Provider at a glance
- Category
- Crypto Offramps
- Entity
- All 4 MoonPay products
- Official website
- moonpay.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 53 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in October 2026.
MoonPay
Crypto-to-fiat widget with bank and card payouts
Crypto Offramps
#6 Overall
Ranked #6 of 7 crypto offramps in the published ranking
53
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is MoonPay right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Verified licences and regulated footprint9/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- All-in cost of a representative sale3/10 here; Coinbase scores 4
- Spread disclosure and quote binding3/10 here; Banxa scores 7
- Payout rails speed and coverage6/10 here; the category best is 9
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: Global. Restricted: Japan.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best offramp shows where it lands for you.
What will MoonPay cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is MoonPay?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read October 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
- On the registersMiCA: authorised, MoonPay Europe B.V. (NL, since 2024-12-30). Read 3 November 2026. Open the registerNYDFS BitLicense: authorised, MoonPay USA LLC (US-NY, since 2025-06). Read 3 November 2026. Register
Alternatives to MoonPay
Compare all 4- 3Coinbase5 points above · stronger on all in sell cost (4 against 3)58
- 4Transak5 points above · stronger on price transparency (6 against 3)58
- 5BanxaLevel on score · stronger on price transparency (7 against 3)53$240
For your setup
Find out if MoonPay fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where MoonPay 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 offrampNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why MoonPay ranks #6
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (14.4 here) sit inside the score; availability, friction, trust record and measured data add the rest. Best in this ranking on 1 of 4.
4 published criteria · Σ weight 100
CriterionWeightStrength · 0–10ScoreContrib.MedianBestRankEvidence
403+3.844.09#6/7Loading evidence…
253+2.406.08#6/7Loading evidence…
206+3.846.09#3/7Loading evidence…
159+4.327.09#1/7Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
MarginLevelbehind Banxa, #5
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 51–56 and ranks #5–#6
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 MoonPay’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.
All-in cost of a representative sale 3 → 4 on its ladder · passes Banxa+156#6 → #5
Spread disclosure and quote binding 3 → 4 on its ladder · passes Banxa+155#6 → #5
Payout rails speed and coverage 6 → 7 on its ladder · passes Banxa+154#6 → #5
Verified licences and regulated footprint 9 → 10 on its ladder · passes Banxa+154#6 → #5
Smallest climb: all-in cost of a representative sale 3 → 4 passes Banxa, #5.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Verified licences and regulated footprint — 9/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- All-in cost of a representative sale — 3/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Spread disclosure and quote binding — 3/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Payout rails speed and coverage — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- MoonPay's terms let it "refuse to complete, or block or cancel transactions you have authorised" and place "holds, delays, or restrictions" on funds, while disclaiming responsibility for "any losses or damages you incur as a result of such holds" — and separately state "All Orders are final and cannot be refunded". Frozen mid-sale, you have neither the crypto nor a refund right.
- The Pricing Disclosure reads: 'the MoonPay fee will be in an amount up to 4.5%, subject to (a) a minimum MoonPay fee of up to $3.99 if your transaction amount is below a minimum threshold and (b) if you are buying or selling a digital asset in a currency other than USD, MoonPay USA LLC will increase the minimum MoonPay Fee in an amount between 0.25% and 10%, depending on the fiat currency you choose to pay in.' The 0.25–10% figure increases the MINIMUM fee, and the minimum only bites when the transaction is below a threshold. It is not a third percentage charge stacked on every non-USD sale. A normal-size EUR sale carries two charges (fee up to 4.5% + unquantified spread), not three. The page also discloses 'Using MoonPay fiat balance for Buy and Sell transactions incurs zero MoonPay fees', which the research omits.
- The 0–10%/typically-1% Transaction Fee sits under the 'Virtual Account fees' heading and applies to MoonPay Virtual Accounts (local-currency/stablecoin conversion), a distinct product from the widget sell flow being compared. Quoting it inside the offramp pricing block overstates the cost of a standard crypto-to-fiat sale.
Competitive position
Where MoonPay 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 / 714.0 of 20 · pool best
Published criteria#7 / 710.8 of 30 · best 20.5
Friction#1 / 72.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 73.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#6 / 78.3 of 18 · best 9.7
Where MoonPay leads
- Payout rails speed and coverage#3 / 7
- Verified licences and regulated footprint#1 / 7
Where it trails
- All-in cost of a representative sale#6 / 7
- Spread disclosure and quote binding#6 / 7
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.
Banxa#5 of 7 · score 53 · same score
MoonPay leads on
- All-in cost of a representative sale3 vs 2
- Verified licences and regulated footprint9 vs 7
Banxa leads on
- Spread disclosure and quote binding7 vs 3
Largest single reason Banxa is ahead: measured data (+3.6 display points).Scenario cost: MoonPay has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Transak#4 of 7 · score 58 · 5.0 points ahead
MoonPay leads on
- Payout rails speed and coverage6 vs 4
- Verified licences and regulated footprint9 vs 5
Transak leads on
- All-in cost of a representative sale4 vs 3
- Spread disclosure and quote binding6 vs 3
Largest single reason Transak is ahead: measured data (+3.6 display points).Scenario cost: Transak has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Coinbase#3 of 7 · score 58 · 5.0 points ahead
MoonPay leads on
- Verified licences and regulated footprint9 vs 8
Coinbase leads on
- All-in cost of a representative sale4 vs 3
Largest single reason Coinbase is ahead: measured data (+3.6 display points).Scenario cost: Coinbase has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
82 vs 53 · gap 29.0Why Kraken ranks above MoonPay
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; a row-above bound on one of the rows keeps the reproduced gap (28.9) from matching the displayed one exactly, which is stated rather than hidden.
DimensionThisKrakenGap share
Availability · 23% weight14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight10.820.5−25.2, worse
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight8.39.7−3.6, worse
Published criterionThisKrakenPoints
All-in cost of a representative sale · w4039−7.68, worse
Spread disclosure and quote binding · w2538−4.00, worse
Payout rails speed and coverage · w2068−1.28, worse
Net5382−29.0≈
Your scenario
MoonPay is not priced for this scenario
Sale spread 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 22 October 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 median$1194 of 7 rows priced
Cheapest priced$96 · KrakenDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filterCompare with Kraken
3 of 7 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
Evidence
Evidence read 22 October 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.RobustnessOne point from changingrank #5 to #6 across one-point re-runs
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 22 October 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
All-in cost of a representative salestrength 3 · weight 40Report an error—22 October 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.Spread disclosure and quote bindingstrength 3 · weight 25Report an error—22 October 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.Payout rails speed and coveragestrength 6 · weight 20Report an error—22 October 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.Verified licences and regulated footprintstrength 9 · weight 15Report an error—22 October 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
- Regulatory failure (MoonPay 9/10): no licence where you are, or a forced market exit.Scored by Verified licences and regulated footprint · 15%
- Execution failure: you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by Spread disclosure and quote binding · 25% (MoonPay 3/10)Scored by Payout rails speed and coverage · 20% (MoonPay 6/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Control failure, Liveness failure, Custody failure, Insolvency 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: All-in cost of a representative sale (40%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- MoonPay Pricing Disclosure (moonpay.com/legal/pricing_disclosure, read 22 October 2026): direct use, "the MoonPay fee will be in an amount up to 4.5%, subject to (a) a minimum MoonPay fee of up to $3.99 if your transaction amount is below a minimum threshold"; via a partner, "a minimum MoonPay fee of up to $4.50"; for non-USD currencies MoonPay "will increase the minimum MoonPay Fee in an amount between 0.25% and 10%" (it raises the minimum, not an extra percentage on every sale). Partners may add a separate "Ecosystem Fee". "MoonPay USA LLC may include a spread in the asset price shown to you during your transaction" (amount not stated); the base price is fetched "from a reputable independent third party / parties every 10 seconds". "Using MoonPay fiat balance for Buy and Sell transactions incurs zero MoonPay fees." New on the page: Virtual Accounts (stablecoin to local currency) carry a Transaction Fee "between 0% and 10% but is typically about 1%" plus a Bank Rail Fee.MoonPay — official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Prices published in
- USDMoonPay — official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Licences held
- United Kingdom: Registration / authorisation, United States: Registration / authorisation, Australia: Registration / authorisation
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- MoonPay (UK) Ltd — FCA, registered cryptoasset firm, FRN 944746. MoonPay USA LLC — FinCEN MSB, 31000301673327; money transmitter licences in 44 states plus DC, Guam and Puerto Rico (New York 0000045 incl. Virtual Currency Business Activity; Texas 3542; Alabama 836; Florida FT230000327). MoonPay USA LLC — FINTRAC (Canada) MSB, M24701825. MoonPay AUS Pty Ltd — AUSTRAC DCE, DCE100858195-001.
- Supported chains
- Not published
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Japan
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- MoonPay help article "MoonPay's unsupported countries" (read 22 October 2026): "Moonpay's services are not available to customers in the following jurisdictions:" 47 entries: Afghanistan, American Samoa, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, China, Congo, Cuba, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, India, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Japan, North Korea, Kosovo, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Macao, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Mongolia, Morocco, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Palestine, Russia, Senegal, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Ukraine, the United States Virgin Islands, Venezuela, Western Sahara, Yemen and Zimbabwe. Sell payouts (withdrawal-methods article, read 22 October 2026): SEPA (EUR), UK Faster Payments, ACH (US), MoonPay Balance (US, UK, EUR), Visa (US, EUR, rest of world) and Mastercard (US, EUR) cards, PayPal (US, UK, EUR) and Venmo (US). "MoonPay currently does not offer any withdrawal methods for users in Texas and the U.S. Virgin Islands"; "PayPal and Venmo are currently not supported in New York".
Legal entity on file: MoonPay, placed in 4 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with MoonPay: 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.
11 methodology entries
- 22 October 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 53, #6 of 7. 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
2026.10.7Forty-one more products are offered only where their own quoted terms serve- fixed 141 country exclusions on 31 rows, each the name of a country the row's own quoted terms exclude: for example Mercuryo Hungary, China, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Chile, Colombia and Morocco; Gemini Custody the United Kingdom, Australia and the EU after its wind-down; Backed xStocks the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, Nigeria, the Philippines and Venezuela.
- changed Thirteen rows list the only countries their terms serve: Coins.ph the Philippines, Spritz bill pay, Brex, Unchained, WisdomTree, Franklin BENJI and AnchorWatch the United States (with its territories for AnchorWatch), PRYPCO Mint the UAE, N26 crypto seven EU countries, Gemini Tokenized Stocks the EU, XNET the US, Canada and the UK, Coldbit Steel and MetaMask Card the countries they list.
- changed Published (no-country) orders do not move. Country results change: in India six categories each lose one row (bill pay, cards, off-ramps, P2P, seed backup, tokenised real estate), and bill pay there has no row confirmed available, so it shows the published order marked as such; country pages list 23 fewer rows (24,357 to 24,334). The grounding test now matches full country names in any case, which shows seven earlier exclusions were quoted all along: the named debt of unquoted exclusions falls from 40 to 33 pairs.
- 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.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt offramps:moonpay_offramp:2026.10.18:e7aeff96beb3
Are you MoonPay? 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.