MetaMask's total financial responsibility to you for any claim is capped at either what you paid them in the last year or $100, whichever is more, and they are not liable for any indirect losses such as lost profits or lost crypto.
This analysis describes what MetaMask's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
If MetaMask's services cause you to lose significant funds due to a technical failure, error, or other issue, the company's financial exposure is limited to a very small amount, leaving users to bear the majority of any losses.
Interpretive note: The enforceability of the $100 cap on consumer claims is jurisdiction-dependent and may be voided under EU or UK consumer contract law.
This provision means that even if MetaMask's platform causes significant financial harm, users can only recover a capped amount that may be far less than their actual loss, with no recovery available for consequential losses like lost cryptocurrency value.
How other platforms handle this
TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, NEITHER WHATNOT NOR ITS SERVICE PROVIDERS INVOLVED IN CREATING, PRODUCING, OR DELIVERING THE SERVICES WILL BE LIABLE FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, OR DAMAGES FOR LOST PROFITS, LOST REVENUES, LOST SAVINGS, LOST BUSINESS OPPORT...
In no event will either party's aggregate liability arising out of or related to this Agreement exceed the total fees paid or payable by Customer in the twelve (12) months preceding the claim. In no event will either party be liable for any indirect, incidental, special, consequential, or punitive d...
Except as stated in Section L.3.b, the liability of each party, and its affiliates and licensors, for any damages arising out of or related to these Terms (i) excludes damages that are consequential, incidental, special, indirect, or exemplary damages, including lost profits, business, contracts, re...
Monitoring
MetaMask has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 10 platforms.
"TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT WILL CONSENSYS, ITS AFFILIATES, OR THEIR LICENSORS, SERVICE PROVIDERS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, OFFICERS, OR DIRECTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES... IN NO EVENT WILL CONSENSYS'S TOTAL LIABILITY TO YOU FOR ALL CLAIMS EXCEED THE GREATER OF THE AMOUNT PAID BY YOU TO CONSENSYS IN THE TWELVE (12) MONTHS PRECEDING THE CLAIM OR $100.— Excerpt from MetaMask's MetaMask Terms of Use
(1) REGULATORY LANDSCAPE: Broad limitation of liability clauses in consumer-facing financial services agreements engage with FTC unfair and deceptive practices standards and, in the EU, with the Unfair Contract Terms Directive. Where MetaMask's services touch regulated financial activity, applicable financial services regulations may impose minimum liability standards that override contractual caps. (2) GOVERNANCE EXPOSURE: High. The liability cap of $100 or prior 12 months of fees is particularly low relative to the potential financial value at stake in cryptocurrency transactions, which can range into thousands or millions of dollars. This creates a significant asymmetric risk profile for users. (3) JURISDICTION FLAGS: The EU Unfair Contract Terms Directive generally prohibits clauses that inappropriately limit the liability of service providers in consumer contracts. UK consumer rights law similarly restricts exclusion clauses. In these jurisdictions, the cap may be unenforceable or subject to judicial revision. (4) CONTRACT AND VENDOR IMPLICATIONS: B2B or institutional users should not rely on this cap as a basis for their own risk management; the clause is drafted broadly but its enforceability, particularly for gross negligence or fraud, is jurisdiction-dependent. Standard commercial practice in financial services typically includes higher liability floors. (5) COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS: Organizations relying on MetaMask infrastructure for customer-facing services should assess their own indemnification exposure and whether their agreements with end customers need to address the effective absence of upstream recourse against Consensys.
Full compliance analysis
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Free: track 1 platform + weekly digest. Watcher: 10 platforms + same-day alerts. No credit card required.
Professional Governance Intelligence
Need to monitor specific governance provisions?
Professional includes provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, regulatory mapping, and audit-ready analysis.
Built from archived source documents, structured governance mappings, and historical version tracking.
If MetaMask's services cause you to lose significant funds due to a technical failure, error, or other issue, the company's financial exposure is limited to a very small amount, leaving users to bear the majority of any losses.
This provision means that even if MetaMask's platform causes significant financial harm, users can only recover a capped amount that may be far less than their actual loss, with no recovery available for consequential losses like lost cryptocurrency value.
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 228 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by MetaMask.