Provider at a glance
- Category
- Crypto Remittances
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- remitly.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 73 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in October 2026.
Remitly (stablecoin rails)
Remittances with stablecoin payouts
Crypto Remittances
#3 Overall
Ranked #3 of 7 crypto remittances in the published ranking
73
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Remitly (stablecoin rails) right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Delivered Value at USD 2008/10; the category best is 9
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Corridor Proof and Payout Method7/10 here; Félix Pago scores 10
- Recipient Burden3/10 here; Félix Pago scores 10
- Payout Partner and Two-Leg Regulatory Exposure6/10 here; Félix Pago scores 9
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 remittance corridor shows where it lands for you.
What will Remitly (stablecoin rails) cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is Remitly (stablecoin rails)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read October 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Remitly (stablecoin rails)
Compare all 4- 1Morse (formerly Sling Money)8 points above · stronger on recipient burden (8 against 3)81
- 2Félix Pago5 points above · stronger on recipient burden (10 against 3)78
- 4Strike Send Globally4 points below · stronger on recipient burden (8 against 3)69
For your setup
Find out if Remitly (stablecoin rails) fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Remitly (stablecoin rails) 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 remittance corridorNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Remitly (stablecoin rails) 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 (20.1 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
358+8.965.09#2/7Loading evidence…
257+5.607.010#3/7Loading evidence…
223+2.118.010#6/7Loading evidence…
186+3.467.09#6/7Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−5behind Félix Pago, #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 Remitly (stablecoin rails)’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.
Recipient Burden 3 → 8 on its ladder · passes Félix Pago+580#3 → #2
Delivered Value at USD 200 8 → 5 on its ladder · Strike Send Globally passes it−366#3 → #4
Corridor Proof and Payout Method 7 → 4 on its ladder · Strike Send Globally passes it−368#3 → #4
Payout Partner and Two-Leg Regulatory Exposure 6 → 1 on its ladder · Strike Send Globally passes it−567#3 → #4
Smallest climb: recipient Burden 3 → 8 passes Félix Pago, #2.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Delivered Value at USD 200 — 8/10, category best 9/10
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Corridor Proof and Payout Method — 7/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Recipient Burden — 3/10 against a category best of 10/10
- Payout Partner and Two-Leg Regulatory Exposure — 6/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- Scope note: this entry scores ONLY Remitly's crypto-wallet delivery method, not Remitly's fiat remittance business, which has no blockchain rail. The distinction is load-bearing — Mexico, the category's anchor corridor, is served by Remitly's fiat rails but NOT by the stablecoin rail (re-verified 2026-09-28: the Mexico corridor page has zero occurrences of "stablecoin" and zero of "USDC", while the stablecoin landing page lists Argentina and Nigeria; the Nigeria corridor page has dropped the "New: Send stablecoins to…" banner it carried in August). In-scope check passed: the product is sender-facing consumer (T&C: "The Stablecoin Payout Services are only available for personal or household use, and not for any business or professional purpose"), it requires the sender to "Provide information about yourself and your recipient", and it is marketed at a named third party — "Offer your loved ones a secure, stable way to receive money." One wrinkle worth naming: the T&C also permits sending "to another digital asset wallet you control", so the same rail can be used as a self-send — that usage would be an offramp and out of scope; the marketed and documented use is the third-party remittance, which is what is scored here. Bridge is cited only as the rail underneath a consumer product, never ranked as a product. The headline finding survives verification with one correction: this is a cheap sender leg (~1.0% all-in at USD 200, published, no login, no promo), undercut in the pool only by Morse (about 0.28% on 2026-09-28), precisely BECAUSE it stops before the expensive part — the FX Remitly's fiat rails would charge for is not eliminated, it is relocated onto the recipient's own exchange account, unpriced and undisclosed. Remitly's own T&C concede the relocation: "your recipient’s crypto custodian may charge you or your recipient additional fees".
Competitive position
Where Remitly (stablecoin rails) 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#3 / 715.1 of 30 · best 20.2
Friction#1 / 72.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 73.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 78.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Remitly (stablecoin rails) leads
- Delivered Value at USD 200#2 / 7
- Corridor Proof and Payout Method#3 / 7
Where it trails
- Recipient Burden#6 / 7
- Payout Partner and Two-Leg Regulatory Exposure#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.
Strike Send Globally#4 of 7 · score 69 · 4.0 points behind
Remitly (stablecoin rails) leads on
- Delivered Value at USD 2008 vs 3
- Corridor Proof and Payout Method7 vs 6
Strike Send Globally leads on
- Recipient Burden8 vs 3
- Payout Partner and Two-Leg Regulatory Exposure7 vs 6
Largest single reason Remitly (stablecoin rails) is ahead: published criteria (+4.4 display points).Scenario cost: Strike Send Globally has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Félix Pago#2 of 7 · score 78 · 5.0 points ahead
Remitly (stablecoin rails) leads on
- Delivered Value at USD 2008 vs 6
Félix Pago leads on
- Corridor Proof and Payout Method10 vs 7
- Recipient Burden10 vs 3
- Payout Partner and Two-Leg Regulatory Exposure9 vs 6
Largest single reason Félix Pago is ahead: published criteria (+13.3 display points).Scenario cost: Félix Pago has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Morse (formerly Sling Money)#1 of 7 · score 81 · 8.0 points ahead
Remitly (stablecoin rails) leads onNo scored criterion
Morse (formerly Sling Money) leads on
- Delivered Value at USD 2009 vs 8
- Corridor Proof and Payout Method9 vs 7
- Recipient Burden8 vs 3
Largest single reason Morse (formerly Sling Money) is ahead: published criteria (+13.3 display points).Scenario cost: Morse (formerly Sling Money) has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
81 vs 73 · gap 8.0Why Morse (formerly Sling Money) ranks above Remitly (stablecoin rails)
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 8.0 to within rounding. Remitly (stablecoin rails) is ahead on availability (+5.2 in its favour).
DimensionThisMorse (formerly Sling Money)Gap share
Availability · 23% weight14.012.0+5.2, better
Published criteria · 35% weight15.120.2−13.3, 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 criterionThisMorse (formerly Sling Money)Points
Delivered Value at USD 200 · w3589−1.12, worse
Corridor Proof and Payout Method · w2579−1.60, worse
Recipient Burden · w2238−3.52, worse
Payout Partner and Two-Leg Regulatory Exposure · w1867−0.58, worse
Net7381−8.0
Your scenario
Remitly (stablecoin rails) is not priced for this scenario
Transfer 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 28 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 medianNot priced0 of 7 rows priced
Cheapest pricedNone pricedDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filter
7 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 28 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.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 28 October 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Delivered Value at USD 200strength 8 · weight 35Report an error—28 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.Corridor Proof and Payout Methodstrength 7 · weight 25Report an error—28 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.Recipient Burdenstrength 3 · weight 22Report an error—28 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 Partner and Two-Leg Regulatory Exposurestrength 6 · weight 18Report an error—28 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 (Remitly (stablecoin rails) 6/10): no licence where you are, or a forced market exit.Scored by Payout Partner and Two-Leg Regulatory Exposure · 18%
- Execution failure (Remitly (stablecoin rails) 7/10): you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by Corridor Proof and Payout Method · 25%
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: Delivered Value at USD 200 (35%), Recipient Burden (22%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- From https://
www .remitly .com /us /en /landing /send-stablecoin-with-remitly (fetched 28 September 2026, HTTP 200). Under the heading "Stablecoin transfer fees" the page states "As a reminder, we don’t charge fees for recipients to receive money." Its fee table pairs "1.99 USD" with "Bank account", "3.99 USD" with "Debit card", and "3.99 USD + 3% fee" with "Credit card". The value block reads "Fees as low as 1.99 USD when you send from a bank account." The rate is published in Remitly's corridor guide https:// www .remitly .com /blog /money-transfer /how-to-send-stablecoins-to-nigeria / ("Original Publish Date: Dec 16, 2025"): "You’ll see a 1:1 exchange rate—every U.S. dollar you send is delivered as one USDC." and "Remitly offers clear pricing with flat fees and no exchange‑rate markup." The Stablecoin Payout Terms are now an HTML page at https:// www .remitly .com /us /en /home /stablecoin _terms ("Effective Date: August 25, 2025"). They hedge the fee ("You may be charged a stablecoin payout fee when you send a stablecoin payout. View the current fee on your Remitly App.") and add "Our Crypto Services Provider(s) will not charge you additional fees. However, your financial institution or your recipient’s crypto custodian may charge you or your recipient additional fees when you use the Stablecoin Payout Services." Worked example (our arithmetic, US->Nigeria, USD 200 from a bank account): the fee of 1.99 is 0.995%. USDC/USD spot was 1 (api.coinbase.com, 28 September 2026), so the 1:1 conversion adds no margin, and about 198.01 USDC arrives in the recipient's wallet. The USDC->NGN step at a third-party exchange is not priced by Remitly. US->Mexico is not served on this rail.Remitly (stablecoin rails) — official pricing page ↗ · 28 October 2026 - Prices published in
- USDRemitly (stablecoin rails) — official pricing page ↗ · 28 October 2026
- Licences held
- United States: Registration / authorisation
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- UNCHANGED. All licence quotes re-verified character-exact on 12 August 2026. Sender leg is the strongest in the pool. The licences page states "We are authorized to transmit money in all U.S. states and Washington, D.C."
- Supported chains
- US → Nigeria (USDC to recipient crypto wallet; no NGN payout on this rail), US → Argentina (USDC to recipient crypto wallet; no ARS payout on this rail), Sender-side exclusions: New York, Alaska, Texas (verified verbatim 12 August 2026), US → Mexico: NOT supported on the stablecoin rail (fiat rails only; Mexico corridor page has 0 occurrences of "stablecoin" and 0 of "USDC"), Networks published (global list, not per-corridor): Ethereum, Solana, Avalanche (C-Chain), Arbitrum, Optimism, Polygon, Stellar, Base
- 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 Remitly (stablecoin rails): 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.
9 methodology entries
- 28 October 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 73, #3 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
2026.10.6A 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 remittances:remitly_stablecoin:2026.10.18:1308ddf65bf7
Are you Remitly (stablecoin rails)? 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.