of accounts, not the numbering.
Should network fees and exchange fees share one account?
No. They have different drivers, and network fees are often settled in the native token, which makes the payment a small disposal of that token in its own right. Keeping them separate preserves analytical visibility.
Do we need a separate account per wallet?
Per-venue sub-accounts under a single control account are worth having, because they make the quantity reconciliation to observable holdings possible. They should roll up to one control account rather than standing independently.