Ranked #26 of 46 · checked 2026-08-31
OpenNode review
OpenNode scores 6.1 of 10 on this index and ranks #26 of 46. It publishes no processing rate. It lists 1+ assets. Verification is not disclosed. It publishes 68% of the fields tracked here.
Bitcoin and Lightning only, with free conversion and same-day fiat settlement.
- Score
- 6.1/10
- Processing from
- —
- Assets listed
- 1+
- Merchant verification
- Not disclosed
- Custody
- Custodial
- Discloses
- 68%
OpenNode at a glance
Provider site| Processing from | |
|---|---|
| Conversion | 0% |
| Payouts | On-chain scheduled and Lightning on-demand free; on-chain on-demand 1% |
| Assets listed | 1+ |
| Networks | Bitcoin, Lightning |
| Merchant verification | Not disclosed |
| Custody | Custodial, the provider holds funds before settlement |
| Jurisdiction | United States |
| Operating since | 2018 |
| 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 OpenNode do?
Verticals the provider names publicly: ecommerce, retail-pos, nonprofit.
How does OpenNode 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 | 3 |
| 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 | 7 |
| Support and operations Reachable channels, published response commitments, and documented handling of underpayment and wrong-network sends. | 12 | 7 |
| Weighted total | 6.1 |
OpenNode across the five criteria
Scored 0–10 · weighted total 6.1
Where it is strong
- Conversion is free and stated as such, which is rare enough to be worth checking competitors against.
- Lightning payouts settle on demand at no cost, so small-ticket businesses avoid on-chain economics entirely.
- Fiat settlement into eight named currencies is published rather than described vaguely.
Where it is weak
- Bitcoin only. A merchant whose customers hold stablecoins cannot use this provider at all.
- The processing rate itself is not on the pricing page, so the headline cost has to come from sales.
On this page
A single-asset provider, stated plainly#
Bitcoin on chain and over Lightning is the entire supported list. For most consumer businesses that ends the evaluation immediately, because customers holding stablecoins have no path at all and stablecoins carry most merchant crypto volume.
Reading that as a weakness misses what the product is. This is not a general-purpose gateway that happens to be narrow, it is a Bitcoin payments company, and within that scope it does things the generalists do not.
Free conversion, and why that is unusual#
Conversion is published as free, which no other card in this index states. Given that the conversion spread is normally the largest and least visible cost in a crypto payment relationship, a provider putting a zero against it publicly is making a strong claim in the place it is hardest to make one.
Payout terms follow the same pattern. Scheduled on-chain and on-demand Lightning withdrawals are free; on-demand on-chain costs 1%. Those are specific published numbers where most competitors publish nothing, and they let a Bitcoin-denominated business calculate a real total.
Why Lightning is the point#
On-chain Bitcoin does not work at retail ticket sizes: the transfer cost and the confirmation wait are both wrong for a small payment. Lightning fixes both, settling in seconds at negligible cost, and it is the difference between Bitcoin acceptance being viable and being theoretical.
That makes this provider a serious candidate for exactly one shape of business: small-ticket, Bitcoin-denominated, ideally in person. Retail acceptance covers why confirmation time decides everything else in that setting.
The gap on the card#
The processing rate is not on the pricing page, which is the one figure a merchant would expect to find there. Everything around it is published precisely, which makes the omission conspicuous rather than typical.
Ask for it directly, and ask whether it differs between on-chain and Lightning volume. Given how much else this provider publishes, a clear answer should be forthcoming.
Who should not choose this#
Almost any consumer business, and that is not a criticism so much as a description. If a customer might want to pay in a stablecoin, there is no path here at all, and in most markets most customers would.
Anyone comparing on headline rate, since there is not one published. The surrounding numbers are precise and the central one has to be requested.
How this card scores where it does#
Coverage scores lowest in the index at a single asset, and coverage carries the joint-highest weight, so the total sits near the bottom despite genuine strengths elsewhere. That is the method working as intended rather than a verdict on quality.
The weighted score is the wrong tool for this provider. If you are Bitcoin-denominated, ignore the total and read the fee lines, which are among the best published here. The methodology page lets you reweight coverage to zero and see what happens.
How to test whether this fits#
Look at whether any customer has ever asked to pay in something other than Bitcoin. If the answer is yes even occasionally, this provider will lose you those sales and no fee advantage compensates.
If the answer is genuinely no, run a Lightning payment end to end and time it. The speed is the product, and it is worth confirming on your own checkout rather than taking from a page.
Both checks take under an hour and together they answer whether this provider is a candidate at all.
Where OpenNode sits in the index#
The short version of this card: free conversion and Lightning payouts on a single asset. 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 weighted total is close to meaningless for this provider, and that is worth saying plainly. Set coverage to zero on the methodology page and read the order again; if you are Bitcoin-denominated, that version of the ranking is the one that describes your options.
How should you read this card?
The score of 6.1 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 68% is a separate measurement and often the more useful one. It counts only the fields OpenNode publishes itself, so it predicts how much of your evaluation will happen over email rather than from documentation. If you are already using OpenNode and looking to leave, the switching page covers the closest replacements.
What OpenNode does not disclose
Checked against the provider's own pages on 2026-08-31. OpenNode does not publish the processing rate, what merchant verification it requires, which ecommerce platforms it supports, whether mass payouts are supported, whether white label is available, whether recurring billing is supported.
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.
OpenNode compared
All comparisonsWhere else OpenNode appears
Questions about OpenNode
Is OpenNode legit?
OpenNode has operated since 2018 and is based in United States. It publishes 68% 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 OpenNode charge?
OpenNode does not publish a processing rate. The figure has to come from sales, which means it cannot be compared with published rates without asking.
Does OpenNode require KYC?
OpenNode 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 OpenNode alternatives?
The three closest substitutes are BitPay, CoinGate, NOWPayments. Which one fits depends on whether you are leaving over cost, coverage or onboarding.