Quick answer: The Move audit firms with the deepest Aptos and Sui track records in 2026 are OtterSec, MoveBit, Zellic, Certora (for Move Prover formal verification), Adevar Labs and Trail of Bits. Among established multi-chain generalists with Move coverage, Halborn, Hacken, CertiK and Cyfrin are the names to know. The right choice depends on your chain (Aptos and Sui audit differently), whether you need formal verification, and your budget — we break down each firm, who they've audited in the Move ecosystem, and what they cost below.
This guide ranks the leading Move smart contract audit firms of 2026 based on public audit reports, portfolio depth on Aptos and Sui, formal verification capability, and real client engagements. Procur3 is a neutral marketplace and does not accept payment for placement.
💡 Get an instant cost indication for your Move audit, based on $1M+ in audit deals transacted through Procur3 — instant, free, no signup.
Why Move Audits Require a Specialist Team
Move was designed at Meta (originally for Diem) explicitly to prevent whole classes of smart contract bugs. Resources cannot be copied or dropped implicitly. Type safety enforces asset ownership at the compiler level. The result is that many EVM-style vulnerabilities — double-spends, unauthorised transfers, integer overflow of balance state — are structurally harder to write in Move.
But that doesn't mean Move programs are safe. It means the failure modes moved elsewhere. And auditors trained on Solidity or even Rust generally aren't calibrated for what to look for.
Resource lifecycle bugs. A resource can be moved but not duplicated. Miss a move_to or move_from in the wrong order and you can accidentally destroy an asset or leave it dangling. These bugs are subtle, don't show up in Solidity-trained reviewers' checklists, and can be catastrophic when the resource represents user funds.
Capability leaks. Move's capability pattern controls sensitive operations. A leaked capability grants permanent, unreviewable authorisation. Reviewing capability creation and transfer paths is a specific Move discipline.
Aptos vs Sui object model differences. Aptos uses a global storage model where resources live at addresses. Sui uses an object-centric model where each object has a unique ID and can be owned, shared, or immutable. The security properties differ. A firm strong on Aptos may not have the same depth on Sui, and vice versa. Ask candidates for chain-specific reports.
Move Prover formal verification. Move ships with a first-class formal verifier. Firms that can write specifications and prove properties get materially stronger results on financial primitives. This is a real specialism — most Move auditors don't do it, and those who do are worth the premium for high-value protocols.
Framework and package upgrades. Both Aptos and Sui allow programmable module upgrades under specific rules. An audit needs to review not just the code as deployed but the upgrade authority and any migration paths. Firms new to Move often miss this.
The One Rule That Matters Most: Chain-Specific Portfolio
Before any ranking is useful: Move on Aptos and Move on Sui are not the same audit engagement. The language family is shared but the object models, standard libraries, and runtime semantics differ enough that reviewer expertise on one chain does not automatically transfer to the other.
Ask each prospective firm for at least two public reports on your specific chain, and the names of the senior reviewers on your engagement. If they can only produce Aptos reports and you're building on Sui, keep looking.
Best Move-Specialist Audit Firms (2026)
These firms have the deepest, most demonstrated Move portfolios across Aptos and Sui. Rankings reflect Procur3's aggregated view as of August 2026.
A note on method: The firms below reflect what teams shipping serious Move protocols on Aptos and Sui actually rely on, cross-referenced against public reports and portfolios. Procur3's Auditor Dashboard tracks live audit counts, findings, chains and incident history so this comparison stays current.
OtterSec — Deepest Move Portfolio Across Both Chains
Beyond their Solana leadership, OtterSec has one of the largest Move portfolios in the industry, covering major protocols on both Aptos and Sui. Public reports include work across Aptos DeFi and Sui-native protocols such as Cetus and Aries Markets, plus core-infrastructure reviews. Their engineering team includes multiple senior reviewers with production Move experience, and their reports cover resource-lifecycle bugs at a level of detail Solidity-trained firms usually miss.
Best fit for: Serious Move protocols on either Aptos or Sui, especially DeFi interacting with core ecosystem programs.
MoveBit — The Move-Native Specialist
MoveBit is Move-native — the firm was built for it. Its public portfolio spans the Aptos and Sui ecosystems, including work associated with the Aptos Foundation, PancakeSwap on Aptos, Thala, and a range of Move-language DeFi protocols. If you want a team whose entire practice is Aptos and Sui, and whose reviewers have shipped Move code themselves, MoveBit is the specialist choice. Smaller bench than the multi-chain giants, but deeper Move-specific expertise per reviewer.
Best fit for: Teams prioritising Move-first specialism over multi-chain breadth.
Zellic — Move Fluency Plus Adjacent-Chain Depth
Zellic has audited significant protocols on Aptos (including infrastructure components) and Sui DeFi. Their reports include architectural analysis alongside issue lists, which helps when your protocol layers non-trivial economic logic on top of the Move modules. A strong choice when you want a firm with broad Move fluency plus experience across neighbouring ecosystems.
Best fit for: Aptos infrastructure or Sui DeFi with cross-chain or complex economic components.
Certora — Move Prover Formal Verification
Move Prover formal verification is one of Certora's specialisms. If your Move protocol contains critical invariants — a lending market, a stablecoin, a settlement engine — Certora can produce mathematical proofs of correctness alongside a manual review, focusing on the financial primitives where a single class of bug could drain the treasury. Longer engagement, higher cost, materially stronger guarantee.
Best fit for: High-value Move protocols with invariants worth mathematically proving.
Adevar Labs — Boutique Move & Multi-Chain Reviews
Adevar Labs is a boutique security firm on Procur3 with Move capability alongside broader smart-contract coverage. For smaller Aptos or Sui engagements — or as a senior second-opinion reviewer beside a larger firm — a boutique like Adevar can offer close attention and competitive pricing. Check their profile for current portfolio and request recent Move reports before engaging.
Best fit for: Smaller Move engagements, or a boutique second review alongside a primary audit.
Trail of Bits — Systems Security & Formal Methods
Trail of Bits has substantial systems-security and formal-methods experience relevant to Move. Fewer public Move engagements than the Move-native firms, but for protocols where the security model interacts with cryptography, cross-chain messaging, or novel consensus, Trail of Bits brings adjacent expertise that specialists may lack.
Best fit for: Move protocols with cryptographic components or novel consensus assumptions.
Established General Web3 Audit Firms (with Move Coverage)
These are large, well-known multi-chain firms. Move is one of several practices rather than their core specialism — but their scale, reporting maturity and brand recognition make them a strong fit for larger engagements or teams that need an audit certificate recognised by exchanges and investors. Always ask for chain-specific Move reports before engaging.
Halborn — Scale for Larger Move Engagements
Halborn has one of the largest audit portfolios in Web3 and a Move practice within its broader multi-chain coverage. Suitable for larger engagements where you want a firm that can staff multiple senior reviewers concurrently, and for teams needing coordinated audits across Move plus EVM or Solana components.
Best fit for: Multi-chain protocols needing coordinated review across Move + EVM/Solana.
Hacken — Broad Multi-Chain, Aptos & Sui Coverage
Hacken runs a broad multi-chain practice that includes Aptos and Sui coverage, pairing manual review with automated tooling. A reasonable choice for straightforward Move DeFi engagements at competitive rates, and for teams that value a widely recognised brand on the final report.
Best fit for: Standard Move DeFi engagements where brand recognition and price both matter.
CertiK — Large-Scale Multi-Chain Assurance
CertiK is one of the highest-volume audit firms in Web3, with Aptos and Sui among the many ecosystems it covers. Its scale and continuous-monitoring products suit teams that want a large, well-known firm and ongoing on-chain monitoring after the audit. As with any generalist, confirm the senior reviewers on your engagement have specific Move experience.
Best fit for: Teams wanting a large brand-name firm plus post-audit monitoring.
Cyfrin — EVM-Leading, Expanding Coverage
Cyfrin is best known for elite EVM private-audit depth, with senior reviewers who rank at the top of competitive leaderboards. Their public Move footprint is lighter than the Move-native specialists, so if you engage them for an Aptos or Sui protocol, ask specifically about Move-experienced reviewers and recent Move reports. A strong option when your stack spans EVM and Move and you want continuity across both.
Best fit for: Teams with a primarily EVM stack extending into Move who want one firm across both.
Also Worth Considering
Depending on the engagement, several other firms are worth shortlisting:
- Verichains — has audited multiple Move projects across Aptos and Sui, with strong DEX and lending coverage. Solid mid-market choice.
- Beosin — a large multi-chain firm whose Move practice has expanded significantly since 2024. Ask for Move-specific reports before engaging.
- Sherlock — its competitive-audit and coverage model is expanding to Move; useful if you want post-audit economic coverage staked against critical bugs.
Every firm named above (and 60+ others) is trackable on the Procur3 auditor dashboard, where you can compare on audit count, findings, chains and incident history.
What a Move Audit Actually Costs
There is no flat rate. Move audit pricing scales with five variables:
Codebase size (NSLOC). Auditors quote against non-blank source lines. A single Move module is very different from a multi-module protocol suite.
Scope complexity. A vanilla token module prices very differently from a lending market with liquidations or an orderbook DEX with settlement logic. Complexity is where the real spread lives — even at the same NSLOC.
Chain. Aptos and Sui price similarly on average, though Sui's object-centric model can add scoping time on complex protocols. Both carry a premium over Solidity because the qualified Move reviewer pool is smaller.
Formal verification. Adding Move Prover work (typically via Certora) increases cost meaningfully, but delivers a materially stronger guarantee on critical invariants.
Timeline and firm utilisation. A firm with an idle team next month quotes differently from the same firm three weeks earlier. Compressed timelines add a premium; flexible start dates earn discounts.
Because these variables compound, the same Move protocol can quote 3–5x apart across equally credible firms. The only reliable way to price your specific scope is to get real, competitive quotes.
Two-step path that works:
- Get an instant cost indication — priced against $1M+ in audit deals transacted through Procur3. Instant, free, no signup.
- Post the same specs as an RFP on Procur3 — real competitive quotes from matched Move firms, usually within the hour.
Both free for builders.
For a full breakdown of what drives audit price across the industry, see Smart Contract Audit Cost in 2026: Real Prices, Real Ranges.
How to Choose Between Them
Chain: Aptos or Sui? Ask each firm for at least two public reports on your specific chain. Sui's object model in particular rewards reviewers who've actively shipped programs on it.
Formal verification: needed or nice-to-have? For protocols where a single class of bug could destroy the treasury (lending, stablecoins, bridges), Move Prover work is worth the cost. For simpler protocols, a strong manual review from a Move specialist is usually sufficient.
Specialist or generalist? Move-native firms (OtterSec, MoveBit) bring the deepest per-reviewer expertise. Established generalists (Halborn, Hacken, CertiK) bring scale, brand recognition and multi-chain coordination. Match the choice to whether your priority is depth or breadth.
Budget and timeline. Get real quotes rather than guessing — start with the calculator, then compare live bids on Procur3.
Post-audit incident record. Move's design has kept incident rates lower than EVM historically, but not zero. Check each firm's portfolio for post-audit exploits and whether the exploited component was in scope. Procur3 aggregates this on every firm's profile.
The Smartest Move: Get Competitive Quotes
Instead of running a two-week vendor search — cold emails, calendar tag, redoing the scope conversation with each firm — post your Move audit scope once on Procur3. Every firm above is on the platform (or invitable). You'll receive competitive quotes in hours, side-by-side on price, timeline, team assigned, methodology, and Move-specific experience.
Free for projects.
Post your Aptos or Sui audit RFP on Procur3 →
Frequently Asked Questions
How much does a Move smart contract audit cost in 2026? There is no flat rate — cost scales with codebase size, scope complexity, chain, whether you add formal verification, and timeline. Move audits carry a premium over Solidity because the qualified reviewer pool is smaller, and Move Prover formal verification adds further cost. Use the free calculator for an indicative range on your specific scope.
How long does a Move audit take? Typically two to five weeks depending on codebase size and complexity. Add another two to four weeks if you want Move Prover formal verification alongside manual review.
Are Solidity or Rust auditors qualified to audit my Move program? Occasionally, when the firm has invested in Move training. Most of the time, no. Move's resource semantics, capability model and chain-specific object systems require reviewer experience that only comes from shipping Move code. Ask any firm for a public Move report on your chain before signing.
Should I use Move Prover formal verification? For protocols where a single bug could drain the treasury — lending, stablecoins, bridges, settlement — yes. It's expensive but the guarantee is materially stronger. For simpler protocols, a rigorous manual review from a Move specialist is generally sufficient.
Which is easier to audit — Aptos or Sui? Neither is meaningfully easier. They have different failure modes. Aptos's global-storage model is closer to what most reviewers have seen elsewhere. Sui's object-centric model is more novel and rewards reviewers who've actively worked with it. Choose auditors by chain-specific portfolio, not by "which is easier."
How do I know if I'm being over- or under-quoted for a Move audit? Start with the audit cost calculator to see the market range for your scope. When real quotes come back through an RFP on Procur3, you can immediately see which are competitive and which sit above or below the market. Both tools are free.