Provider at a glance
- Category
- Crypto Cards
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- plutus.it
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 41 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
Plutus Card
Visa rewards card
Crypto Cards
#9 Overall
Ranked #9 of 9 crypto cards in the published ranking
41
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Plutus Card right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Cost abroad4/10 here; Zeal scores 5
- Card reliability1/10 here; Coinbase Card scores 6
- Named issuer1/10 here; Coinbase Card scores 7
- Tax on spending2/10 here; Coinbase Card scores 4
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: Europe.
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best crypto card shows where it lands for you.
What will Plutus Card cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Payments per month
- 500
- Average payment
- $100
How safe is Plutus Card?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Plutus Card
Compare all 4- 6RedotPay Card14 points above · stronger on card reliability (5 against 1)55
- 7Coinbase Card11 points above · stronger on card reliability (6 against 1)52
- 8Zeal8 points above · stronger on named issuer (6 against 1)49
For your setup
Find out if Plutus Card fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Plutus Card 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 crypto cardNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Plutus Card ranks #9
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (7.0 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
334+4.226.08#7/9Loading evidence…
261+0.835.09#9/9Loading evidence…
211+0.676.09#9/9Loading evidence…
202+1.285.08#8/9Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−8behind Zeal, #8
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 41 and stays #9
Evidence4 of 4 scored4 quoted, 4 with a source link
What would move the rank
The ranking was run again with each of Plutus Card’s criterion scores changed on its own, as far as each ladder goes in both directions. None of those changes moves its rank.
Strengths
0 from the score dataWhere it leads
No scored criterion is at or within one point of the category best, so no strength can be stated from the data.
Tradeoffs
4 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- What does one swipe abroad actually cost me, and can I work that out before I sign up? — 4/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Will this card still work next month, and who has to fail for it to stop? — 1/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Whose licence is actually behind this card, and will they even tell me their name? — 1/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Does buying a coffee create a taxable disposal, and will they hand me the record? — 2/10 against a category best of 8/10
Record watch-outs
- You can be paying £/€6.99 to £/€19.99 a month, today, for a card the vendor's own most recent dated communication says cannot be spent — and the page that sells you the subscription links to that communication under the words 'The 2026 Transition Update'. The homepage headline next to it reads 'No fees. No Catch.'
Competitive position
Where Plutus Card 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#5 / 96.0 of 20 · best 12.0
Published criteria#9 / 95.3 of 30 · best 18.8
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 Plutus Card leadsNo criterion in the top third of its pool.
Where it trails
- What does one swipe abroad actually cost me, and can I work that out before I sign up?#7 / 9
- Will this card still work next month, and who has to fail for it to stop?#9 / 9
- Whose licence is actually behind this card, and will they even tell me their name?#9 / 9
- Does buying a coffee create a taxable disposal, and will they hand me the record?#8 / 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.
Zeal#8 of 9 · score 49 · 8.0 points ahead
Plutus Card leads onNo scored criterion
Zeal leads on
- What does one swipe abroad actually cost me, and can I work that out before I sign up?5 vs 4
- Will this card still work next month, and who has to fail for it to stop?5 vs 1
- Whose licence is actually behind this card, and will they even tell me their name?6 vs 1
Largest single reason Zeal is ahead: published criteria (+15.1 display points).Scenario cost: Zeal has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Coinbase Card#7 of 9 · score 52 · 11.0 points ahead
Plutus Card leads onNo scored criterion
Coinbase Card leads on
- Will this card still work next month, and who has to fail for it to stop?6 vs 1
- Whose licence is actually behind this card, and will they even tell me their name?7 vs 1
- Does buying a coffee create a taxable disposal, and will they hand me the record?4 vs 2
Largest single reason Coinbase Card is ahead: published criteria (+18.5 display points).Scenario cost: Coinbase Card has no verified pricing for this scenario.
RedotPay Card#6 of 9 · score 55 · 14.0 points ahead
Plutus Card leads on
- What does one swipe abroad actually cost me, and can I work that out before I sign up?4 vs 2
RedotPay Card leads on
- Will this card still work next month, and who has to fail for it to stop?5 vs 1
- Whose licence is actually behind this card, and will they even tell me their name?2 vs 1
- Does buying a coffee create a taxable disposal, and will they hand me the record?3 vs 2
Largest single reason RedotPay Card is ahead: availability (+15.6 display points).Scenario cost: RedotPay Card has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
79 vs 41 · gap 38.0Why ether.fi Cash ranks above Plutus Card
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 floor bound on one of the rows keeps the reproduced gap (45.0) from matching the displayed one exactly, which is stated rather than hidden.
DimensionThisether.fi CashGap share
Availability · 23% weight6.012.0−15.6, worse
Published criteria · 35% weight5.316.6−29.4, 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 criterionThisether.fi CashPoints
What does one swipe abroad actually cost me, and can I work that out before I sign up? · w3348−4.22, worse
Will this card still work next month, and who has to fail for it to stop? · w2617−4.99, worse
Whose licence is actually behind this card, and will they even tell me their name? · w2114−2.02, worse
Does buying a coffee create a taxable disposal, and will they hand me the record? · w2028−3.84, worse
Net4179−38.0≈
Your scenario
Plutus Card is not priced for this scenario
Percentage and fixed legs on each payment, for a year. Excludes chargebacks, FX markup and settlement fees priced separately. 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
Payments per month · your input500
Average payment · your input$100
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 28 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 28 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 #9 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 28 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
What does one swipe abroad actually cost me, and can I work that out before I sign up?strength 4 · weight 33Report an error—28 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.Will this card still work next month, and who has to fail for it to stop?strength 1 · weight 26Report an error—28 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.Whose licence is actually behind this card, and will they even tell me their name?strength 1 · weight 21Report an error—28 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.Does buying a coffee create a taxable disposal, and will they hand me the record?strength 2 · weight 20Report an error—28 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
- Regulatory failure: no licence where you are, or a forced market exit.Scored by Whose licence is actually behind this card, and will they even tell me their name? · 21% (Plutus Card 1/10)Scored by Does buying a coffee create a taxable disposal, and will they hand me the record? · 20% (Plutus Card 2/10)
- Exit failure (Plutus Card 1/10): you cannot get out at par, on time, or with what is yours.Scored by Will this card still work next month, and who has to fail for it to stop? · 26%
Not assessed by this ranking: Control failure, Liveness failure, Custody failure, Insolvency failure, Execution 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: What does one swipe abroad actually cost me, and can I work that out before I sign up? (33%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- From https://
www .plutus .it /fees (HTTP 200, fetched 28 September 2026), verbatim rows across the plan columns "Starter" / "Everyday" / "Premium": "1.3 Trading Fee" "1%" "0%" "0%"; "1.4 Virtual Card Order Fee" "Free"; "1.6 Physical Card Order Fee" "€9.99 / £9.99"; "2.1 Point of Sale transaction (Domestic)*" "Free"; "2.2 Point of Sale transaction (Non Domestic)*" "2.5%" on all three plans; "3.1 ATM withdrawal" "2.5%" on all three plans; "4.1 Single Card Transaction Limit" "£500,000 /€500,000". Footnote: "However, if you use a EURO-denominated card to make a payment in a currency other than EURO, a 2.5% fee will be imposed (classified as a non-domestic transaction)." The page carries no last-updated stamp of its own; its only date is "© Plutus 2025". Subscriptions, https:// www .plutus .it /plans (fetched 28 September 2026): "Starter (£/€)" "6.99 / month*", "Everyday(£/€)" "9.99 / month*", "Premium (£/€)" "19.99 / month*". These prices govern a card the vendor says cannot currently be spent: https:// www .plutus .it /blog /plutus-q 1-migration-faq (dated 20 February 2026, still the newest status notice on 28 September 2026) says "even while card spending is not possible".Plutus Card — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDPlutus Card — official pricing page ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- READ ON https://
www .plutus .it /legal /terms-and-conditions /eur (HTTP 200, loaded 17 August 2026), stamped 'EEA Terms & Conditions' / 'Effective Date: 20 February 2025' / 'Last updated: 8 April 2025'. The binding cardholder-facing document never names the issuer. - Supported chains
- Not published
- Markets served
- europe
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- MARKET RESTRICTION, not a sanctions representation — and it is structural, expressed as two separate legal entities with two separate terms sets. https://
www .plutus .it /legal /terms-and-conditions /eur (HTTP 200, loaded 17 August 2026) presents an 'EEA' / 'UK' toggle and the EEA text reads: '1.2 These Terms and Conditions govern the way in which we provide our services, fiat currency products, reward points and crypto-assets to consumers based in Lithuania and EEA (where applicable)' and '1.1 We are Block Code LT UAB, trading as Plutus, a company incorporated in Lithuania with company number 305848086'. The footer of every page carries the UK counterparty: 'Plutus is the trading name of Block Code Ltd, Block Code Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales (09674279) and BLOCK CODE LT UAB, a company registered in Lithuania under company registration (NIPC) number 305848086 whose registered office is at Vilnius, Vilkpėdės g. 22.' Availability is further qualified inside the programme itself: '4.2 Availability of our services and reward programmes may vary according to your geographical location and the third-party providers we work with. For example, certain PRS rewards may only be available in specific countries where we have established partnerships with local merchants. Similarly, the availability of Plutus Card top-ups and spending features may depend on regional banking regulations and payment network support.' Complaints handling is likewise EEA-bound: '34.7 We will accept complaints in English, Lithuanian or the language which we individually agreed in the agreement with you.' A US expansion is stated as a FUTURE plan only, not current availability, in https:// www .plutus .it /blog /plutus-q 1-migration-faq (loaded 17 August 2026): 'New payment options for utilities in new regions, including the US and UAE'. The EEA terms as loaded carry no standard OFAC/sanctions representation clause; the geographic language here is genuinely a footprint restriction (EEA + UK), not a boilerplate eligibility rule.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Plutus Card: 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.
12 methodology entries
- 28 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 41, #9 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
2026.10.7Forty-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 crypto_card:plutus-card:2026.10.18:63e40e0eb320
Are you Plutus Card? 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.