OxaPay vs NOWPayments

One and a half percent against one#

OxaPay publishes 1.5% on merchant invoices, 1.5% on payment links, 2% on white label and 2% plus a fixed amount on static addresses. NOWPayments publishes a flat 1% and nothing else.

The advertised 0.4% floor on the first card is reachable on negotiation and is not what a new merchant pays. This comparison uses sign-up rates on both sides.

Neither publishes a conversion spread or a payout cost, so both totals have the same two components missing. On what is published, the flat rate is a third cheaper.

Six prices against one#

Publishing a separate figure for each product is more specific than most of this index manages, and it includes the awkward ones: deposits at 1% once cumulative receipts pass twenty thousand dollars, and a fixed component on static addresses.

A single flat rate is easier to model and hides nothing by construction, because there is only one product line priced.

At seventy-nine percent disclosure against sixty-eight, the more expensive card publishes more of the fields this index tracks. Paying more for better information is a real trade and not an obvious one.

Twenty assets against three hundred and fifty#

This is the widest gap on the page. Twenty across eleven networks including Polygon, Solana, Monero and TON, against more than three hundred and fifty across seven.

Network breadth actually favours the narrower catalogue: eleven named chains against seven, including Monero and TON, which very few providers here carry.

So the choice is a long asset list on fewer rails against a short one on more. A merchant should check the specific chains their customers use rather than either total.

Custody separates them structurally#

One holds the balance, which is what makes internal transfers free and static addresses possible. The other is non-custodial, with settlement reaching a wallet the merchant controls.

Static addresses in particular do not survive a move to a non-custodial provider, and merchants whose customers have saved a payment address should check that before switching anything.

The custody guide sets out the trade. It is the one line on this page that cannot be revisited at renewal.

No documents against no statement#

One card states that signup needs no documents and no delays. The other records merchant verification as undisclosed after checking.

A published claim is checkable and a silence is not, which is why the onboarding scores separate as they do rather than through any judgement about which policy is preferable.

Neither statement covers what happens at volume. Ask both what triggers a review after onboarding, because that is when it hurts.

White label priced against white label absent#

A branded checkout at a published 2% against a card that records white label as unpublished. This is the only place in this index where the branding premium is a number.

Fifty basis points over the standard rate is a small, legible premium. Everywhere else in this category the tier is documented and priced in conversation, if at all.

For a reseller that single line may outweigh the rate difference, since an unknown premium at a cheaper provider can easily exceed a known one at a dearer.

Two plugins against none#

WooCommerce and WHMCS on one side, no named ecommerce integrations at all on the other. Two is thin and it beats zero.

WHMCS is the pointed choice, since it is the billing system most hosting resellers run and its presence says more about the customer base than any marketing page.

For a shop owner neither shelf is generous, and the WooCommerce list covers the providers that have done more of this work.

Product surface is close#

Mass payouts, point of sale and hosted invoicing appear on both. Recurring billing is documented on the non-custodial card and unpublished on the other.

Fiat settlement is unpublished on both, so a business pricing in euros arranges conversion separately either way.

That leaves white label and recurring billing as the two product lines that actually differ, and they point at different customers.

How the totals land#

Coverage decides it: nine against six, at twenty-five weight. The flat-rate card takes one of the highest totals in this index largely on that criterion.

Onboarding runs the other way, rewarding a published no-documents claim over an unstated process. Cost favours the flat rate on the published numbers.

Integrations are level and low. Neither is a card a shop owner should choose for its plugin shelf.

Where this pair actually lands#

A hosting reseller or digital-goods seller that wants to be live today, settle in crypto and never open a verification file takes the per-product card and pays half again as much for the privilege.

A merchant meeting unpredictable customers takes the flat-rate card, keeps its own keys, and gets seventeen times the assets at a third less.

A business that needs branded checkout with a knowable premium has exactly one option here, and it is not the cheaper one.

What happens to a static address after a move#

Customers who have saved a fixed payment address will keep sending to it long after an integration changes, and on a custodial provider that address belongs to the provider rather than to you.

A non-custodial replacement issues addresses from a key you control, which is better in every respect except this one: the old saved address stops working and nobody tells the payer.

Plan a notification and a grace period if returning customers pay to a stored address. It is the single most common avoidable loss when moving between these two shapes.