Best White-Label Crypto Payment Gateways for Fintechs (2026)

Disclosure: Xchange360, which publishes this guide, offers its own white-label gateway. We haven't ranked ourselves. Every score below comes from a provider's own pages or a regulator's records, linked so you can check them.

White-label crypto gateway pricing looks cheap on paper. One provider's own guide quotes a conversion fee of 0.5–1.0%, an FX markup of 0.2–0.8%, network fees passed through with a 10–30% uplift, and a platform fee of 0–2,000 a month. On €100,000 of monthly volume, its worked example comes to about €1,200 a month for one merchant.

But the fee isn’t the expensive part, the licence is.

If you're a fintech, PSP or neobank, "white-label" means your brand on someone else's rails. Someone still has to hold the authorisation, run custody and screen every transaction. This guide shows how to work out who that is, then scores five providers using only their own pages and regulator records.

(Selling to customers rather than building a product for them? See our ranking of crypto payment gateways for merchants instead.)

What "white-label" actually means

A white-label crypto payment gateway is a branded checkout and portal that you own. The provider runs everything underneath: wallets, blockchain monitoring, transaction screening, FX and the fiat off-ramp. You control the brand and the user experience.

It helps to separate three models that often get lumped together:

• Referral or ISO: you introduce customers, and they sign up directly with the provider.
• White-label: customers see your brand, while the provider supplies the licence, infrastructure and compliance.
• Provider-branded: you use the provider's own gateway under its name.

Our guide to what a white-label payment gateway is covers the differences in more detail. The part that matters here is who is responsible for what. In a well-run white-label setup, the provider holds the regulatory permissions and runs KYC, sanctions screening and transaction monitoring. You own the customer relationship and the first-line onboarding experience, and you must not weaken the provider's controls. It's a division of responsibility.

The licence question comes first

In the EU

Under MiCA (Regulation (EU) 2023/1114), crypto-asset services need CASP authorisation, and the grace period is over. ESMA's MiCA page says firms already operating under national law before 30 December 2024 could continue only until 1 July 2026, or until their MiCA application was granted or refused.

Two consequences matter for you:

• Under the ESMA and AMF guidance, non-EU entities can't serve EU clients except under the narrow reverse-solicitation exemption.
• CASPs can't outsource services such as custody to unauthorised firms.

So if your gateway partner isn't authorised, that gap can become your problem. ESMA publishes an interim register of authorised CASPs, updated weekly. Check any provider there before you sign.

In the US

The GENIUS Act limits payment stablecoin issuance to "permitted payment stablecoin issuers". According to that law-firm summary, the Act takes effect on the earlier of 18 January 2027 or 120 days after final implementing rules.

Digital asset service providers then get a three-year transition. From 18 July 2028, they may only offer stablecoins issued by a permitted issuer. Check the current status of the rulemaking, and ask any provider which stablecoins it supports and how it expects their issuers to qualify.

How we ranked them

Most "best gateway" lists rank on features, and many are written by vendors. We ranked on what a fintech has to carry, with three rules.

Rule 1: source hierarchy. Scores use only a provider's own pages or a regulator's records. A rival's comparison page was never used to score anyone, because it's the easiest place for an unverified claim to hide.

Rule 2: points. Each provider gets 0–3 on four criteria, and the weights reflect how much each matters to a fintech.

A score of 0 means nothing was stated. The maximum is 24.

Settlement is scored on what you can use through the white-label offering itself, not the provider's wider catalogue. That's why Transak, whose Whitelabel API covers on-ramp only, scores lower than its broader payout options might suggest.

Rule 3: the licence gate. A provider with no licence evidence is still listed, but marked conditional. You can't launch without a licence, whether it's yours or a partner's.

These scores measure what's publicly checkable as of October 2026. They don't measure uptime, support quality or real-world fees.

The ranked list

1. BVNK (20/24)

Best for: fintechs that want stablecoin wallets and fiat accounts embedded in their product.

BVNK announced a MiCA CASP licence from the Malta Financial Services Authority on 16 February 2026. Its compliance page says it's a regulated electronic money institution in both the UK (FCA) and Malta (MFSA). Its fintech page says customers can store, spend and get paid in USD, GBP and EUR, and describes stablecoin wallets and fiat accounts you embed through a single API.

Watch out for:

• The compliance page claims "40+" licences and approvals but doesn't break them down by entity. Ask which entity would serve you.
• BVNK states it works with businesses processing at least $500,000 a month, with six months of trading history. That threshold may rule out early-stage products.
• No pricing is published.
• The page doesn't mention white-labelling or custom branding. Confirm how much of the experience you can brand.

2. Crassula (15/24, conditional)

Best for: teams that want to launch under a partner's or their own licence and need transparent pricing up front.

It's the only provider here that publishes fee ranges. Its guide describes a white-label platform with fiat off-ramp via SEPA, SWIFT, FPS, ACH or FedNow, depending on the banking partner, and stablecoin settlement in USDC, USDT and EURC.

Watch out for:

• The guide says the platform runs on your own licence or a partner CASP and EMI. It doesn't state that Crassula holds any authorisation itself, which is why it scores 0 on licence and carries the conditional flag.
• It quotes 6–12 weeks to MVP in one place and eight to ten weeks to the first live merchant in another.
• The market statistics in the guide aren't sourced.

3. Transak (14/24)

Best for: wallet-style products that mainly need an on-ramp.

Transak's own comparison page lists registrations in the US, UK, Canada, Australia and Hong Kong, plus ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II certification. These are Transak's own claims about itself, which is why they count here. Its Whitelabel API documentation says the partner controls the interface and the full user journey, while Transak handles KYC, AML and transaction monitoring, compliance, liquidity, payment processing and fraud management. Bank transfers are fully API-based.

Watch out for:

• The Whitelabel API covers on-ramp only. Off-ramp isn't supported through it. Transak's comparison page also lists payouts and EUR, GBP and USD virtual accounts, but those sit outside the white-label API, so they don't count towards its settlement score.
• No EU authorisation is listed on the pages reviewed. If you need EU coverage, check the ESMA register.
• Some KYC steps send the user to Transak's own widget, so the journey isn't fully branded.
• There's no fee schedule, only real-time quotes through its Lookup APIs.

4. Banxa (13/24)

Best for: teams that want developer tooling and a MiCA-authorised EU entity.

Banxa's press release says EU Internet Ventures B.V. received a MiCA licence from the Dutch AFM on 13 October 2025, covering 30 EEA countries for exchanging crypto-assets for fiat. Its homepage lists APIs and SDKs for web, iOS, Android and React Native, with a hosted checkout or a native API.

Watch out for:

• The page never uses the term "white-label", so confirm what can be branded.
• Settlement timing, currencies and conditions aren't stated.
• Pricing is described as flexible and customised, with no schedule published.
• Other licences weren't verifiable from Banxa's own pages, so it scores for MiCA only.

5. CoinsPaid (9/24)

Best for: merchants who want crypto acceptance with simple terms, rather than a branded fintech product.

CoinsPaid's documentation says integration is free and it charges only transaction fees, quoted individually. It says there are no rolling reserves, settlement is on request, and automatic withdrawals can trigger at a balance threshold you set. The service is provided by Dream Finance OÜ under an Estonian Financial Intelligence Unit licence for exchange and wallet services.

Watch out for:

• An Estonian FIU licence isn't a MiCA authorisation, and CoinsPaid's MiCA status wasn't confirmed. Check the register.
• The FAQ doesn't mention white-label options.
• Fiat settlement isn't described.

Considered, but not ranked: MoonPay

MoonPay's licences check out. The AMF lists MoonPay Europe B.V. as MiCA-licensed, with the Dutch AFM as home regulator. MoonPay's own licences page lists registrations in the UK, US, Canada, Australia and Jersey, plus licences in 47 US jurisdictions. Some of those state licences don't cover virtual currency, so check the scope for your use case.

We didn't rank it because we couldn't verify its settlement and white-label terms from its own pages. Rather than score it on someone else's description, we've left it unscored.

Build, resell or white-label?

The same Crassula guide gives these estimates. Treat them as a vendor's view, not an audited benchmark:

The trade-off is control against speed. A custom build gives you the most control and takes the longest. Reselling is fastest, but your brand sits on someone else's compliance posture. A white-label setup sits between the two, and the licence gate above decides whether it's viable for you.

What the gateway doesn't cover

Even a good white-label gateway leaves work on your side:

• Merchant onboarding (KYB): you still verify the businesses that use your product. Our guide to KYC for crypto payments explains how onboarding runs from individual KYC to KYB and which documents to prepare.
• The travel rule: Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 extends originator and beneficiary information duties to crypto-asset service providers. The EBA's guidelines apply from 30 December 2024 and cover payment service providers and CASPs, including intermediaries, along with handling missing information and self-hosted wallets. Ask which party sends and receives the data, and who is responsible when it's missing. Our travel rule guide lists the data fields.
• Custody: the licence gate applies here too. Our custodial vs non-custodial guide breaks down the arrangements.
• Reconciliation: see how pay-by-crypto works for B2B for settlement, refunds and the basics of matching payments to invoices.
• FX exposure: the Crassula guide describes a 15-minute FX lock. Ask what happens to the rate if a payment confirms late.
• Tax and accounting: none of the provider pages cover this, so budget for your own advice.

Why headline rates mislead

Of the five providers, only Crassula publishes rate ranges. BVNK points to a conversation with an expert. Banxa calls its pricing flexible and customised. CoinsPaid quotes individually. Transak offers live quotes through its API but no schedule. So your first ask is a written fee schedule.

Then work out the whole stack. In the Crassula example, 0.8% plus 0.4% comes to 1.2% of volume. Network, bank and platform fees can sit on top, so check exactly what each quoted rate includes. The only reliable comparison is the net amount that actually lands, on the same invoice, with each provider.

Our guide to the real cost of crypto payments explains how the processing fee, the spread and fiat-side charges add up, and why to compare the net amount received. If you're still deciding whether you need a gateway at all, start with what a crypto payment gateway is and B2B crypto payments: a practical guide. For the selection criteria in brief, see how to choose a crypto payment gateway.

Your vendor checklist

Ask every provider these before you shortlist:

1. Which entity holds the licence, and can I find it on the ESMA register (or the relevant US state and federal registers)?
2. Do you run on my licence, a partner's, or your own?
3. Who provides custody, and is it an authorised firm?
4. Which stablecoins do you support, and what's your position on issuer authorisation under MiCA and the GENIUS Act?
5. Which fiat rails and currencies do you settle in, and what are the cut-off times?
6. Which corridors are live today, and which are planned?
7. What are the minimum volume or trading-history requirements?
8. Who handles the travel rule data?
9. How much of the experience can I brand, and where does the user leave my interface?
10. What does it cost, line by line, in writing?

Fee-stack worksheet

Copy this, fill it in for each provider, and compare totals on the same monthly volume.

Recommended reading: Embedded Payments & Finance: Crypto Inside Your Product, Payment Gateway vs Payment Processor: What's the Difference?,MiCA CASP Authorisation: What Payment & OTC Firms Need for EU Go-Live,Stablecoin Rules Under MiCA: The EMT/ART Regime for Payment Businesses