Provider at a glance
- Category
- Onramps
- Entity
- Not verified
- Official website
- topperpay.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 54 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in September 2026.
Topper (Uphold)
Self-custody onramp widget from Uphold
Onramps
#8 Overall
Ranked #8 of 16 onramps in the published ranking
54
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Topper (Uphold) right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- Purchase cost5/10 here; the category best is 8
- Quote honesty3/10 here; Stripe Crypto Onramp scores 5
- Named licence5/10 here; Mercuryo scores 6
- KYC and speed5/10 here; the category best is 7
Not yet tested for your country. Markets it lists: United States, Canada, Europe, Latin America, Asia, Australia. Restricted: Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Ireland, Austria….
to test where you can use it.
The rank above is the published one, the same for every reader. Find my best crypto onramp shows where it lands for you.
What will Topper (Uphold) cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- How do you buy?
- One-time
- Amount
- $1k
How safe is Topper (Uphold)?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read September 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Topper (Uphold)
Compare all 4- 7Mercuryo3 points above · stronger on quote honesty (4 against 3)57
- 9Stripe Crypto OnrampLevel on score · stronger on quote honesty (5 against 3)54
- 10Onramp.money3 points below · weaker on quote honesty (2 against 3)51
For your setup
Find out if Topper (Uphold) fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Topper (Uphold) 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 onrampNothing is inferred from clicks, popularity or commercial value.
Why this rank
Why Topper (Uphold) ranks #8
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (14.3 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
345+5.445.08#6/16Loading evidence…
263+2.504.56#11/16Loading evidence…
225+3.526.09#11/16Loading evidence…
185+2.885.07#7/16Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
Margin−3behind Mercuryo, #7
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 52–56 and ranks #8–#9
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 Topper (Uphold)’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.
What does a €200 purchase actually cost me — by card and by bank, all-in? 5 → 7 on its ladder · passes Mercuryo+258#8 → #7
Is the number on the widget the number that settles? 3 → 5 on its ladder · passes Mercuryo+257#8 → #7
Whose money-transmission licence is my money riding — and is that entity my counterparty? 5 → 8 on its ladder · passes Mercuryo+358#8 → #7
How much identity do I surrender before the coins land in my wallet, and how long does that take? 5 → 8 on its ladder · passes Mercuryo+357#8 → #7
What does a €200 purchase actually cost me — by card and by bank, all-in? 5 → 4 on its ladder · Stripe Crypto Onramp passes it−152#8 → #9
Is the number on the widget the number that settles? 3 → 2 on its ladder · Stripe Crypto Onramp passes it−152#8 → #9
Whose money-transmission licence is my money riding — and is that entity my counterparty? 5 → 4 on its ladder · Stripe Crypto Onramp passes it−153#8 → #9
Smallest climb: “What does a €200 purchase actually cost me — by card and by bank, all-in?” 5 → 7 passes Mercuryo, #7.
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 a €200 purchase actually cost me — by card and by bank, all-in? — 5/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Is the number on the widget the number that settles? — 3/10 against a category best of 6/10
- Whose money-transmission licence is my money riding — and is that entity my counterparty? — 5/10 against a category best of 9/10
- How much identity do I surrender before the coins land in my wallet, and how long does that take? — 5/10 against a category best of 7/10
Record watch-outs
- The fee is published but the price is not: Topper's fee article (edited 2026-06-29, read 2026-09-29) charges 4.25% by card and 4.89% by PIX with a $3.99 minimum but never mentions an exchange-rate spread, partner fees are added on top ('Order Detail Fee = Topper's Fee + Partner's Fee'), and the terms say every purchase is final while committing to no delivery window and no benchmark for the rate.
Competitive position
Where Topper (Uphold) 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#4 / 1612.0 of 20 · best 14.0
Published criteria#9 / 1610.8 of 30 · best 16.9
Friction#1 / 162.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 163.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#3 / 168.3 of 18 · best 13.8
Where Topper (Uphold) leads
- What does a €200 purchase actually cost me — by card and by bank, all-in?#6 / 16
Where it trails
- Is the number on the widget the number that settles?#11 / 16
- Whose money-transmission licence is my money riding — and is that entity my counterparty?#11 / 16
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.
Stripe Crypto Onramp#9 of 16 · score 54 · same score
Topper (Uphold) leads on
- What does a €200 purchase actually cost me — by card and by bank, all-in?5 vs 4
Stripe Crypto Onramp leads on
- Is the number on the widget the number that settles?5 vs 3
- Whose money-transmission licence is my money riding — and is that entity my counterparty?6 vs 5
Largest single reason Topper (Uphold) is ahead: availability (+2.6 display points).Scenario cost: Stripe Crypto Onramp has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Mercuryo#7 of 16 · score 57 · 3.0 points ahead
Topper (Uphold) leads onNo scored criterion
Mercuryo leads on
- Is the number on the widget the number that settles?4 vs 3
- Whose money-transmission licence is my money riding — and is that entity my counterparty?6 vs 5
Largest single reason Mercuryo is ahead: published criteria (+2.9 display points).Scenario cost: Mercuryo has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Onramp.money#10 of 16 · score 51 · 3.0 points behind
Topper (Uphold) leads on
- Is the number on the widget the number that settles?3 vs 2
- Whose money-transmission licence is my money riding — and is that entity my counterparty?5 vs 4
Onramp.money leads onNo scored criterion
Largest single reason Topper (Uphold) is ahead: published criteria (+3.1 display points).Scenario cost: Onramp.money has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
81 vs 54 · gap 27.0Why Transak ranks above Topper (Uphold)
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 27.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisTransakGap share
Availability · 23% weight12.012.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight10.815.6−12.5, worse
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight8.313.8−14.3, worse
Published criterionThisTransakPoints
What does a €200 purchase actually cost me — by card and by bank, all-in? · w3457−2.18, worse
Is the number on the widget the number that settles? · w2636−2.50, worse
Whose money-transmission licence is my money riding — and is that entity my counterparty? · w2256−0.70, worse
How much identity do I surrender before the coins land in my wallet, and how long does that take? · w1857−1.15, worse
Net5481−27.0
Your scenario
Topper (Uphold) is not priced for this scenario
Purchase spread on what you buy: on one purchase, or for a year of purchases or of trading. Fixed purchase fees and deposit fees are not published as fields yet, so they are excluded, as are network gas and any withdrawal fee. Change an input and every figure recomputes from the published rate; the published rank does not move.
cost on your amount · default scenario — set your own
How do you buy?
How do you buy? · your inputOne-time
Amount · your input$1k
Rate read from the provider’s published pricing ↗ on 28 September 2026.
cost on your amountCost is stated as cost on your amount 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$154 of 16 rows priced
Cheapest priced$9.90 · TransakDifference not stated · availability not applied — set your country to filterCompare with Transak
12 of 16 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.RobustnessOne point from changingrank #8 to #9 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 28 September 2026.
Reading the evidence ledger…
CriterionSourceTypeReadFreshnessStatusReceipt
What does a €200 purchase actually cost me — by card and by bank, all-in?strength 5 · weight 34Report 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.Is the number on the widget the number that settles?strength 3 · 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 money-transmission licence is my money riding — and is that entity my counterparty?strength 5 · weight 22Report 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 much identity do I surrender before the coins land in my wallet, and how long does that take?strength 5 · weight 18Report 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 (Topper (Uphold) 5/10): no licence where you are, or a forced market exit.Scored by Whose money-transmission licence is my money riding — and is that entity my counterparty? · 22%
- Execution failure (Topper (Uphold) 3/10): you get a worse price, later, or nothing.Scored by Is the number on the widget the number that settles? · 26%
- Information failure (Topper (Uphold) 5/10): the number is wrong or bought, or your data leaks.Scored by How much identity do I surrender before the coins land in my wallet, and how long does that take? · 18%
Not assessed by this ranking: Control failure, Liveness failure, Custody failure, Insolvency failure, Exit 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 a €200 purchase actually cost me — by card and by bank, all-in? (34%).
Facts
facts, not scoresWhat the record publishes
- Pricing
- Topper help article "Topper costs and fees" (https://
support .topperpay .com /hc /en-us /articles /8926549324444 -Topper-costs-and-fees, last edited 29 June 2026; the HTML page returns HTTP 403 to non-browser clients, so it was read through the help-centre API, HTTP 200, fetched 29 September 2026). Topperpay.com buying fees by payment method: Credit/Debit cards "4.25%"; Google Pay "4.25%"; Apple Pay "4.25%"; SEPA bank transfer "0.99%"; Pix "4.89%"; PayPal "4.25%"; Venmo "4.25%". "The minimum fee applied to any transaction is $3.99 USD." Partner orders: "Order Detail Fee = Topper's Fee + Partner's Fee." Network fees "are a separate charge from Topper's buying or selling fees". The article says nothing about an exchange-rate spread. Worked example (our arithmetic, not a Topper figure): a purchase worth EUR 200 costs 4.25 percent (about EUR 8.50) by card or 4.89 percent (about EUR 9.78) by Pix, plus network fee and any partner fee; the 0.99 percent SEPA fee would fall below the $3.99 USD minimum at that size, but every EEA country is on Topper's unsupported list since the MiCA transition ended. The 18 August 2026 note quoted a percentage range from a 17 October 2025 archive of this article; the live article carries this schedule instead.Topper (Uphold) — official page at support.topperpay.com ↗ · 28 September 2026 - Prices published in
- USDTopper (Uphold) — official page at support.topperpay.com ↗ · 28 September 2026
- Licences held
- Not published
- Compliance level
- partial
- Regulatory note
- IDENTITY — the counterparty split is stated in the terms preamble (immediately before '1. General'): 'Topper is offered by Uphold HQ Inc. to individuals residing in the U.S. (other than New York), by Uphold Operating Canada Ltd. to individuals residing in Canada, by Uphold Europe Limited to individuals residing in the UK, and by Uphold Worldwide Ltd. to individuals residing elsewhere.' (topperpay.
- Supported chains
- Not published
- Markets served
- us, ca, europe, latam, asia, au
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Ireland, Austria, Belgium, Poland, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- A named exclusion list, not a sanctions representation. Topper's help article "Which countries are not supported by Topper?" (last edited 3 August 2026, read through the help-centre API on 29 September 2026) says "our services may not be available in certain jurisdictions due to legal or regulatory constraints" and lists 126 jurisdictions, up from 87 in the 17 October 2025 archive the August note used. It now includes every EEA member state (among them Germany, France, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Ireland, Poland, Norway and Iceland), plus India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Kenya, Egypt, Turkey, Ukraine and "New York (U.S.)". The UK, Switzerland, Canada, Australia, Brazil and the rest of the US are not on it. topperpay.com/legal says Uphold Digital Assets Europe's "MiCAR application remains under active review" and that "we have introduced temporary service restrictions" since the transition ended on 1 July 2026; the Terms (Last updated 1 September 2026) state "These Terms do not apply to individuals residing in the EEA". Rails: "Pix", "SEPA bank transfer", "PayPal" and "Venmo" are priced on the fee article.
No confirmed legal entity is on file for this record. Nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Topper (Uphold): 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.
14 methodology entries
- 28 September 2026Current verified snapshot · methodology 2026.10.18Score 54, #8 of 16. 4 of 4 criteria scored. History starts here; earlier values are not interpolated.
- 28 October 2026
2026.10.14An exchange's fee is scored at the rate the entity serving the reader's country charges- changed Exchanges and onramps: the fee term of the score reads the rate of the entity that serves the reader's country (taker fee, spread); with no country, the record's base rate. Replaces 2026.10.13's dearest rate.
- added A country whose rates differ from the base records has its own order, the questionnaire run for that country: /best with the country set, Find my best, compare and the country landing print it. 22 questionnaire countries (the EEA ones and the United States) have one for exchanges.
- added A row whose serving entity's rate was not read carries "regional rate not read" (Coinbase for EEA, UK and US readers: its retail fee table is behind sign-in; Kraken and Bybit for UK readers; OKX outside the EEA and the US, whose global page could not be loaded).
- changed OKX: the 0.20% / 0.10% spot-only rate is the EEA entity's and applies to EEA readers only; OKX has no base rate, so its published fee term is neutral.
- 28 October 2026
2026.10.13A venue that charges by entity is priced for each reader by the entity that serves them, and scored on its dearest entity's rate- changed Exchanges and onramps: the fee term of the score reads the dearest entry rate a venue publishes for any of its entities (taker fee, spread), not the rate of one entity.
- added Pricing records carry regional entries (entity, verbatim quote, source, read date); every cost a reader sees, on the list, the provider page and the country page, is computed on the entry for their country.
- changed Exchange scores this rule gave, before and after; 2026.10.14 replaced it in the same release, so they were never the published order: Bitstamp 79 to 81 (#3 to #1), Bybit 81 to 78 (#1 to #2), Upbit 76 to 78 (#4 to #3), Binance 75 to 76 (#5 to #4), OKX 80 to 73 (#2 to #5), Coinbase 69 to 71, Luno 69 to 70, Bitvavo 62 to 69, VALR 58 to 62 (#10 to #9), Kraken 60 to 62 (#9 to #10), CoinDCX 45 to 51 (#12 to #11), Gemini 48 to 49 (#11 to #12), Mercado Bitcoin 42 to 44. Bitso is unchanged at 41 (#14).
- added On every build three checks fail: a price without the currency it is billed in, a regional entry its quote does not bear out or a venue with a separate EEA entity and no EEA rate, and a provider that no longer operates still carrying a price.
- 20 October 2026
2026.10.11Two new requirements: the chain you swap on, and a MiCA authorisation in the onramp's own name- added DEXs: "Which chain do you swap on?" (Ethereum or another EVM chain, Solana, or several). Solana keeps only Orca and Raydium; EVM removes Orca, Raydium and Osmosis; it keeps a venue with two years of pools on any EVM chain, not necessarily the reader's. Each venue's chains come from data/dex-chain-deployments.json, read from DefiLlama on 2026-10-20.
- added Onramps: "Authorised under MiCA in its own name" removes Transak, Mercuryo (it rides Criptan's authorisation), Stripe (its terms do not name the crypto provider), Topper (Uphold), Alchemy Pay and five regional rails (Koywe, Onramp Money, Onmeta, Fonbnk, Kotani Pay); six providers authorised in their own name remain. Each row is matched to ESMA's register by LEI (data/esma-casps.json, read 2026-10-10).
- added On every build a test holds each of the eight flagship categories to at least one answer that changes its winner.
Methodology 2026.10.18, the same published run every visitor sees · receipt onramp:topper:2026.10.18:81e0d99e7baa
Are you Topper (Uphold)? 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.
Show this rank on your site
Editorial review of Topper , on file since April 2026 — the review is separate from the score.