Missing words
One or more positions in a 12-, 18- or 24-word phrase are blank, smudged or were never written down.
A recovery phrase with a few missing or uncertain words is often solvable; a phrase that is entirely gone is not. The difference is combinatorics, and it can be estimated before any work begins.
BIP39 phrases are not arbitrary text. Every word comes from a fixed 2048-word list, and the final word encodes a checksum over the rest. That structure eliminates most nonsense combinations immediately, and every surviving candidate can be tested by deriving addresses and comparing them with an address you know belonged to the wallet.
This is what makes partial recovery a search rather than a guess. With one unknown word the candidate set is trivial. With two or three it is still well within reach of ordinary hardware. Beyond that the space grows by roughly three orders of magnitude per missing word, and it quickly stops being a computing problem and becomes an impossibility.
Word order is a related but separate case: if all words are present and only the sequence is wrong, the checksum and address verification usually narrow it down efficiently, especially when parts of the order are certain.
One or more positions in a 12-, 18- or 24-word phrase are blank, smudged or were never written down.
Words exist on paper but cannot be read with certainty — a candidate-set problem rather than a blank one.
All words are known but the sequence was recorded incorrectly or the paper was cut and reassembled.
The wallet rejects the phrase outright, usually meaning one word is wrong rather than the whole phrase being lost.
The phrase is accepted but shows no funds — commonly a derivation path, passphrase or wallet-type mismatch.
The optional extra word that creates a hidden wallet, where the 12/24 words alone show an empty account.
Realistically, no. Each unknown word multiplies the candidate space by 2048; six unknown words is on the order of 10^19 combinations before checksum filtering, which no practical hardware can search against a slow derivation function.
It means the checksum does not match. Most often a single word was misread or misspelled — 'gauge' and 'guage', or two visually similar words. This is one of the more tractable cases.
Not necessarily. The same seed produces different addresses under different derivation paths and address types. Scanning the standard paths for the wallet software in question often locates the funds.
Yes, in many cases. Full 12-word permutation is astronomically large, but real cases almost always have partial ordering knowledge, and the checksum plus address verification prune the space dramatically.
Describe the wallet, what happened and what information you still have. You will get an honest assessment of whether recovery is technically feasible — without sending any secret credentials.
Assess My Seed Phrase Case