Provider at a glance
- Category
- Crypto Offramps
- Entity
- All 2 Transak products
- Official website
- transak.com
Independent rankingchecked How it works
Details
Scored 58 out of 100 under methodology 2026.10.18, from the evidence read in October 2026.
Transak
Crypto-to-fiat widget
Crypto Offramps
#4 Overall
Ranked #4 of 7 crypto offramps in the published ranking
58
ChainChoice Score
The ChainChoice Score, shown against 100: published scores run from 41 to 99.- High evidence confidence
Is Transak right for you?
Look elsewhere if these come first
- All-in cost of a representative sale4/10 here; the category best is 9
- Spread disclosure and quote binding6/10 here; Banxa scores 7
- Payout rails speed and coverage4/10 here; Coinbase scores 6
- Verified licences and regulated footprint5/10 here; MoonPay 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 offramp shows where it lands for you.
What will Transak cost you?
Not priced on this basis
- Your monthly volume
- $1k
How safe is Transak?
- Evidence: verified4 of 4 criteria rest on quoted, sourced receipts. Read October 2026.
- LicenceMiCA (EU): no register record on file here.
Alternatives to Transak
Compare all 4- 3CoinbaseLevel on score · stronger on licence depth (8 against 5)58
- 5Banxa5 points below · stronger on payout speed rails (6 against 4)53$240
- 6MoonPay5 points below · stronger on licence depth (9 against 5)53
For your setup
Find out if Transak fits you
The rank above is the published one — the same for every visitor. Answer the category's questions and this section shows where Transak 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 Transak ranks #4
Each strength is read from evidence on a 0–10 ladder and weighted as the published methodology states. The 32 objective points these produce (14.9 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
404+5.124.09#4/7Loading evidence…
256+4.806.08#3/7Loading evidence…
204+2.566.09#7/7Loading evidence…
155+2.407.09#7/7Loading evidence…
Hairline = best in this ranking · tick = its median · a missing bar is "not scored", never zero
MarginLevelbehind Coinbase, #3
RobustnessOne point from changingacross a one-point change to each of its 4 criterion scores, the re-run scores 55–60 and ranks #3–#4
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 Transak’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 4 → 5 on its ladder · passes Coinbase+160#4 → #3
Spread disclosure and quote binding 6 → 7 on its ladder · passes Coinbase+159#4 → #3
Payout rails speed and coverage 4 → 5 on its ladder · passes Coinbase+159#4 → #3
Verified licences and regulated footprint 5 → 6 on its ladder · passes Coinbase+159#4 → #3
All-in cost of a representative sale 4 → 2 on its ladder · Banxa passes it−253#4 → #6
Spread disclosure and quote binding 6 → 3 on its ladder · Banxa passes it−353#4 → #6
Payout rails speed and coverage 4 → 0 on its ladder · Banxa passes it−453#4 → #6
Smallest climb: all-in cost of a representative sale 4 → 5 passes Coinbase, #3.
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
- All-in cost of a representative sale — 4/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Spread disclosure and quote binding — 6/10 against a category best of 8/10
- Payout rails speed and coverage — 4/10 against a category best of 9/10
- Verified licences and regulated footprint — 5/10 against a category best of 9/10
Record watch-outs
- The advertised "Flat 1% Transak Fee" is contradicted by Transak's own fee article, which adds "a spread of 0% to 2.5%, depending on how volatile the currency is at the time" over the CoinGecko price on top of the rail fee. Worse, the fee page says "The final exchange rate is the rate valid at the time the transaction is deemed final", and an off-ramp order "is deemed final when Transak receives the crypto asset from you" — you send crypto against a price that has not yet been set.
Competitive position
Where Transak 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#6 / 711.2 of 30 · best 20.5
Friction#1 / 72.7 of 10 · constant here
Trust record#1 / 73.2 of 8 · constant here
Measured data#1 / 79.7 of 18 · pool best
Where Transak leads
- Spread disclosure and quote binding#3 / 7
Where it trails
- Payout rails speed and coverage#7 / 7
- Verified licences and regulated footprint#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.
Coinbase#3 of 7 · score 58 · same score
Transak leads on
- Spread disclosure and quote binding6 vs 3
Coinbase leads on
- Payout rails speed and coverage6 vs 4
- Verified licences and regulated footprint8 vs 5
Largest single reason Coinbase is ahead: published criteria (+0.5 display points).Scenario cost: Coinbase has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Banxa#5 of 7 · score 53 · 5.0 points behind
Transak leads on
- All-in cost of a representative sale4 vs 2
Banxa leads on
- Spread disclosure and quote binding7 vs 6
- Payout rails speed and coverage6 vs 4
- Verified licences and regulated footprint7 vs 5
Largest single reason Transak is ahead: availability (+5.2 display points).Scenario cost: Transak has no verified pricing for this scenario.
MoonPay#6 of 7 · score 53 · 5.0 points behind
Transak leads on
- All-in cost of a representative sale4 vs 3
- Spread disclosure and quote binding6 vs 3
MoonPay leads on
- Payout rails speed and coverage6 vs 4
- Verified licences and regulated footprint9 vs 5
Largest single reason Transak is ahead: measured data (+3.6 display points).Scenario cost: MoonPay has no verified pricing for this scenario.
Against the leader
82 vs 58 · gap 24.0Why Kraken ranks above Transak
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 24.0 to within rounding.
DimensionThisKrakenGap share
Availability · 23% weight14.014.0same
Published criteria · 35% weight11.220.5−24.2, worse
Friction · 12% weight · constant here2.72.7same
Trust record · 9% weight · constant here3.23.2same
Measured data · 21% weight9.79.7same
Published criterionThisKrakenPoints
All-in cost of a representative sale · w4049−6.40, worse
Spread disclosure and quote binding · w2568−1.60, worse
Payout rails speed and coverage · w2048−2.56, worse
Verified licences and regulated footprint · w1559−1.92, worse
Net5882−24.0
Your scenario
Transak 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 #3 to #4 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 4 · 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 6 · 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 4 · 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 5 · 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 (Transak 5/10): 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% (Transak 6/10)Scored by Payout rails speed and coverage · 20% (Transak 4/10)
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
- Transak help article "How does Transak calculate prices and fees?" (dated 2 September 2026; read 22 October 2026), Off-Ramp Fees: Credit / Debit Card (EUR) "0.99% of transaction amount, minimum 3.49 EUR"; Credit / Debit Card (non-EUR) "4.99% of transaction amount, minimum 5.99 EUR"; SEPA Transfer "0.6% of transaction amount, minimum 3 EUR". The rate is the CoinGecko price "plus a spread of 0% to 2.5%, depending on how volatile the currency is at the time"; a quote "is valid only for a short period — generally between 5 and 10 seconds", and "The final exchange rate is the rate valid at the time the transaction is deemed final" (for off-ramp, when Transak receives the crypto). The transak.com/off-ramp page (read 22 October 2026) still advertises a "Flat 1% Transak Fee".Transak — official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Prices published in
- USDTransak — official pricing page ↗ · 22 October 2026
- Licences held
- United Kingdom: Registration / authorisation, United States: Registration / authorisation, Australia: Registration / authorisation
- Compliance level
- full
- Regulatory note
- Transak Limited — FCA, registered cryptoasset firm, FRN 928910 as printed in the terms (the compliance page prints the registration without a number).
- Supported chains
- Not published
- Markets served
- global
- Primary markets
- Not published
- Restricted markets
- Not published
- Operating limits
- Not published
- Availability note
- Transak Terms of Service ("Last Updated: September 21, 2026", read 22 October 2026): users residing in India, the United States, Australia and Canada are served by local Transak entities, and "Users residing in all other countries are serviced by Transak Limited", which "is a registered cryptoasset firm with the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FRN: 928910)"; "If you are a resident in any jurisdiction not specifically named in these terms and you decide to use Transak Services of your own accord, you will be serviced by Transak Limited." Users must comply with "OFAC, EU and UN" sanctions. The off-ramp page (read 22 October 2026) advertises "Off-Ramp to 18 + Countries" without naming them; payouts go to a bank account (SEPA for EUR) or a card. No named country list is published on these pages.
Legal entity on file: Transak, placed in 2 products. Only confirmed entities are shown; nothing is inferred from the brand name.
If something goes wrong with Transak: 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 58, #4 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:transak_offramp:2026.10.18:e7aeff96beb3
Are you Transak? 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.