Provider at a glance
- Category
- Crypto Payroll
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- requestfinance.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 53 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in October 2026.
Request Finance
Invoicing and payables for crypto teams
Crypto Payroll
#6 Overall
Ranked #6 of 7 crypto payroll in the published ranking
53
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
- $0.00 your cost/yr
Is Request Finance right for you?
Right for you if these matter most
- Cost clarity per seat8/10, the category best
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Compliant coverage where you employ1/10 here; Rise (Rise Works) scores 4
- Custody of payroll float3/10 here; Papaya Global scores 7
- Tax forms & filing coverage1/10 here; Opolis 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 crypto payroll platform shows where it lands for you.
What will Request Finance cost you?
$0.00 your cost/yr
The fee alone, plus network gas.
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
- Payroll spread
- 0%
How safe is Request Finance?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read October 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Request Finance
Compare all 4- 4Papaya Global10 points above · stronger on tax filings (6 against 1)63
- 5Rise (Rise Works)5 points above · stronger on tax filings (5 against 1)58
- 7Opolis11 points below · stronger on tax filings (9 against 1)42$120
For your setup
Find out if Request Finance fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Request Finance 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 payroll platformNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Request Finance 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 (9.3 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
301+0.963.06#6/7Loading evidence…
263+2.505.07#5/7Loading evidence…
241+0.776.09#7/7Loading evidence…
208+5.127.08#1/7Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−5behind Rise (Rise Works), #5
RobustnessHoldsacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 52–55 and stays #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 Request Finance’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.
Compliant coverage where you employ 1 → 4 on its ladder · passes Rise (Rise Works)+359#6 → #5
Custody of payroll float 3 → 6 on its ladder · passes Rise (Rise Works)+358#6 → #5
Tax forms & filing coverage 1 → 5 on its ladder · passes Rise (Rise Works)+459#6 → #5
Smallest climb: compliant coverage where you employ 1 → 4 passes Rise (Rise Works), #5.
Strengths
1 from the score dataWhere it leads
Best for readers who weight
- Cost clarity per seat — 8/10, the category best
Tradeoffs
3 from the score dataWhere it trails
Not for readers who put first
- Compliant coverage where you employ — 1/10 against a category best of 6/10
- Custody of payroll float — 3/10 against a category best of 7/10
- Tax forms & filing coverage — 1/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- It is an accounts-payable and invoicing tool marketed adjacent to payroll, not a payroll compliance provider — a buyer scoring it on tax-form and…
- Stablecoin payouts are free on every plan, but each off-ramp to a bank account costs 1% on Starter or 0.5% on Growth and above, plus $10 per local or $30 per SWIFT transfer.
Competitive position
Where Request Finance 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 / 720.0 of 20 · pool best
Published criteria#7 / 77.0 of 30 · best 14.8
Friction#6 / 72.7 of 10 · best 4.7
Trust record#4 / 73.2 of 8 · best 4.8
Measured data#1 / 78.3 of 18 · constant here
Where Request Finance leads
- Cost clarity per seat#1 / 7
Where it trails
- Compliant coverage where you employ#6 / 7
- Custody of payroll float#5 / 7
- Tax forms & filing coverage#7 / 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.
Rise (Rise Works)#5 of 7 · score 58 · 5.0 points ahead
Request Finance leads on
- Custody of payroll float3 vs 1
- Cost clarity per seat8 vs 5
Rise (Rise Works) leads on
- Compliant coverage where you employ4 vs 1
- Tax forms & filing coverage5 vs 1
Largest single reason Rise (Rise Works) is ahead: published criteria (+4.7 display points).Scenario cost: not compared, since Request Finance's figure is the fee alone, plus network gas.
Papaya Global#4 of 7 · score 63 · 10.0 points ahead
Request Finance leads on
- Cost clarity per seat8 vs 3
Papaya Global leads on
- Custody of payroll float7 vs 3
- Tax forms & filing coverage6 vs 1
Largest single reason Papaya Global is ahead: published criteria (+7.8 display points).Scenario cost: not compared, since Request Finance's figure is the fee alone, plus network gas.
Opolis#7 of 7 · score 42 · 11.0 points behind
Request Finance leads on
- Cost clarity per seat8 vs 7
Opolis leads on
- Compliant coverage where you employ3 vs 1
- Custody of payroll float5 vs 3
- Tax forms & filing coverage9 vs 1
Largest single reason Request Finance is ahead: availability (+36.4 display points).Scenario cost: not compared, since Request Finance's figure is the fee alone, plus network gas.
Against the leader
83 vs 53 · gap 30.0Why Deel ranks above Request Finance
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 30.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisDeelGap share
Availability · 23% weight20.020.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight7.014.8−20.3, worse
Friction · 12% weight2.74.7−5.2, worse
Trust record · 9% weight3.24.8−4.2, worse
Measured data · 21% weight · constant here8.38.3same
Published criterionThisDeelPoints
Compliant coverage where you employ · w3016−4.80, worse
Custody of payroll float · w2635−1.66, worse
Tax forms & filing coverage · w2417−4.61, worse
Cost clarity per seat · w2087+0.64, better
Net5383−30.0
Your scenario
What Request Finance costs on your scenario
Payroll 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
$1k a month × 12 months × 0% payroll spread = $0.00 / year
Your monthly volume · your input$1k
Payroll spread · published rate0%
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.
$0.00
The fee alone, plus network gas: not a total, and never compared as one.Under the default inputs · USDCategory median and cheapestNot statedOnly 2 of 7 rows publish a comparable price; a median and a cheapest row need at least 3.
4 of 7 rows in this ranking have no verified rate for this scenario and are absent from the median, not counted as free.
1 of 7 quote a zero fee that leaves costs out, so they are absent from the median and the cheapest row, 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.RobustnessHoldsrank #6 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 22 October 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
Compliant coverage where you employstrength 1 · weight 30Report 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.Custody of payroll floatstrength 3 · weight 26Report 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.Tax forms & filing coveragestrength 1 · weight 24Report 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.Cost clarity per seatstrength 8 · 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.How you can lose money here, and what the ranking scores
- Custody failure (Request Finance 3/10): whoever holds the assets loses or withholds them.Scored by Custody of payroll float · 26%
- Regulatory failure: no licence where you are, or a forced market exit.Scored by Compliant coverage where you employ · 30% (Request Finance 1/10)Scored by Tax forms & filing coverage · 24% (Request Finance 1/10)
Not assessed by this ranking: Control failure, Liveness failure, Insolvency failure, Execution 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: Cost clarity per seat (20%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Request Finance pricing page (requestfinance.com/pricing, read 22 October 2026), monthly prices as the page shows them by default: Free "$0" (invoicing only); Starter "$50 USD per month" (1 virtual account after self-serve KYB, "Free stablecoin payouts, unlimited volume", unlimited fiat payouts, batch payments and payroll, 1 team member, 1 entity); Growth "$300 USD per month" (up to 3 virtual accounts, unlimited team members, QuickBooks Online and Xero); Pro "$600 USD per month" (up to 15 virtual accounts, up to 3 entities, API access, dedicated senior CSM); Enterprise "priced on request". "Yearly plans include two months free compared to paying monthly"; no yearly figure is printed. "Every plan starts with a 30-day free trial." Transaction fees: "Stablecoin payouts: free, on every plan."; "bank off-ramps are 1% on Starter and 0.5% on Growth and Pro, plus $10 local / $30 SWIFT per transfer"; funding: "USDC top-ups are free, USDT top-ups are 0.30%, and USD bank top-ups are 0.30%", EUR, BRL, MXN and GBP bank top-ups "0.60%". Worked example (Request's own): "a $10,000 SWIFT transfer on Growth costs $50 + $30 = $80".Request Finance official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Prices published in
- USDRequest Finance official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- Not published
- Supported chains
- Multi-chain stablecoin rails
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Employers paying globally
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Self-serve: every plan starts with a 30-day free trial with no credit card required, and the Request Account is activated after self-serve KYB; the Scale plan is 'Talk to sales'. Listed prices are annual billing, and paying yearly saves 17% versus monthly. The pricing page lists no employment, withholding or EOR service.
- Availability note
- Request Finance Terms & Conditions (support.request.finance/legal/terms-and-conditions, read 22 October 2026): users "must not be, and will not be, located in any jurisdiction that is subject to an embargo by the United Kingdom, the European Union, or the United States"; no country is named. Pricing page (read 22 October 2026): "Every plan starts with a 30-day free trial. No credit card required.", the Starter account is "activated after self-serve KYB", Enterprise is "Talk to sales", and payouts reach vendors "in 190+ countries". The pricing page lists no employment, withholding or EOR service.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Request Finance: 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 crypto_payroll:request_finance:2026.10.18:9b43441821c5
Are you Request Finance? 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.