Weights version 2026.08 · effective 2026-08-31
How this index ranks
Five criteria carry fixed weights: coverage 25, cost 25, onboarding 20, integrations 18 and support 12. Each provider scores 0 to 10 per criterion from its own published pages. This page reads the same weights file the tables read, so the published method cannot drift from the actual order.
Any ranking is a set of weights somebody chose. Publishing ours lets you disagree with the conclusion instead of guessing at the reasoning.
On this page
How much each criterion counts
Weights version 2026.08 · sums to 100
What each criterion measures
| Criterion | Weight | What it measures and why |
|---|---|---|
| Assets, networks and geography | 25 | How many assets and chains are live for merchants, and in which markets settlement actually works. The gap between a global asset list and live local coverage is where most disappointment in this category starts. A provider listing 300 coins that cannot settle in your country scores badly here and should. Source: Provider asset and country pages, checked per card. |
| All-in cost | 25 | Processing percentage, conversion spread and payout cost taken together, not the headline number alone. The advertised percentage is rarely the whole figure. A 0.5% gateway that takes 2% on conversion costs more than a 1% gateway that settles in the asset received. Source: Published pricing pages only. Negotiated enterprise rates are excluded because they are not verifiable. |
| Onboarding and verification | 20 | What a merchant must submit before going live, how long it takes, and which verticals are refused outright. This decides whether a business can use the provider at all. A perfect product behind a KYB process that rejects your vertical scores zero for you. Source: Provider Terms of Service and onboarding documentation. |
| Integrations and API | 18 | Maintained plugins, API surface, webhook reliability and whether a developer can reach a test transaction from public docs alone. A sales engineer walking you through integration hides how good the docs are for whoever maintains this in a year. Source: Public developer documentation and plugin directories. |
| Support and operations | 12 | Reachable channels, published response commitments, and documented handling of underpayment and wrong-network sends. Payments break at inconvenient times by definition. It carries the smallest weight because it is the hardest to verify from public sources, and a criterion that cannot be checked should not outvote one that can. Source: Provider support pages and public documentation. |
Change the weights, change the ranking
Move a slider and the table re-sorts against your weights rather than ours. Nothing is saved and nothing is sent anywhere. If your order differs from the published one, your order is the one you should act on.
| # | Gateway | Your score | Published |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Speend | 8.3 | 8.3 |
| 2 | NOWPayments | 8.0 | 8.0 |
| 3 | BTCPay Server | 7.7 | 7.7 |
| 4 | CoinPayments | 7.4 | 7.4 |
| 5 | Cryptomus | 7.4 | 7.4 |
| 6 | Bitcart | 7.1 | 7.1 |
| 7 | Crypto.com Pay | 7.1 | 7.1 |
| 8 | Binance Pay | 7.0 | 7.0 |
| 9 | CoinRemitter | 7.0 | 7.0 |
| 10 | PassimPay | 7.0 | 7.0 |
| 11 | Paymento | 6.9 | 6.9 |
| 12 | Plisio | 6.9 | 6.9 |
| 13 | Whitepay | 6.8 | 6.8 |
| 14 | CoinGate | 6.7 | 6.7 |
| 15 | ForumPay | 6.7 | 6.7 |
| 16 | MyCryptoCheckout | 6.7 | 6.7 |
| 17 | B2BINPAY | 6.6 | 6.6 |
| 18 | CoinsPaid | 6.6 | 6.6 |
| 19 | OxaPay | 6.6 | 6.6 |
| 20 | CryptoCloud | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| 21 | PayCek | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| 22 | Bitnovo Pay | 6.3 | 6.3 |
| 23 | Coinbase Commerce | 6.2 | 6.2 |
| 24 | DePay | 6.2 | 6.2 |
| 25 | Apirone | 6.1 | 6.1 |
| 26 | OpenNode | 6.1 | 6.1 |
| 27 | ALFAcoins | 6.0 | 6.0 |
| 28 | Coinify | 6.0 | 6.0 |
| 29 | Radom | 6.0 | 6.0 |
| 30 | 0xProcessing | 5.8 | 5.8 |
| 31 | GoUrl | 5.8 | 5.8 |
| 32 | Triple-A | 5.8 | 5.8 |
| 33 | Aurpay | 5.7 | 5.7 |
| 34 | BitPay | 5.6 | 5.6 |
| 35 | Blockonomics | 5.6 | 5.6 |
| 36 | Speed | 5.6 | 5.6 |
| 37 | Alchemy Pay | 5.3 | 5.3 |
| 38 | Lunu | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| 39 | BVNK | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| 40 | Bitpace | 4.8 | 4.8 |
| 41 | Coinsnap | 4.8 | 4.8 |
| 42 | Zaprite | 4.8 | 4.8 |
| 43 | Sheepy | 4.7 | 4.7 |
| 44 | xMoney | 4.7 | 4.7 |
| 45 | SpectroCoin | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| 46 | Confirmo | 4.3 | 4.3 |
What is excluded from scoring, and why?
Negotiated rates. Almost every provider here will quote better terms at volume, and none of those quotes can be checked by a reader. A criterion nobody can verify should not decide an order that somebody relies on, so scoring uses published figures only.
User reviews are also excluded. Review volume in this category is heavily gamed, and an aggregate we cannot trace to a source would import someone else's unverified number into a method that is otherwise checkable. Where a provider carries a genuine external aggregate with a citation, the card links it rather than folding it into the score.
How does a page qualify to publish?
Every card tracks nineteen fields. A field counts as resolved when the provider publishes a value, or when we checked and recorded that the provider does not publish it. A comparison or switching page publishes only when both providers are at or above 80% resolved, and the build logs the ones it refused rather than shipping a thin page.
The Discloses figure shown in every comparison and on every shortlist is different and deliberately so. It counts only fields the provider publishes itself, which makes it a measurement of the provider rather than of our research. A high score next to a low disclosure figure is a real signal about how the rest of the relationship will go.
How much this category publishes
One dot per indexed provider
Median 65.5% across 46 providers
What would change a score?
A provider publishing something it previously withheld, a rate change on a pricing page, or a correction we get wrong. Corrections are welcome and handled on the contact page. Cards carry the date they were checked and are flagged for re-checking after 120 days, so a stale card is visible rather than silent. The editorial policy covers what we will and will not publish.
Questions merchants ask
Can I change the weights?
Yes, on this page. The sliders below re-rank every provider live, and the order you get is as valid as ours. If settlement flexibility matters more to you than integration quality, say so with the sliders and read off the result.
Do providers pay to be included or ranked?
No. No provider pays to appear, to rank higher, or to be described in a particular way, and no provider sees a page before it publishes. Commercial relationships that do exist are described on the disclosure page.
Where do the scores come from?
Each score is assigned from the provider's own public pages, and every card lists the URLs used and the date they were checked. Negotiated enterprise rates are excluded because a reader cannot verify them.
How often is this updated?
Cards carry a checked date and are flagged for re-checking after 120 days. The weights carry a version, currently 2026.08. Changing a weight changes every table on the site at once, which is why it is a versioned decision rather than an edit.
- Weights published at version 2026.08.
- Publish threshold set at 80% of resolved card fields.