Aurpay vs Cryptomus

Half the rate on one side#

Cryptomus publishes 0.4% and Aurpay publishes 0.8%. Neither publishes a conversion spread or a withdrawal cost, so the two headlines carry identical blanks behind them.

On what is public, one card is twice the other and there is no ambiguity about it. That is unusually clean for this index.

Both figures are low by category standards. The comparison is not cheap against expensive so much as cheap against cheaper.

Eight rails named precisely against a hundred and twenty counted#

One enumerates USDT and USDC on Ethereum and Tron, DAI on Ethereum, plus Bitcoin and Bitcoin Lightning. The other publishes a hundred and twenty assets across seven networks.

The short list names the chain for every stablecoin, which prevents the most expensive mistake a payer can make. Very little else in this index bothers.

The long list covers everything the short one does apart from Lightning, and a great deal besides. On raw coverage there is no contest.

Lightning appears on the narrower card#

Bitcoin Lightning sits alongside the stablecoin rails on one side and is absent from the other. That pairing is uncommon: providers here tend to be Bitcoin-native with Lightning or stablecoin-oriented without.

It means a four dollar digital item and a four hundred dollar order run through the same integration.

For a merchant with a genuinely small average order, that single line outweighs a hundred and twelve extra assets nobody in their checkout holds.

Eight plugins against seven#

Shopify, WooCommerce, Ecwid, BigCommerce, PrestaShop, OpenCart, Easy Digital Downloads and Paid Memberships Pro on one card; WooCommerce, Shopify, OpenCart, PrestaShop, Magento and WHMCS on the other.

Ecwid, BigCommerce and the two WordPress add-ons appear on only one; Magento and WHMCS on only the other. Four platforms overlap.

This is one of the few pairs here where a shop owner is well served whichever way the decision goes, which pushes the choice back onto cost and corporate disclosure.

One names a company and the other does not#

A Canadian entity dating from 2022 on one card. No operating entity, no jurisdiction and no founding year on the other, with compliance asserted and a registration referenced but not identified.

That is the widest gap on this page after the rate, and it is the one a bank will raise first.

Forty-seven percent disclosure against seventy-four is the same story in a single number: ten of nineteen tracked fields blank against five.

Custody is answered on one card only#

One states that it holds funds. The other leaves the custody model blank, which for a provider converting and settling is the field a reader should want filled in first.

Ask which addresses in the payment path belong to the provider and for how long funds may rest there. A short window is normally fine; not knowing is not.

The custody guide sets out why that answer matters more than the difference of forty basis points above it.

Product lines beyond the checkout#

Mass payouts, white label, recurring billing and hosted invoicing are documented on one card. Only invoicing is documented on the other.

For a marketplace or a subscription business that is a straightforward answer, and it has nothing to do with the rate.

For a shop selling goods once to each customer, none of those four lines will ever be used and they should not influence the decision.

Verification is blank on both#

Neither publishes what a merchant must submit before going live. One references anti-money-laundering compliance without identifying a registration; the other says nothing.

That silence is common in this index and it is the question most likely to end a conversation, so it belongs in the first message rather than the fourth.

Ask also what triggers a review later. Light onboarding followed by a request at a volume threshold is the version that actually hurts.

How the totals separate#

Cost, coverage and integrations all favour the broader card, and the totals separate by more than a point and a half.

The narrower card scores respectably on cost and integrations, and is dragged by coverage and by the four unfilled corporate fields.

Lightning does not appear in the scoring at all, which is a real limitation of the scale on this pair and worth reading past.

Which one to install#

A store on Ecwid, BigCommerce, Easy Digital Downloads or Paid Memberships Pro takes the narrower card, because the other does not support it at all.

A store on Magento or running WHMCS billing takes the broader card for exactly the same reason, and pays half as much for the privilege.

A store on Shopify, WooCommerce, PrestaShop or OpenCart can take either, at which point the cheaper rate and the named entity make the decision straightforward.

What to establish before either goes live#

Ask both for the conversion spread and the withdrawal cost, since those two components are blank on each card and together decide whether a doubled rate is really a doubled bill.

Ask the narrower card for its contracting entity and its custody model, which are the two fields a bank or a board will want before a payment provider is approved.

Then run one underpaid invoice through each. What the order record shows afterwards is the actual integration quality, and it takes an hour to find out.