Provider at a glance
- Category
- OTC Desks
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- b2c2.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 73 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
B2C2
Institutional crypto liquidity provider
OTC Desks
#3 Overall
Ranked #3 of 9 OTC desks in the published ranking
73
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is B2C2 right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Published minimum ticket9/10; the category best is 10
- Counterparty footing and asset segregation8/10; the category best is 9
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Documented settlement mechanics5/10 here; Kraken OTC Desk scores 9
- Published price transparency1/10 here; Binance OTC & Execution Services scores 5
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: Global.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best OTC desk shows where it lands for you.
What will B2C2 cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is B2C2?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
- On the registersMiCA: authorised, B2C2 Europe Sarl (LU, since 2026-05-13). Read 3 November 2026. Open the register
Alternatives to B2C2
Compare all 4- 1Gemini eOTC7 points above · stronger on documented settlement mechanics (8 against 5)80
- 2Kraken OTC Desk4 points above · stronger on documented settlement mechanics (9 against 5)77
- 4Binance OTC & Execution Services7 points below · stronger on published price transparency (5 against 1)66
For your setup
Find out if B2C2 fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where B2C2 lands for you, which criteria your answers weight up, and which stated needs the record does or does not meet. The published rank stays beside it.
- A few questions
- No account required
- Ranking-blind: no commercial input
- Personalised in under 60 seconds
Find my best OTC deskNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why B2C2 ranks #3
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (20.4 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
309+8.645.010#2/9Loading evidence…
308+7.687.09#2/9Loading evidence…
225+3.526.09#7/9Loading evidence…
181+0.583.05#7/9Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−4behind Kraken OTC Desk, #2
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 71–75 and stays #3
Evidence4 of 4 scored4 quoted, 4 with a source link
What would move the rank
Each line is the ranking run again with one of B2C2’s criterion scores changed and every other value held: the smallest whole-point change on that criterion that moves its rank, and where the re-run puts it. Up to 4 climbs and 3 falls are listed, smallest change first. Nothing here is a forecast.
Documented settlement mechanics 5 → 8 on its ladder · passes Kraken OTC Desk+377#3 → #2
Published price transparency 1 → 5 on its ladder · passes Kraken OTC Desk+477#3 → #2
Published minimum ticket 9 → 5 on its ladder · Binance OTC & Execution Services passes it−465#3 → #4
Counterparty footing and asset segregation 8 → 4 on its ladder · Binance OTC & Execution Services passes it−465#3 → #4
Smallest climb: documented settlement mechanics 5 → 8 passes Kraken OTC Desk, #2.
Strengths
2 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Published minimum ticket — 9/10, category best 10/10
- Counterparty footing and asset segregation — 8/10, category best 9/10
Tradeoffs
2 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Documented settlement mechanics — 5/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Published price transparency — 1/10 against a category best of 5/10
Record watch-outs
- The 0.0005 BTC floor is real but it is not an invitation. B2C2 states "We do not serve retail clients" and gates its own newsletter behind the same rule: "B2C2 does not transact with or provide any service to any retail investor or consumer. By subscribing to our content, you represent that you are not a retail investor or consumer." The tiny minimum exists so institutional clients can send odd-lot and residual orders down the same pipe as blocks — it is not a route in for a private buyer, who will fail onboarding regardless of ticket size.
Competitive position
Where B2C2 leads and where it trails
Rank on every objective dimension among the rows scored on it. A criterion in the top third of its pool is listed as a lead, the bottom third as a trail; the middle is neither. Popularity, size and commercial terms are not dimensions.
Availability#1 / 914.0 of 20 · constant here
Published criteria#3 / 915.3 of 30 · best 18.0
Friction#1 / 92.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 93.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 98.3 of 18 · constant here
Where B2C2 leads
- Published minimum ticket#2 / 9
- Counterparty footing and asset segregation#2 / 9
Where it trails
- Documented settlement mechanics#7 / 9
- Published price transparency#7 / 9
Closest alternatives
The 3 nearest rows by score
Nearest by published score in either direction. Each card states the criteria on which the two rows differ and the cost difference under the same scenario inputs; the compare arithmetic below shows why the higher one ranks higher.
Kraken OTC Desk#2 of 9 · score 77 · 4.0 points ahead
B2C2 leads on
- Published minimum ticket9 vs 8
- Counterparty footing and asset segregation8 vs 7
Kraken OTC Desk leads on
- Documented settlement mechanics9 vs 5
- Published price transparency3 vs 1
Largest single reason Kraken OTC Desk is ahead: published criteria (+3.9 display points).Scenario cost: Kraken OTC Desk has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Binance OTC & Execution Services#4 of 9 · score 66 · 7.0 points behind
B2C2 leads on
- Published minimum ticket9 vs 5
- Counterparty footing and asset segregation8 vs 5
Binance OTC & Execution Services leads on
- Documented settlement mechanics6 vs 5
- Published price transparency5 vs 1
Largest single reason B2C2 is ahead: published criteria (+7.3 display points).Scenario cost: Binance OTC & Execution Services has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Gemini eOTC#1 of 9 · score 80 · 7.0 points ahead
B2C2 leads onNo scored criterion
Gemini eOTC leads on
- Published minimum ticket10 vs 9
- Documented settlement mechanics8 vs 5
- Published price transparency2 vs 1
Largest single reason Gemini eOTC is ahead: published criteria (+7.0 display points).Scenario cost: Gemini eOTC has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
80 vs 73 · gap 7.0Why Gemini eOTC ranks above B2C2
The compare workspace's arithmetic applied to these two rows. Each dimension's share of the gap is its weight × the difference, on the displayed scale — it reproduces the displayed gap of 7.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisGemini eOTCGap share
Availability · 23% weight · constant here14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight15.318.0−7.0, worse
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisGemini eOTCPoints
Published minimum ticket · w30910−0.96, worse
Documented settlement mechanics · w2258−2.11, worse
Published price transparency · w1812−0.58, worse
Net7380−7.0
Your scenario
B2C2 is not priced for this scenario
Taker fee on your volume for a year. Excludes network gas and any withdrawal fee. Change an input and every figure recomputes from the published rate; the published rank does not move.
your cost/yr · default scenario — set your own
Your monthly volume · your input$1k
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 24 September 2026.
your cost/yrCost is stated as your cost/yr in USD; it is never a yield, never annualised, and it does not enter the score.
Not priced on this basis
Under the default inputs · USDCategory medianNot priced0 of 9 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
9 of 9 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 24 September 2026
One row per published criterion: the page each strength was read from, its source type by domain, the reading date and whether the file and the published table agree. Open a row for the quote and the receipt.
4 of 4 cells scored
Score evidenceVerified4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from receipts
4 of 4 criteria reconstruct from a quoted, sourced receipt equal to the published strength.Public receiptsReading…4 quoted with a source URL
The receipt file has not been read yet.Evidence confidenceHighcoverage and corroboration, never freshness
4/4 criteria scored, with 4 dated sources quoted.RobustnessHoldsrank #3 across every one-point re-run
Whether the position holds when one criterion score is changed by one point and the ranking is run again. It is always a re-run of the ranking, never an estimate.The newest evidence read on the platform is 3 November 2026; this category's reading is older. The scores stand as read on 24 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Published minimum ticketstrength 9 · weight 30Report an error—24 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Counterparty footing and asset segregationstrength 8 · weight 30Report an error—24 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Documented settlement mechanicsstrength 5 · weight 22Report an error—24 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.Published price transparencystrength 1 · weight 18Report an error—24 September 2026*
Unknown
No reading date is recorded for this cell or its category.No receipt
A strength is published but no quote or source page is on file for it.How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Insolvency failure (B2C2 8/10): the firm or issuer that owes you cannot pay.Scored by Counterparty footing and asset segregation · 30%
- Execution failure: you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by Documented settlement mechanics · 22% (B2C2 5/10)Scored by Published price transparency · 18% (B2C2 1/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Control failure, Liveness failure, Custody failure, Regulatory failure, Exit failure, Information failure. A high place says nothing about these; the Methodology tab says what each means. Also scored, as cost, quality or a summary of several families: Published minimum ticket (30%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- B2C2 publishes no spread, fee, commission or bps figure on any page fetched in this session. The closest thing to a rate is a mechanism with no number attached: "What is the overnight funding rate? How is this calculated? Our daily overnight funding rate is variable, dependent on various factors including liquidity and broad cryptocurrency contract demand across our franchise. This is calculated on a 365 day count convention." The only pricing claim on the site is comparative and unquantified: "Our business model is to provide the best possible pricing and a level of customer service normally only seen in traditional financial markets." (both from https://
b2c2 .com /about /faqs, fetched 24 September 2026). The FAQ's only zero-fee claim covers a different product: "PENNY is B2C2's zero-fee stablecoin swap platform".B2C2 — official pricing page ↗ · 24 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDB2C2 — official pricing page ↗ · 24 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Multi-chain
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Not published
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with B2C2: where to complain, and where to report a scam
Loading the routes for your country.
How this page is reviewed
Reviewed means this product in this category was read against its sources on or after that date; every ranked category is re-read at least every 45 days. Models research, extract and parse. A deterministic engine ranks. Every quote passes an adversarial refute pass.
Accountable for this review: Mathias Siemonsmeier, Founder.
How we review · Review calendar · Corrections log · How we make money
History
What the record carries
Changes to published ranks are recorded in a ledger; every step and its cause is listed on the rank-history page. The entries below begin with the current verified snapshot, then the methodology versions whose changes applied to this category, newest first.
8 methodology entries
- 24 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 73, #3 of 9. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.8When nothing serves your country, the list shown for reference is the published ranking · platform-wide- fixed The reference list shown when nothing serves your country is the published order with the published scores, and a build check now fails any such list out of that order or with a score the ranking does not publish.
- fixed The explorer prints an overall rank only for a row the published ranking holds; a country entrant such as Coinbase Commerce for US merchants shows no overall rank.
- changed Published orders do not move. Country results change only where nothing serves the country: in India bill pay keeps Bitcoin Well first and now shows Strike second, as published; 35 such runs across all categories and countries now match the published list exactly.
- 10 October 2026
2026.10.6A criterion you require re-scores the rows that meet it · platform-wide- changed The explorer sends each criterion you require, at any band, as fit_required with your other answers; region, licence, chain and fact filters stay filters. On /best, a required criterion joins For you as a marked preference does, which needs your country; Overall stays the published ranking, filtered.
- added Every published criterion has a golden case as the explorer sends it (require:<criterion>), so the order a requirement gives is replayed and gated as the published order is, and a change to it needs an entry here.
- 16 September 2026
2026.09.15Dimension scores carry tenths, and eleven more categories are re-read from primary sources · platform-wide- changed Dimension scores resolve to tenths of a point (O-04b), and weightedTotal is rounded to six decimal places before the order is read. 518 published scores move across 107 categories that were not re-read; none of them moves by more than 4 points, and most move by 1.
- fixed 66 published scores change in the eleven re-read categories, against a verbatim source each. The largest moves are Reflexer RAI (−16), Beefy and Unrekt (−11), Aztec (−10) and Golem (+9) — all of them rows whose sources had moved since their last read.
- changed Published order moves in 38 of 119 categories and three #1s change: smart_contract_audits (Zellic → Certora) and travel_rule_compliance (Sumsub Travel Rule → CodeVASP) on the finer resolution, kyc_compliance (Veriff → Sumsub) on the re-read.
- added availabilitySource (O-04g): for a reader who states a country, a row whose availability in that country rests on a region tag its record gives no source for sorts below every sourced row. It is inert in every order published here, which states no country.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt otc_desks:b2c2:2026.10.18:a9fe754b7f1f
Are you B2C2? Reply to this verdict, or send evidence, ask for a correction or claim the listing. Every message gets a public ticket number; none of it changes a rank unless a public page or a signed statement supports it.