Coinify: обзор

Two rates, and who pays the margin#

The help centre describes a choice the merchant makes once. On the Coinify rate, the customer pays a higher crypto amount that covers currency margin, processing and risk, and the merchant pays nothing. On the market rate, the customer pays the last market price and the same margins come out of what the merchant receives.

That is the whole fee model, and it is why this card records processing at zero and conversion as not disclosed. The zero is real on one setting; the deduction on the other is real and unquantified. A merchant choosing the market rate to improve conversion is choosing an unpublished cost, and should ask for the percentage before doing so.

What the payout page actually commits to#

Payouts are processed every Wednesday when the available balance exceeds 250 EUR or 0.01 BTC. Bitcoin payouts carry a 0.0001 BTC fee to cover network cost. International bank transfers carry a wire fee, and some payouts include a processing fee attributed to exchange rates and administration.

The cadence and the minimum are precise; the two fees at the end are not. For a merchant settling in euro inside the SEPA area the picture is close to complete. For one settling internationally, the wire fee is the number to ask for, and it is likely to be a fixed amount rather than a percentage.

The counterparty case#

The company has operated since 2014 from Denmark and describes itself as regulated. In a category where a large share of providers do not name a jurisdiction, that is a material difference for a merchant whose finance or legal team asks who the money is held with between payment and payout.

It also shapes the onboarding. Merchant sign-up is a documented KYB flow, and a regulated European processor will not skip it. The provider does not publish a timeline, which is the one gap in an otherwise clear process.

Coverage is the weak line#

The asset list is short and the networks named publicly are few. This is a processor built around Bitcoin acceptance settled in fiat, and a merchant whose customers pay in stablecoins on Tron will find the list does not reach them.

That is a fit question rather than a quality one. A European merchant taking occasional Bitcoin payments and wanting euro on Wednesdays is well served. A marketplace with an unpredictable asset mix is looking at a wider provider.

What is not published#

Mass payouts, white label, recurring billing and point of sale are not mentioned on the merchant pages checked, and each is recorded as not disclosed. Invoicing is covered by the payment button and hosted checkout products.

The conversion percentage on the market-rate model is the field that matters most and is absent. Everything else on the card follows from that one choice, so it is the first question to put in writing.

Who should not choose this#

A merchant with a wide asset mix or customers on cheap chains. The list does not reach them and no fee model compensates for a sale that cannot happen.

A business that wants to hold what it receives. The product is built to convert, and the payout minimum in Bitcoin exists for merchants who chose crypto settlement, not as an invitation to treasury management.

How this card scores where it does#

Cost scores reasonably: one model is fully published and free to the merchant, the other is unquantified. Onboarding is a documented KYB without a timeline. Integrations cover the main open-source carts. Support is scored on a real help centre with specific articles, which is better documentation than most of the index.

Coverage is the line that holds the card back, and it does so for a reason a merchant can check against their own order book in an hour. Reweight it on the methodology page if your customers pay in Bitcoin and nothing else.

Where Coinify sits in the index#

A regulated European Bitcoin processor with a clear payout schedule and a fee model that is free on one setting and unpublished on the other. Every figure above was read from the help-centre articles on 2026-09-06.

Read Coinify against BitPay for the closest comparison: two long-established processors built around fiat settlement, one publishing a percentage and one publishing a model.