Transak vs Alchemy Pay Transak leads by 39 points.
Transak scores 39 points above Alchemy Pay, led by purchase cost, quote honesty, and named licence. Transak ranks #1 and Alchemy Pay #12 of 16 published onramps. Every term of the gap is on the ledger below; the inputs are on the audit receipt.
Transak81
vs
Alchemy Pay42
Scores are out of 100; published scores fall within 41–99 · ranks #1 and #12 of 16
Published gapAfter score rounding and bounds — see the note below8142+39.0
Weight is in points of the 86-point weighted total. Points are score points of the gap between the two.
TransakScore 81The most disclosed onramp in the pool — full per-rail fee schedule with minimum floors plus a separately stated spread over CoinGecko of 0% to 2.5% depending on volatility (a flat 2.5% in August; read 2026-09-28) — whose own help centre admits the settled amount floats to the settlement-time rate on bank rails, and whose otherwise numbered five-jurisdiction licence stack has a conspicuous MiCA-shaped hole.Strength: All in purchase cost — 7/10Watch-out: The number on the confirm button is not the number that settles: the quote is 'valid only for a short period — generally between 5 and 10 seconds', settlement on bank rails happens at the 'Market Price (at time of bank transfer settlement)', and standard SEPA 'May take up to 3-5 Working Days' — so the buyer wears up to five days of market move, and with a spread of 0% to 2.5% over CoinGecko on top of the 0.99% fee the cheap bank rail lands anywhere from roughly 1% to 3.5% all-in (fee article read 2026-09-28) — though that day Transak's coverage page and countries API listed no EU state and its fiat API offered EUR with no SEPA option.Alchemy PayScore 42Hybrid fiat-crypto ramp with genuinely deep local-rail coverage (UPI, PIX, SPEI, African mobile money) and published numeric KYC tiers, but no public fee schedule anywhere, a licence story whose numbered registers (NMLS, AUSTRAC) belong to entities that are NOT the regional buyer's counterparty, and a sampled UPI all-in near 20%.Strength: Kyc friction time to coins — 6/10Watch-out: The widget will quote you a rate whose spread is never disclosed and can be enormous on exactly the rails this segment exists for — a sampled ₹22,153 UPI purchase delivered USDT at ₹111.9 apiece against the ₹95.79 interbank rate embedded in the same API response, a 19.7% all-in the buyer only discovers by doing the maths on the delivered amount — and if Alchemy Pay rejects your order after capture, clause 6.5 lets it charge you a processing fee to refund your own money.
Quick facts
At a glance
1 of 3 rows read the same for both.
FactTransakAlchemy Pay
PricingSnapshotTransak help-centre article "How does Transak calculate prices and fees?" (https://support.transak.com/en/articles/7845942-how-does-transak-calculate-prices-and-fees), fetched 28 September 2026, HTTP 200 ("Updated over 3 weeks ago"). On-ramp fees: SEPA Transfer "0.99% of transaction amount, minimum 1 EUR"; Credit / Debit Card (EUR) "3.5% of transaction amount + 1 EUR"; Credit / Debit Card (non-EUR) "5.5% of transaction amount + 1 EUR"; Apple Pay / Google Pay (EUR) "3.5% of transaction amount, minimum 1 EUR", (non-EUR) "5.5% of transaction amount, minimum 1 EUR". Rate: "The quoted rate reflects the rate provided via the publicly available market pricing tool CoinGecko at the time of the transaction, plus a spread of 0% to 2.5%, depending on how volatile the currency is at the time." (on 18 August 2026 the same sentence read "plus a spread of 2.5%"). Third-party fees (gas, validator, liquidity) are separate and "displayed before you confirm your transaction". Worked example (our arithmetic, not a Transak figure): a EUR 200 purchase by SEPA = EUR 1.98 fee plus a spread of 0 to 2.5 percent over CoinGecko, an all-in of roughly 1 to 3.5 percent plus network fees; by EUR card = EUR 8.00 fee plus the same spread, roughly 4 to 6.5 percent. A second, USD-denominated on-ramp fee table on transak.com/fees-pricing-calculation (linked as "Pricing & Fees" from the compliance page) prices cards and bank transfers differently and does not say which jurisdiction it applies to.No fee schedule is published. The Alchemy Pay docs page "Fiat currencies, Payment Method Coverages plus Other Details" (https://alchemypay.readme.io/docs/fiat-currency-country-payment-method-coverage-plus-fees-and-limits.md, updatedAt 21 November 2025), fetched 29 September 2026, HTTP 200, links a Notion table "On-Ramp Payment Methods" whose columns (processing time, KYC countries, currencies, KYC level, pay-way code, method type, minimum, maximum and daily limits, documents) include no fee column (read through the Notion API on 29 September 2026). The Crypto Ramp Terms ("Last updated: Dec 25, 2025") say only "9.1 All fees payable under this Agreement are displayed during the purchase flow", and the marketing page says "Your users will appreciate the lowest fees in the industry." Sampled from Alchemy Pay's public quote API on 29 September 2026 (not published prices): a card quote for 200 euros carried a ramp fee of 4.19 percent and delivered about 4.3 percent less USDT than the USD rate in the same response; a Pix quote for 1,206 reais carried a 2.67 percent ramp fee and about 4.5 percent all-in; a UPI quote returned no data that day.
Asset coverageEditorial——
Region fitSnapshotus, europe, caeurope, asia, latam
From the published criteria
Which should you pick?
Transak
81#1 of 16
Leads
Pick it when
Pick Transak if purchase cost matters most — it scores 7/10 to Alchemy Pay's 1/10 there (weight 34).
Strength
All in purchase cost — 7/10
Tradeoff
The number on the confirm button is not the number that settles: the quote is 'valid only for a short period — generally between 5 and 10 seconds', settlement on bank rails happens at the 'Market Price (at time of bank transfer settlement)', and standard SEPA 'May take up to 3-5 Working Days' — so the buyer wears up to five days of market move, and with a spread of 0% to 2.5% over CoinGecko on top of the 0.99% fee the cheap bank rail lands anywhere from roughly 1% to 3.5% all-in (fee article read 2026-09-28) — though that day Transak's coverage page and countries API listed no EU state and its fiat API offered EUR with no SEPA option.
Alchemy Pay
42#12 of 16
Pick it when
Alchemy Pay leads Transak on no published criterion and no score dimension — pick it only if a fact outside the score (country, funding rail, custody) decides for you.
Strength
Kyc friction time to coins — 6/10
Tradeoff
The widget will quote you a rate whose spread is never disclosed and can be enormous on exactly the rails this segment exists for — a sampled ₹22,153 UPI purchase delivered USDT at ₹111.9 apiece against the ₹95.79 interbank rate embedded in the same API response, a 19.7% all-in the buyer only discovers by doing the maths on the delivered amount — and if Alchemy Pay rejects your order after capture, clause 6.5 lets it charge you a processing fee to refund your own money.
Self-identify in 10 seconds
Which one is actually for you?
TransakLeads
Choose Transak if purchase cost matters most
Purchase cost: 7/10 against 1/10 for Alchemy Pay (weight 34)
Quote honesty: 6/10 against 2/10 for Alchemy Pay (weight 26)
Named licence: 6/10 against 3/10 for Alchemy Pay (weight 22)
TransakScore 81The most disclosed onramp in the pool — full per-rail fee schedule with minimum floors plus a separately stated spread over CoinGecko of 0% to 2.5% depending on volatility (a flat 2.5% in August; read 2026-09-28) — whose own help centre admits the settled amount floats to the settlement-time rate on bank rails, and whose otherwise numbered five-jurisdiction licence stack has a conspicuous MiCA-shaped hole.Strength: All in purchase cost — 7/10Watch-out: The number on the confirm button is not the number that settles: the quote is 'valid only for a short period — generally between 5 and 10 seconds', settlement on bank rails happens at the 'Market Price (at time of bank transfer settlement)', and standard SEPA 'May take up to 3-5 Working Days' — so the buyer wears up to five days of market move, and with a spread of 0% to 2.5% over CoinGecko on top of the 0.99% fee the cheap bank rail lands anywhere from roughly 1% to 3.5% all-in (fee article read 2026-09-28) — though that day Transak's coverage page and countries API listed no EU state and its fiat API offered EUR with no SEPA option.
Alchemy Pay
Alchemy Pay leads Transak on no published criterion
Choose it only if something outside the published criteria decides for you — your country, a funding rail, or custody.
Alchemy PayScore 42Hybrid fiat-crypto ramp with genuinely deep local-rail coverage (UPI, PIX, SPEI, African mobile money) and published numeric KYC tiers, but no public fee schedule anywhere, a licence story whose numbered registers (NMLS, AUSTRAC) belong to entities that are NOT the regional buyer's counterparty, and a sampled UPI all-in near 20%.Strength: Kyc friction time to coins — 6/10Watch-out: The widget will quote you a rate whose spread is never disclosed and can be enormous on exactly the rails this segment exists for — a sampled ₹22,153 UPI purchase delivered USDT at ₹111.9 apiece against the ₹95.79 interbank rate embedded in the same API response, a 19.7% all-in the buyer only discovers by doing the maths on the delivered amount — and if Alchemy Pay rejects your order after capture, clause 6.5 lets it charge you a processing fee to refund your own money.
Criterion by criterion
Scorecard
Published criteria · weight in points of 868 of 8 cells scored. Strength is read from the evidence file; the weight is the published one. Methodology
Purchase cost
by 6 of 10weight 8.2 of 86Transak leads
Transak7/10 out of 10
Alchemy Pay1/10 out of 10
Quote honesty
by 4 of 10weight 6.2 of 86Transak leads
Transak6/10 out of 10
Alchemy Pay2/10 out of 10
Named licence
by 3 of 10weight 5.3 of 86Transak leads
Transak6/10 out of 10
Alchemy Pay3/10 out of 10
KYC and speed
by 1 of 10weight 4.3 of 86Transak leads
Transak7/10 out of 10
Alchemy Pay6/10 out of 10
Score dimensions
weights sum to 86
The published score is five dimensions, each weighted for the category. "Published criteria" is the criteria block above; the other four are the engine's own terms — availability, friction, trust record, measured data. Each bar is one side's points out of that dimension's maximum; the weight beside the name is its points of the 86-point weighted total. The published criteria above can fill 24 of the block’s 30. A weight marked “constant here” belongs to a dimension every ranked product in the category holds at the same value: it still counts in the total, and it orders nothing here.
Availabilityweight 20 of 86
Transak12/20Alchemy Pay12/20
Tie
Published criteriaweight 30 of 86
Transak15.6/30Alchemy Pay6.2/30
Transak leads
Frictionweight 10 of 86 · constant here
Transak2.7/10Alchemy Pay2.7/10
Tie
Trust recordweight 8 of 86 · constant here
Transak3.2/8Alchemy Pay3.2/8
Tie
Measured dataweight 18 of 86
Transak13.8/18Alchemy Pay8.3/18
Transak leads
Decision rulePublished order
Choose Transak unless the term Alchemy Pay leads on is the one you are buying.
Alchemy Pay leads Transak on no published criterion and no score dimension — pick it only if a fact outside the score (country, funding rail, custody) decides for you.
The published order weighs every criterion the same way for everyone. To weigh them your way, run .
From the published order
Next best action
If this isn't your case
Other matchups worth comparing
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 money-transmission licence is my money riding — and is that entity my counterparty? · 22% (Transak 6/10, Alchemy Pay 3/10)
Execution failure: you get a worse price, later, or nothing.
Scored by Is the number on the widget the number that settles? · 26% (Transak 6/10, Alchemy Pay 2/10)
Information failure: 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% (Transak 7/10, Alchemy Pay 6/10)
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%).
Questions
Frequently asked questions
Transak scores 39 points above Alchemy Pay, led by purchase cost, quote honesty, and named licence. Published scores, out of 100: Transak 81 (rank 1 of 16 onramps), Alchemy Pay 42 (rank 12 of 16).
Reviewed means both products compared here 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.
Answer a few quick questions and get one clear recommendation based on how you actually plan to use crypto — with rationale, tradeoffs, and a path to monitor the decision.
No signup·Free first pass · Private·No spam · No account
Not financial advice · Independent · Always do your own research
Not financial advice · For informational purposes only · Always do your own research
