Headline rate versus effective rate

Two services advertise "0% fees". The first pays you 96,100 EUR for 1 BTC, the second 98,300 EUR. Both are literally telling the truth, and the gap is 2,200 EUR.

This article explains where that difference goes, and how to measure it with one division.

The only number that cannot lie

Before anything else, here is the method. Take the amount you actually receive, divide by the quantity you send.

effective rate = net received / quantity sent

For 1 BTC sent and 96,100 EUR received, the effective rate is 96,100 EUR per BTC. Compare that number to the mid-market rate at quote time and you get the total cost of the operation, everything included, as a percentage:

total cost = (mid-market - effective rate) / mid-market

That ratio absorbs absolutely everything: spread, fixed fees, rail fees, FX margin, and the lines nobody showed you. It is the only valid comparison between two offers. Everything else is presentation.

We expose that value directly: every quote shows its effective rate and its gap to mid-market in basis points. It is a design constraint of the pricing engine, not a display option.

The four places cost hides

1. The reference rate itself

Mid-market is the midpoint between the best bid and the best ask. Nobody trades at that price: it is a reference point, not an executable one.

The first available manipulation is to announce "the market rate" starting from an already shifted reference — one particular venue's price, a conveniently weighted average, or a rate several minutes old. A 0.3% shift on the reference is invisible to the naked eye and worth 300 EUR on 100,000.

Two questions to ask: what is the source of the rate, and how old is it? Our live rates page publishes the source and timestamp of every quote.

2. The spread folded into the rate

This is the most widespread technique. The service announces zero fees and applies a rate below mid-market. The margin is real, it is simply invisible because it has no line.

A 1.5% spread on a 10,000 EUR sale is 150 EUR. No fee was "charged": the rate was just worse.

Our opposite stance is explicit: the spread is a separate line with its calculation basis. The default pricing policy combines a base spread, a surcharge for volatile assets — a stablecoin does not carry the same price risk during confirmations as an asset whose price moves — a surcharge for corridors still in beta, and volume-tier discounts. The exact values in force are published on the fee schedule, and they are the ones the engine actually applies.

3. Fixed fees

A fixed fee looks neutral and is brutal on small amounts. Two euros of rail fee is 0.02% on 10,000 EUR and 2% on 100 EUR.

That is why comparing services at a single reference amount is meaningless. A provider can be cheapest at 5,000 EUR and most expensive at 200 EUR purely because of the fixed/variable structure. Compare at the amount you will actually sell.

4. Rail cost and FX

Receiving euros into a euro account costs almost nothing. Receiving reais into a Brazilian account implies a EUR/BRL or USD/BRL conversion, and that conversion carries its own spread — often larger than the one applied to the crypto itself.

A service advertising "0.5% fees" on a BTC to BRL corridor while applying a 2% FX margin costs you 2.5%. The FX line has to appear separately, otherwise you cannot see it.

A worked example, line by line

Take a concrete case with illustrative values. You sell 0.25 BTC, mid-market is 96,000 EUR per BTC, you get paid by SEPA Instant.

| Line | Basis | Amount | | --- | --- | --- | | Value at mid-market | 0.25 x 96,000 | 24,000.00 EUR | | Spread | percentage of gross | -246.00 EUR | | Network cost | estimated on-chain withdrawal | -1.80 EUR | | Rail fee | fixed SEPA Instant fee | -0.35 EUR | | Net received | | 23,751.85 EUR |

Effective rate: 23,751.85 / 0.25 = 95,007.40 EUR per BTC. Gap to mid-market: 1.03%, or 103 basis points.

That last number is the only one to remember. It compares directly with another service's, whatever way the other one presents its lines.

The most common comparison traps

• Comparing a headline rate to an effective rate. The first is a promise, the second a result. Never put both in the same table.
• Forgetting the sending cost. What you pay to get the crypto there counts in the total. On small amounts the network choice weighs more than the spread, as shown in USDT on TRC-20 or ERC-20.
• Ignoring timing. A slightly better rate settling on day three exposes you to the market for three days if you then need to convert back. That opportunity cost is real even though it appears on no invoice.
• Comparing different amounts. The fixed/variable structure changes the ranking. Always compare at the same amount.
• Taking the rate shown on a homepage. A public rate with no timestamp, no commitment and no reference amount binds nobody.

The cost nobody invoices: a failed payout

There is one line that never appears in any fee schedule and that can dwarf the spread: the cost of a payout that does not arrive.

A transfer rejected for a name mismatch, a closed account or an exceeded ceiling is not lost, but it takes days to bounce back, and the funds return in the payout currency, not in the asset you sold. Getting paid then requires a fresh transfer, sometimes a fresh conversion, and always fresh waiting.

That is why a service's real quality is measured as much by its input validation as by its rate. A form that checks an IBAN's check digits, resolves the holder name with the destination bank, or refuses a phone number in the wrong format before you confirm is worth more than a few basis points of spread.

The comparison to make is therefore not only "how much do I receive", but "how likely is it to arrive first time". A cheaper provider that fails one payout in twenty is more expensive than a slightly pricier one that fails none.

What "locked" means

A firm rate is a dated commitment. With us the quote holds for a window that depends on the asset: fifteen minutes for a volatile asset, thirty minutes for a stablecoin. Inside that window, whatever the market does, the announced net is owed.

After it, the order is re-quoted and you must accept the new amount before any payout goes out. That is the opposite of an "indicative" rate that quietly becomes something else at settlement.

A service that does not tell you how long its rate holds has not given you a price, it has given you an estimate.

The question to ask

If you remember one thing, ask this question — of us as much as of any competitor:

For X units of this asset sent right now, exactly how much lands on my account, and for how long is that amount firm?

A numeric, dated answer beats a three-page fee schedule. An answer starting with "it depends" and giving no bounds is worth nothing.

The guide Understanding what you pay breaks down every line of the pricing engine, and the compare rails page applies this calculation to each payout method at the same amount.