Ranked #25 of 46 · checked 2026-09-01
Apirone review
Apirone scores 6.1 of 10 on this index and ranks #25 of 46. Processing starts at a published 0%. It publishes no asset count. Verification is not disclosed. It publishes 58% of the fields tracked here.
Non custodial, free to accept, with the charge moved entirely to withdrawal.
- Score
- 6.1/10
- Processing from
- 0%
- Assets listed
- —
- Merchant verification
- Not disclosed
- Custody
- Non custodial
- Discloses
- 58%
Apirone at a glance
Provider site| Processing from | 0% |
|---|---|
| Conversion | |
| Payouts | Fixed fee on withdrawal |
| Assets listed | |
| Networks | Bitcoin, Litecoin, Dogecoin |
| Merchant verification | Not disclosed |
| Custody | Non custodial, settlement reaches a merchant wallet |
| Jurisdiction | Estonia |
| Operating since | 2017 |
| Integrations | WooCommerce, Magento, OpenCart, VirtueMart |
A dash means the provider does not publish the figure, not that we did not look. Fee figures come from the provider's own pricing page.
What can Apirone do?
Verticals the provider names publicly: ecommerce.
How does Apirone score?
Weights| Criterion | Weight | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Assets, networks and geography How many assets and chains are live for merchants, and in which markets settlement actually works. | 25 | 4 |
| All-in cost Processing percentage, conversion spread and payout cost taken together, not the headline number alone. | 25 | 8 |
| Onboarding and verification What a merchant must submit before going live, how long it takes, and which verticals are refused outright. | 20 | 7 |
| Integrations and API Maintained plugins, API surface, webhook reliability and whether a developer can reach a test transaction from public docs alone. | 18 | 6 |
| Support and operations Reachable channels, published response commitments, and documented handling of underpayment and wrong-network sends. | 12 | 5 |
| Weighted total | 6.1 |
Apirone across the five criteria
Scored 0–10 · weighted total 6.1
Where it is strong
- Incoming payments are free for merchant and customer alike, with the charge moved to a fixed withdrawal fee.
- Non custodial by design: payments route to the merchant's own wallet rather than sitting with the provider.
- Registered in Estonia and operating since 2017, which is a longer record than several better-known providers here.
Where it is weak
- The asset list is narrow and the public pages do not enumerate it, so coverage has to be confirmed by asking.
- Being non custodial rules out fiat settlement, so volatility management and conversion stay entirely with the merchant.
On this page
Free to accept, non-custodial, and both at once#
Incoming payments cost nothing for merchant and customer alike, and the charge moves to a fixed withdrawal fee. Settlement routes to a wallet the merchant controls rather than sitting with the provider.
That pairing appears once in this index. Most free-to-accept providers are custodial and most non-custodial providers charge on acceptance, so a business that wants both has very few places to look.
Estonia, and operating since 2017#
A stated jurisdiction and a founding year, which sounds unremarkable until you notice how many cards here publish neither. Several better-known providers in this index have shorter records and say less about where they sit.
For a non-custodial provider the jurisdiction matters less than it would elsewhere, since there is no balance to be caught in an insolvency. It still tells a procurement review something.
A fixed fee behaves unlike a percentage#
On a two hundred withdrawal a fixed amount is proportionally large; on a twenty thousand one it disappears. A percentage does the opposite, growing with the amount and staying constant as a share.
So the right choice depends on how often and how much you withdraw rather than on revenue. Run twelve months of your own withdrawals through both shapes; it is ten minutes and it settles the question.
The asset list is the weak line#
Bitcoin, Litecoin and Dogecoin are named, with no published count and no Ethereum or Tron. That means the two chains carrying most stablecoin merchant volume are absent, which is decisive for anyone receiving USDT.
Coverage scores lowest on this card for that reason, and coverage carries joint-top weight in the method. Confirm the enumerated list by asking before assuming the named networks are the whole story.
No fiat settlement, structurally#
A provider that never holds your funds is not the shape that delivers bank transfers on a schedule, so conversion and volatility management stay entirely with the merchant. That is design rather than omission.
For a business already comfortable holding crypto it costs nothing. For one whose finance function prices in bank currency it is a workflow somebody owns, and the volatility guide covers what carrying that exposure means even briefly.
Four platforms, which is unusual here#
WooCommerce, Magento, OpenCart and VirtueMart. That is broader platform support than most non-custodial providers publish, and VirtueMart appears nowhere else in this index.
For a shop rather than an API integration, that coverage is the practical reason to consider this card over the other non-custodial options, which mostly enumerate no platforms at all.
Who should shortlist this#
A Bitcoin-centred store on a supported platform that wants funds arriving in its own wallet and pays little to accept them. On that profile this card is genuinely hard to beat.
A merchant who withdraws infrequently in large amounts, where a fixed fee is close to free as a percentage.
Who should not#
Anyone receiving stablecoins on Ethereum or Tron, which is most merchants by volume. That is the whole of the case against this card and it is a large one.
A business without someone accountable for key custody. Non-custodial removes the provider-failure risk and hands you a wallet you must secure and be able to restore — the key security guide covers the minimum.
How this card scores where it does#
Cost scores highly on free acceptance and a published withdrawal model, and coverage scores lowest in the index on three named networks with no count. Those two lines pull hard in opposite directions and the total sits between them.
Coverage carries joint-top weight, so a merchant whose customers pay in Bitcoin can reasonably weight it down and watch this card climb. The methodology page does that live rather than asking you to take the ordering on trust.
One thing to establish for your own case#
The enumerated asset list. Three named networks is a floor rather than a list, and the answer may make the rest of this card irrelevant to you in either direction.
It is one email and the cheapest step available. Send it before scoping any integration work rather than after.
How should you read this card?
The score of 6.1 comes from the five weighted criteria above, applied identically to every provider in the catalogue. If you weight the criteria differently, the methodology page re-ranks the whole index against your weights, and the order you get is as valid as this one.
The disclosure figure of 58% is a separate measurement and often the more useful one. It counts only the fields Apirone publishes itself, so it predicts how much of your evaluation will happen over email rather than from documentation. If you are already using Apirone and looking to leave, the switching page covers the closest replacements.
What Apirone does not disclose
Checked against the provider's own pages on 2026-09-01. Apirone does not publish what conversion costs, how many assets it supports, whether mass payouts are supported, whether it settles to fiat, whether white label is available, whether recurring billing is supported, whether it offers point of sale.
Ask for each of these in writing before signing. A provider that answers a factual question with positioning has told you something useful about the next two years.
Apirone compared
All comparisonsWhere else Apirone appears
Questions about Apirone
Is Apirone legit?
Apirone has operated since 2017 and is based in Estonia. It publishes 58% of the fields this index tracks. Nothing here is a security assessment: run your own checks on custody and settlement before sending volume through any processor.
What does Apirone charge?
The published processing rate starts at 0%, checked 2026-09-01. Conversion cost is not published, so this is a floor rather than an all-in figure.
Does Apirone require KYC?
Apirone does not publish its merchant verification requirements. That is a planning risk rather than an answer, and it is why this card scores as it does on onboarding.
What are the best Apirone alternatives?
The three closest substitutes are NOWPayments, Plisio, CoinRemitter. Which one fits depends on whether you are leaving over cost, coverage or onboarding.