Ranked #11 of 46 · checked 2026-09-06
Paymento review
Paymento scores 6.9 of 10 on this index and ranks #11 of 46. Processing starts at a published 0.5%. It publishes no asset count. Verification is none stated. It publishes 63% of the fields tracked here.
Non-custodial, wallet-to-wallet gateway with no merchant KYC, a 0.5% fee and a starting credit that covers the first sales.
- Score
- 6.9/10
- Processing from
- 0.5%
- Assets listed
- —
- Merchant verification
- None stated
- Custody
- Non custodial
- Discloses
- 63%
Paymento at a glance
Provider site| Processing from | 0.5% |
|---|---|
| Conversion | |
| Payouts | None: payments settle directly to the merchant's own wallet; the customer pays the network fee |
| Assets listed | |
| Networks | Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tron, BNB Chain, Polygon |
| Merchant verification | None stated |
| Custody | Non custodial, settlement reaches a merchant wallet |
| Jurisdiction | Not stated on the provider's public pages |
| Operating since | |
| Integrations | WooCommerce, Shopify, OpenCart, WHMCS |
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 Paymento do?
Verticals the provider names publicly: ecommerce, saas, high-risk.
How does Paymento 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 | 5 |
| 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 | 9 |
| 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 | 5 |
| Weighted total | 6.9 |
Paymento across the five criteria
Scored 0–10 · weighted total 6.9
Where it is strong
- Funds never touch the provider: payments route from the customer's wallet to an address you control, which removes the one failure in this category that cannot be recovered from.
- No merchant verification is required to start, and the pricing page states a $15 signing credit that covers roughly the first $3,000 of payments before the 0.5% applies.
- Plugins for WooCommerce, Shopify, OpenCart and WHMCS plus payment links, which is a practical integration set for a small merchant without developers.
Where it is weak
- No fiat settlement of any kind, so a business that needs bank currency has to arrange conversion elsewhere and carry the price risk until it does.
- The published asset list is not summarised as a count, and the company behind the product does not state a jurisdiction, which matters for a provider whose whole pitch is that nobody verifies anybody.
On this page
What non-custodial means on this card#
Two settlement modes are described and both keep the provider out of the money. Bring-your-own-wallet uses addresses you supply and payments land there directly. The embedded-wallet option creates a store wallet that only the merchant can authorise, at an additional $0.20 per successful transaction on top of the percentage.
That design is the reason the card scores as it does on onboarding: there is nothing for the provider to hold, so there is nothing to verify before it lets you start. It is also why the fee cannot be deducted at source. The fee is billed against the credit balance you top up, and the credit is what stops working when it runs out.
How the pricing actually works#
The rate is 0.5% per successful transaction, charged against a prepaid credit rather than deducted from the payment. New accounts receive $15 of credit, which the pricing page translates to roughly $3,000 of payments before any cost. An extra store costs $10 once, and the embedded wallet adds $0.20 per transaction.
Network fees are the customer's, because the payment is an ordinary on-chain transfer to your address. That makes the total cost unusually predictable: the percentage, the optional per-transaction cent charge, and nothing on the way out because there is no way out to pay for.
The no-KYC trade, stated plainly#
No merchant verification means a business can start taking payments in an afternoon and that nobody is standing between it and its customers. It also means the provider cannot offer fiat settlement, cannot underwrite disputes and cannot represent to anyone that it knows who its merchants are.
For a merchant in a vertical that acquirers decline, that is the product. For a merchant that needs to explain to a bank or an accountant where the money came from, it moves the compliance work from the provider to the merchant rather than removing it. The verification guide sets out what that shift actually costs.
What is not published#
The asset list is linked rather than counted, and the page names stablecoins, Bitcoin, Litecoin and Dogecoin as examples. The networks recorded on this card are the ones named across the provider's pages, and a merchant should confirm the specific chain for USDT before assuming Tron is covered.
The company's jurisdiction and founding date are not stated, and neither are mass payouts, white label, recurring billing or point of sale. Each of those is marked not disclosed rather than assumed absent. For a provider that asks merchants for no verification, the absence of a stated legal entity is the field most worth asking about.
Who should not choose this#
Any business that settles in fiat. There is no conversion product here, and a finance function that will not hold stablecoins is looking at the wrong provider regardless of the rate.
A merchant whose customers expect refunds handled by the provider. With funds in your own wallet, a refund is an outbound transfer you sign yourself, and the provider has no balance to draw on. That is the non-custodial trade in its purest form, and the refunds guide covers how to run it.
How this card scores where it does#
Onboarding carries the highest available score because there is no process to plan around. Cost scores well on a published percentage and a stated per-transaction charge with no conversion or payout component to hide. Integrations are reasonable for the plugin set.
Coverage is the weak line: no asset count, five named networks and no fiat. Support is scored on the documented channels, which are ordinary. A reader who weights custody highly can move this card up considerably on the methodology page; one who weights fiat settlement will move it down.
Where Paymento sits in the index#
The lightest possible way to accept crypto into a wallet you own, at a rate that is fully published, from a company that publishes almost nothing about itself. Every figure above was read from the pricing and product pages on 2026-09-06.
The natural comparison is Paymento against NOWPayments: both are non-custodial, one publishes a rate and a credit model, the other publishes a rate and three hundred assets. Which gap matters depends on whether your customers pay in three assets or thirty.
How should you read this card?
The score of 6.9 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 63% is a separate measurement and often the more useful one. It counts only the fields Paymento publishes itself, so it predicts how much of your evaluation will happen over email rather than from documentation. If you are already using Paymento and looking to leave, the switching page covers the closest replacements.
What Paymento does not disclose
Checked against the provider's own pages on 2026-09-06. Paymento does not publish what conversion costs, how many assets it supports, founded, whether mass payouts are supported, whether white label is available, whether recurring billing is supported, 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.
Paymento compared
All comparisonsWhere else Paymento appears
Questions about Paymento
Is Paymento legit?
Paymento does not publish a founding date and does not state a jurisdiction on its public pages. It publishes 63% 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 Paymento charge?
The published processing rate starts at 0.5%, checked 2026-09-06. Conversion cost is not published, so this is a floor rather than an all-in figure.
Does Paymento require KYC?
Paymento requires none stated for merchants, per its published documentation.
What are the best Paymento alternatives?
The three closest substitutes are Plisio, NOWPayments, CoinGate. Which one fits depends on whether you are leaving over cost, coverage or onboarding.