Ranked #29 of 46 · checked 2026-09-02
Radom review
Radom scores 6.0 of 10 on this index and ranks #29 of 46. Processing starts at a published 0.5%. It lists 12+ assets. Verification is not disclosed. It publishes 68% of the fields tracked here.
Prices crypto payments at 0.5% plus a flat 50 cents and publishes a rate for every other product too.
- Score
- 6.0/10
- Processing from
- 0.5%
- Assets listed
- 12+
- Merchant verification
- Not disclosed
- Custody
- —
- Discloses
- 68%
Radom at a glance
Provider site| Processing from | 0.5% |
|---|---|
| Conversion | |
| Payouts | Instant payouts stated as carrying no additional fee; on-ramp and off-ramp 1%; donations 1% |
| Assets listed | 12+ |
| Networks | Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tron, Solana |
| Merchant verification | Not disclosed |
| Custody | |
| Jurisdiction | Cook Islands |
| Operating since | |
| Integrations | API |
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 Radom do?
Verticals the provider names publicly: ecommerce, saas.
How does Radom 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 | 6 |
| 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 | 5 |
| Integrations and API Maintained plugins, API surface, webhook reliability and whether a developer can reach a test transaction from public docs alone. | 18 | 5 |
| Support and operations Reachable channels, published response commitments, and documented handling of underpayment and wrong-network sends. | 12 | 5 |
| Weighted total | 6.0 |
Radom across the five criteria
Scored 0–10 · weighted total 6.0
Where it is strong
- At 0.5% plus 50 cents it publishes the lowest standard processing rate of any custodial provider in this index.
- Prices the whole product line in public: donations at 1%, on-ramp at 1%, off-ramp at 1%, instant payouts at no additional fee.
- Recurring billing, mass payouts and itemised invoicing are all named products rather than roadmap items.
Where it is weak
- The flat 50 cents dominates at small ticket sizes, taking 5.5% of a ten-dollar payment.
- Incorporated in the Cook Islands, with fiat handled through unnamed partner institutions.
On this page
The cheapest published rate here, with a catch in the second term#
Half a percent plus fifty cents is the lowest standard processing rate any custodial provider in this index puts in public. On a five hundred dollar payment that is 0.6% all in, which beats every other card here on the same basis.
On a ten dollar payment it is 5.5%. The flat component does not scale, and it turns a headline that reads as the cheapest option into one of the most expensive for anyone selling small digital items. Average ticket size decides this card entirely.
A price for everything, which is rarer than it should be#
Donations are priced at one percent, on-ramp and off-ramp at one percent each, and instant payouts are stated as carrying no additional fee. Only the presale product is held back for a sales conversation, and it is marked as such rather than left ambiguous.
That is a more complete public price list than most of this index manages. It lets a merchant model a year across several products without a call, which is the practical standard the method rewards.
Subscriptions are a first-class product here#
Recurring crypto billing is a named product rather than a feature bolted onto invoicing, and that is unusual. Most providers in this index treat a subscription as a repeated one-off payment and leave the retry logic, dunning and failed-renewal handling to the merchant.
For a SaaS business that difference is the entire evaluation. Combined with itemised invoicing and mass payouts under one account, this card covers a billing operation rather than just a checkout, and the SaaS page is where those requirements are set out.
Where the company sits, and why it is a con#
The operating entity is incorporated in the Cook Islands, with a company number published on the site. Fiat services are described as running through licensed and regulated financial institutions, but those institutions are not named.
That combination is listed here as a drawback and not as an accusation. A finance function asked to approve a payment processor will ask which regulated entity holds the money and under whose supervision, and neither question can be answered from the public pages.
Twelve assets across ten chains#
The published figures are twelve or more cryptocurrencies across ten or more blockchains, with Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tron and Solana named. That is a narrow asset list on a wide set of networks, which is the shape of a provider built around stablecoins rather than around coin variety.
For most business-to-business flows that shape is correct: the assets that matter are two stablecoins on whichever chain the payer already uses. A consumer checkout meeting the long tail of holdings will find twelve short, and the stablecoin page covers where the line usually falls.
An API and no plugin shelf#
There is a prebuilt hosted checkout page and a documented API, and no named platform plugins on the pages we read. For a team with engineers that is a non-issue; for a shop owner it is the difference between an afternoon and a quotation.
Given the subscription and payout products, the audience here is clearly a platform rather than a storefront, and a platform was going to write code anyway. Judged against that audience the missing plugins matter far less than they would elsewhere in this index.
Who should shortlist this#
A platform or SaaS business with a developer, a ticket size above about fifty dollars, and a need for recurring billing and payouts from the same account. That is a specific profile and this card fits it better than anything else here.
Anyone selling cheap digital goods should price the flat fifty cents against their actual average order value before going further. It is a five-minute calculation and it will settle the question in either direction.
Where Radom sits in the index#
Strong on published pricing and product breadth, weak on jurisdiction and integration convenience, with the custody model itself left unstated. It is a card for readers who will read the whole thing rather than the headline rate.
The figures above came off the provider's own pages on 2026-09-02. Raising the weight on onboarding at the methodology page is the fastest way to see what the unanswered regulatory questions cost this card.
How should you read this card?
The score of 6.0 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 Radom publishes itself, so it predicts how much of your evaluation will happen over email rather than from documentation. If you are already using Radom and looking to leave, the switching page covers the closest replacements.
What Radom does not disclose
Checked against the provider's own pages on 2026-09-02. Radom does not publish what conversion costs, what merchant verification it requires, custodial, founded, 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.
Radom compared
All comparisonsWhere else Radom appears
Questions about Radom
Is Radom legit?
Radom does not publish a founding date and is based in Cook Islands. 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 Radom charge?
The published processing rate starts at 0.5%, checked 2026-09-02. Conversion cost is not published, so this is a floor rather than an all-in figure.
Does Radom require KYC?
Radom 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 Radom alternatives?
The three closest substitutes are CoinGate, Cryptomus, NOWPayments. Which one fits depends on whether you are leaving over cost, coverage or onboarding.