Ranked #43 of 46 · checked 2026-09-02
Sheepy review
Sheepy scores 4.7 of 10 on this index and ranks #43 of 46. It publishes no processing rate. It lists 20+ assets. Verification is not disclosed. It publishes 58% of the fields tracked here.
Automatic conversion to fiat and bulk crypto payouts from one account, with no rate published.
- Score
- 4.7/10
- Processing from
- —
- Assets listed
- 20+
- Merchant verification
- Not disclosed
- Custody
- Custodial
- Discloses
- 58%
Sheepy at a glance
Provider site| Processing from | |
|---|---|
| Conversion | |
| Payouts | |
| Assets listed | 20+ |
| Networks | Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tron, Litecoin, XRP, Dogecoin |
| Merchant verification | Not disclosed |
| Custody | Custodial, the provider holds funds before settlement |
| Jurisdiction | Not stated on the provider's public pages |
| Operating since | 2019 |
| Integrations | Shopify, WooCommerce, PrestaShop, WHMCS, 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 Sheepy do?
Verticals the provider names publicly: ecommerce, saas.
How does Sheepy 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 | 2 |
| 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 | 6 |
| Support and operations Reachable channels, published response commitments, and documented handling of underpayment and wrong-network sends. | 12 | 5 |
| Weighted total | 4.7 |
Sheepy across the five criteria
Scored 0–10 · weighted total 4.7
Where it is strong
- Publishes a founding year, which sounds trivial until you notice how many cards in this index cannot.
- Runs acceptance and bulk payouts from one account, so affiliate and platform payments do not need a second provider.
- Names four maintained integrations including WHMCS, and documents each of them on its own developer pages.
Where it is weak
- No processing, conversion or withdrawal figure appears on any page, including the one dedicated to the gateway.
- Names no jurisdiction or operating entity, so a merchant cannot establish who they would be contracting with.
On this page
Acceptance and payouts under one roof#
Incoming payments convert to fiat automatically and outgoing bulk transfers run from the same balance. For a platform paying affiliates or creators out of the revenue it just took in, that removes an entire reconciliation problem rather than merely simplifying one.
Several providers in this index do one side well and treat the other as an afterthought. Doing both from one account is the clearest reason to look at this card, and it is aimed squarely at marketplaces rather than at shops.
Automatic conversion, with the spread unstated#
Incoming crypto converts to fiat on arrival, which is presented as removing the volatility problem, and it does. It also means every payment passes through a conversion whose cost is not published anywhere on the provider's pages.
Automatic conversion with an unpublished spread is the most expensive shape a fee gap can take, because it applies to one hundred percent of revenue and never appears on an invoice. The conversion guide covers how to measure it before committing.
Nothing at all is priced#
Neither the homepage nor the dedicated gateway page carries a processing rate, a conversion figure or a withdrawal cost. A page titled for the payment gateway that does not state what the gateway costs is a deliberate choice, not an oversight.
This card records all three as checked absences rather than blanks. Every fee field here was looked for on the provider's own pages, and the disclosure figure on this card is the honest summary of what that search returned.
Twenty assets, sensibly chosen#
Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tether on two networks, USDC, Litecoin, XRP and Dogecoin are named within a stated twenty or more. Naming Tether on both Tron and Ethereum is a small but useful detail, because those two are not interchangeable to a payer.
Twenty is mid-table here and covers what a general checkout meets in practice. It is a working list rather than a marketing one, which suits the platform audience this provider seems to be built for.
Four integrations, documented individually#
Shopify, WooCommerce, PrestaShop and WHMCS each get their own developer guide rather than a name on a logo wall. That distinction matters: a guide implies somebody maintains the plugin, a logo implies nothing at all.
WHMCS again points at hosting and digital services as the core customer base, the same signal several other mid-market cards in the index give off. It is a crowded segment and integration quality is how providers separate within it.
The unnamed operating entity#
A founding year of 2019 is published and no jurisdiction, company name or registration is. That is an unusual combination and it is the field a compliance reviewer will stop at first, well before they reach the fee question.
It is recorded as a drawback rather than an accusation. Plenty of legitimate businesses under-document themselves on a marketing site; the point is that a merchant cannot verify it from public pages and will have to ask.
Who should shortlist this#
A marketplace or affiliate platform that needs acceptance and mass payouts in one place, runs on one of the four supported systems, and has the volume to make a quotation worth requesting. That is a real and underserved profile.
Anyone in that position should ask for the processing rate, the conversion spread and the contracting entity in the first message. All three are missing from the site and all three decide whether this card belongs on a shortlist.
Where Sheepy sits in the index#
A sensible product with a coherent audience, presented without any of the numbers that would let a reader judge it. Integrations and coverage score respectably; cost scores near the bottom because nothing about cost is public.
Everything above came from the provider's own pages on 2026-09-02. The gap between what this provider builds and what it publishes is the largest on this card, and closing it would move the score more than any product change.
How should you read this card?
The score of 4.7 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 Sheepy publishes itself, so it predicts how much of your evaluation will happen over email rather than from documentation. If you are already using Sheepy and looking to leave, the switching page covers the closest replacements.
What Sheepy does not disclose
Checked against the provider's own pages on 2026-09-02. Sheepy does not publish the processing rate, what conversion costs, what payouts cost, what merchant verification it requires, whether white label is available, whether recurring billing is supported, whether it offers point of sale, whether it offers invoicing.
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.
Sheepy compared
All comparisonsWhere else Sheepy appears
Questions about Sheepy
Is Sheepy legit?
Sheepy has operated since 2019 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 Sheepy charge?
Sheepy 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 Sheepy require KYC?
Sheepy 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 Sheepy alternatives?
The three closest substitutes are Cryptomus, PassimPay, CoinsPaid. Which one fits depends on whether you are leaving over cost, coverage or onboarding.