Ranked #4 of 46 · checked 2026-08-31
CoinPayments review
CoinPayments scores 7.4 of 10 on this index and ranks #4 of 46. Processing starts at a published 0.5%. It publishes no asset count. Verification is not disclosed. It publishes 58% of the fields tracked here.
Long-running processor split-priced between coins and tokens, with batch withdrawals.
- Score
- 7.4/10
- Processing from
- 0.5%
- Assets listed
- —
- Merchant verification
- Not disclosed
- Custody
- Custodial
- Discloses
- 58%
CoinPayments at a glance
Provider site| Processing from | 0.5% |
|---|---|
| Conversion | |
| Payouts | |
| Assets listed | |
| Networks | Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, Tron, BNB Chain |
| Merchant verification | Not disclosed |
| Custody | Custodial, the provider holds funds before settlement |
| Jurisdiction | Not stated on the provider's public pages |
| Operating since | 2013 |
| Integrations |
A dash means the provider does not publish the figure, not that we did not look. Fee figures come from the provider's own pricing page.
What can CoinPayments do?
Verticals the provider names publicly: ecommerce, saas, igaming.
How does CoinPayments score?
Weights| Criterion | Weight | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Assets, networks and geography How many assets and chains are live for merchants, and in which markets settlement actually works. | 25 | 8 |
| All-in cost Processing percentage, conversion spread and payout cost taken together, not the headline number alone. | 25 | 8 |
| Onboarding and verification What a merchant must submit before going live, how long it takes, and which verticals are refused outright. | 20 | 6 |
| Integrations and API Maintained plugins, API surface, webhook reliability and whether a developer can reach a test transaction from public docs alone. | 18 | 8 |
| Support and operations Reachable channels, published response commitments, and documented handling of underpayment and wrong-network sends. | 12 | 6 |
| Weighted total | 7.4 |
CoinPayments across the five criteria
Scored 0–10 · weighted total 7.4
Where it is strong
- Batch withdrawals are reported to cut network costs substantially for merchants paying out often.
- Operating since 2013, with plugin coverage across six named platforms.
- No minimum volume, no contract and no setup fee, per the provider's own marketing pages.
Where it is weak
- Coins and tokens are priced differently, so a stablecoin-heavy merchant pays roughly double the headline rate.
- The pricing page did not resolve at the time of checking, so figures here rest on secondary sources.
On this page
Split pricing, and who it actually helps#
Coins price at 0.5% and tokens at 1%. Since stablecoins are tokens and stablecoins carry most merchant volume, the effective rate for a typical merchant is 1%, which matches the flat-rate competitors rather than beating them.
The lower figure is real for a business taking payment predominantly in Bitcoin or Litecoin, and that describes a minority of the merchants who will read the headline. Check your own asset mix before assuming which number applies to you, because the answer flips the comparison.
Batch withdrawals, and why they do not show up in rate comparisons#
Grouping outbound transactions shares the per-transaction network overhead across recipients instead of paying it repeatedly. For a business paying out to many people regularly that is a substantial saving, and it appears in no processing-rate comparison anywhere.
Whether it matters to you is a question about direction rather than volume. A merchant only taking money in gains nothing from it. One paying four hundred affiliates every month gains more from it than from any plausible difference in processing rate. Mass payouts covers what else to test in that case.
Twelve years, and a pricing page that did not resolve#
Operating since 2013 with plugin coverage across six named platforms is a real track record, and it sits oddly next to a pricing page that failed to serve when this card was compiled. The figures here therefore rest on secondary sources, and the card records that rather than presenting them as confirmed.
That combination puts disclosure at 58%, below the index average. It is worth checking the page yourself before shortlisting, since a temporary failure and a permanent absence are different findings and only one of them is a mark against the provider.
What to establish#
Which of your assets price at which tier, since that decides your real rate. The conversion spread, which is unpublished as it is nearly everywhere here. And whether batch withdrawal has a minimum or a cap that would affect how you actually use it.
The fees guide covers assembling those into a comparable total.
How this card scores where it does#
Coverage and cost score well, and integrations score on six named platforms. The figures behind cost come from secondary reporting because the pricing page did not resolve, which the cons record explicitly.
Disclosure sits at 58%, below the index average. That gap between a good score and a modest disclosure figure is exactly the pattern the method separates the two numbers to expose.
Who should not choose this#
A stablecoin-heavy merchant attracted by the 0.5% headline, since tokens price at 1% and the advantage evaporates at the exact point most merchants sit.
A business that needs to confirm terms at source before committing. Until the pricing page resolves, everything here needs a written quote to be actionable.
Working out your own effective rate#
Take your last month of payments and split them by asset type. The share arriving as coins prices at 0.5% and the share arriving as tokens at 1%, and the blend is your real rate rather than either published figure.
Most merchants find the blend sits close to 1%, because stablecoins dominate. If yours does not, this card is genuinely cheaper than the flat-rate alternatives and the advantage is worth having.
Do the split before comparing rates, because the published headline describes a merchant who may not be you.
If the blend does come out near 1%, the deciding factor moves to batch withdrawals and the twelve-year track record, neither of which appears in a rate comparison at all.
Where CoinPayments sits in the index#
The short version of this card: batch withdrawals and a long track record, priced by asset type. Every figure above was read off the provider's own pages on 2026-08-31, and the fields it declines to publish are recorded as such rather than left blank.
The line worth checking yourself is cost, since the split between coins and tokens means your effective rate depends on your own asset mix rather than on any published figure. Work out which tier your volume actually falls into before comparing.
How should you read this card?
The score of 7.4 comes from the five weighted criteria above, applied identically to every provider in the catalogue. If you weight the criteria differently, the methodology page re-ranks the whole index against your weights, and the order you get is as valid as this one.
The disclosure figure of 58% is a separate measurement and often the more useful one. It counts only the fields CoinPayments publishes itself, so it predicts how much of your evaluation will happen over email rather than from documentation. If you are already using CoinPayments and looking to leave, the switching page covers the closest replacements.
What CoinPayments does not disclose
Checked against the provider's own pages on 2026-08-31. CoinPayments does not publish what conversion costs, what payouts cost, how many assets it supports, which ecommerce platforms it supports, whether it settles to fiat, whether white label is available, whether it offers point of sale.
Ask for each of these in writing before signing. A provider that answers a factual question with positioning has told you something useful about the next two years.
CoinPayments compared
All comparisonsWhere else CoinPayments appears
Questions about CoinPayments
Is CoinPayments legit?
CoinPayments has operated since 2013 and does not state a jurisdiction on its public pages. It publishes 58% of the fields this index tracks. Nothing here is a security assessment: run your own checks on custody and settlement before sending volume through any processor.
What does CoinPayments charge?
The published processing rate starts at 0.5%, checked 2026-08-31. Conversion cost is not published, so this is a floor rather than an all-in figure.
Does CoinPayments require KYC?
CoinPayments does not publish its merchant verification requirements. That is a planning risk rather than an answer, and it is why this card scores as it does on onboarding.
What are the best CoinPayments alternatives?
The three closest substitutes are NOWPayments, Cryptomus, CoinGate. Which one fits depends on whether you are leaving over cost, coverage or onboarding.