Onramper vs Topper

Onramper4.0/5

VS

Topper3.7/5

Feature	OnramperVisit	TopperVisit
Ratings
Our score	4.0/5	3.7/5
User rating	No reviews yet	No reviews yet
Fees	3.5	3.0
Coverage	4.5	4.0
Payment methods	4.5	4.5
Ease of use	4.0	4.0
Support	3.5	3.0
Specs
Service	On-ramp, Off-ramp, Widget / API, Aggregator	On-ramp, Off-ramp, Widget / API
Payment methods	Card, Bank transfer, Apple Pay, Google Pay	Card, Apple Pay, Google Pay, SEPA, PIX
Typical fee	Generally no added fee for end users; the underlying provider sets the transaction rate.	Not disclosed
Countries	190	Not disclosed
Assets	2,000	250
Developer widget / API	Yes	Yes
KYC required	Yes	Not disclosed
Sell to fiat (off-ramp)	Yes	Yes
Apple Pay	Yes	Yes
Delivery time	Not disclosed	Instant
Company
Founded	—	—
Headquarters	—	—
Investors	Not disclosed	Not disclosed
Strengths and weaknesses
Pros	30+ onramp providers through one integration 175+ payment methods across 190+ countries More than 1,500 supported cryptocurrencies Routing considers fees and KYC friction	Supports 250+ crypto assets Offers cards, digital wallets and bank transfers Sends purchases to self-custodial wallets Provides debit-card selling in supported regions
Cons	Final fees and spreads depend on the selected ramp KYC, approval and settlement depend on third-party providers Regional asset and payment coverage varies by country Payments can be rejected, reversed or held for compliance review	Regional payment and off-ramp coverage varies Exact costs depend on payment method and transaction Fiat payments can involve reversals or identity checks Self-custody places wallet security outside Topper
Best for	Wallet and exchange developers, Apps needing global payment coverage, Businesses adding offramp flows	Self-custody wallet buyers, Recurring card purchases, Brazilian Pix users

Highlighted cells show the stronger value in each row. Data comes from each provider's site and public sources; check details before you sign up.

More comparisons