Radom vs CoinGate

A flat fifty cents changes everything below fifty dollars#

Radom prices at half a percent plus a fixed fifty cents. CoinGate prices at one percent with no fixed component.

On a five hundred dollar payment that is 0.6% against 1%, a clear win for the fixed-fee card. On a twenty dollar payment it is 3% against 1%, a clear loss. The crossover sits near a hundred dollars.

Nothing else on this page moves the answer as much as your own average order value. Work it out first and the rest of the comparison becomes a check on the loser rather than a decision.

Complete disclosure against partial disclosure#

One card publishes processing, conversion on manual exchanges, SEPA, SWIFT and crypto payout costs on a single page. The other publishes processing, donations, on-ramp and off-ramp, and leaves the conversion spread unstated.

Both are far above the median for this index, which is a provider publishing one number and stopping. The difference is that only one of them lets a European merchant compute a total to the last basis point.

The unpublished conversion figure on the cheaper card is the gap worth pressing. Every payment converted passes through it, and a spread of half a percent would erase most of the headline advantage.

Twelve assets against ten#

Neither of these is a broad-coverage provider and neither pretends to be. Twelve or more cryptocurrencies on one side, ten or more on the other, both far below the hundreds published elsewhere in this index.

The shape differs even at similar counts. One spreads a short asset list across ten or more blockchains including Tron and Solana; the other names Bitcoin, Ethereum and Litecoin and settles into euro banking.

A merchant selling worldwide will meet customers outside both lists. That is a cost neither card shows, because an abandoned checkout does not generate a support ticket.

Recurring billing is real on both, and differently built#

Both document subscriptions, which is unusual: most of this index treats a recurring charge as a repeated one-off and leaves retries and dunning to the merchant.

One treats recurring billing as a named product alongside mass payouts and itemised invoicing, aimed at platforms. The other offers it alongside a plugin shelf, aimed at stores.

For a SaaS business that difference decides more than the rate does, and it points toward the platform-shaped card unless your billing already lives inside a storefront.

Where the companies sit#

A Lithuanian company operating since 2014, against an entity incorporated in the Cook Islands whose fiat partners are described but not named.

That gap is the strongest argument on this page for the more expensive card, and it has nothing to do with payments. A finance function asked to approve a processor will ask who holds the money and under whose supervision.

The cheaper card also leaves its custody model unstated entirely, which compounds the same question rather than answering it.

Integration effort is not equal#

Five maintained ecommerce plugins on one side against a prebuilt hosted checkout and an API on the other. For a shop that is the difference between an afternoon and a project with a budget.

The API-only card is aimed at platforms that were going to write code regardless, and judged against that audience the missing plugins barely register.

Judged against a WooCommerce store they register a great deal. The WordPress list is the faster route if that describes you.

What to ask each of them#

To the fixed-fee provider: the conversion spread, the custody model, and which regulated institution holds merchant funds. Three questions, none answerable from the site, all of them material.

To the published-table provider: whether the ten-asset list has grown, since a narrow list is its only real weakness and it is the sort of thing that changes without a press release.

To both: what happens to an underpaid invoice. Handling differs across the category and it is the most common support case in crypto checkout.

Where this pair actually lands#

A platform with an engineer, invoices above a hundred dollars and a need for subscriptions and payouts from one account takes the fixed-fee card and saves real money at scale.

A European store with a finance function, a WooCommerce install and a preference for knowing the total takes the published-table card and pays a little more for a number it can defend.

A shop selling cheap digital goods should not take the fixed-fee card at all, whatever the headline says. Fifty cents on a ten dollar order is five and a half percent, and no amount of product quality fixes that.

What neither card resolves#

The conversion spread on the cheaper side, which is the missing term in every calculation on this page and the one most likely to reverse the conclusion.

The asset roadmap on the more expensive side. Ten assets is the narrowest general-purpose list in this index and it is the single line holding an otherwise strong card back.

What is settled is the shape of the decision. Large invoices and a development team point one way, small orders and a storefront point the other, and neither provider is trying to be the other one.