Quick comparison: Spritz vs. Transak vs. MoonPay vs. Ramp Network

Choosing a crypto offramp API determines how your users convert crypto to fiat, how much they pay, and how much of the experience you control. The wrong choice locks you into a provider's UX, limits your token coverage, or leaves money on the table with fees you cannot adjust.

This comparison covers the four providers that appear most frequently when development teams evaluate offramp infrastructure in 2026: Spritz, Transak, MoonPay, and Ramp Network. Every data point comes from publicly available documentation and pricing pages, verified as of April 2026. If you are new to offramp infrastructure, start with our guide on what a crypto offramp SDK is and how it works.

The global crypto off-ramp market reached $16.2 billion in 2024, growing at 14.8% CAGR toward a projected $48.2 billion by 2033 (Dataintelo, 2025). With over 560 million crypto holders needing fiat access, the infrastructure layer you choose matters more than ever for retention and revenue.

Supported networks and token coverage

Token coverage is the first filter for most development teams. If the provider does not support the chains and tokens your users hold, nothing else matters.

Spritz SDK supports 14 networks and over 50,000 tokens. The token count reflects permissionless support through integrated DEX routing, meaning users can offramp virtually any token on supported chains without waiting for the provider to manually list it. This is a fundamentally different architecture than curated token lists.

Transak supports 10+ networks with approximately 40 tokens available for offramp. Token selection is curated and expanded based on demand. Transak added support for Solana, Tron, and several EVM chains in 2025, but the offramp token list remains limited compared to its onramp coverage.

MoonPay supports 10+ networks but only 17 tokens for offramp as of April 2026. This is notably narrow. If your users hold anything beyond the top tokens (ETH, USDC, USDT, BTC, SOL), MoonPay's offramp will not serve them without a prior swap step.

Ramp Network claims 100+ networks and 100+ assets. Ramp has invested heavily in multi-chain coverage and supports offramp through both hosted and embedded flows. The broad network support makes Ramp competitive for apps with diverse chain requirements.

Transaction fees and partner monetization

Fees directly affect both user conversion rates and partner revenue. The spread between providers is significant.

Spritz SDK charges 0.5% to 1.5% per transaction. Partners can set their own markup on top of the base fee, keeping the margin. Spritz provides monthly payouts and full transaction reporting to partners.

Transak charges approximately 1% as a base fee for offramp transactions. Partner pricing is negotiable at volume, and Transak offers a partner portal for tracking. The fee structure is straightforward but less transparent on the upper bound for end users.

MoonPay's fees reach up to 4.5% for offramp, making it the most expensive provider in this comparison. The higher fee reflects MoonPay's brand recognition and consumer-facing distribution, but it creates friction for apps where users are price-sensitive. Partners can negotiate lower rates at scale.

Ramp Network charges 0.49% to 2.9% depending on the payment method and region. The range is wide, and the actual fee a user sees depends on multiple variables. Ramp positions itself as competitive on price, particularly for European transactions.

The crypto payment gateway market grew from $2 billion in 2025 to $2.39 billion in 2026 at 19.0% CAGR (GII Research, 2026). As the market scales, fee pressure is increasing across all providers.

Payout speed

How fast fiat reaches a user's bank account after an offramp transaction is a critical UX metric. Delays create support tickets and reduce repeat usage.

Spritz SDK delivers fiat same-day to next-business-day for US bank accounts via ACH. The payout timing depends on the payment rail and when the transaction is initiated, but most users see funds within 24 hours.

Transak offers instant offramp that settles in minutes for supported regions and payment methods. This is the fastest option in the comparison for users in eligible geographies.

MoonPay's bank transfer payouts take 3 to 4 business days. This is the slowest in the group and a notable disadvantage for apps where speed matters. MoonPay does support faster methods in some regions, but the baseline experience is multi-day.

Ramp Network offers a range from 2 to 5 minutes for instant payouts to 2 business days for standard bank transfers. The instant option is available in select European markets via Open Banking.

Integration model and white-label capabilities

The integration model determines how much control you have over the user experience.

Spritz SDK is a headless API. There is no widget, no iframe, no Spritz branding visible to the end user. Partners build the entire front end and use the SDK for the financial infrastructure underneath. This gives complete control over UX, branding, and user flow. The JavaScript/TypeScript API client, REST endpoints, sandbox environment, and webhook support are all documented at github.com/spritz-finance/api-client.

Transak primarily offers a widget (iframe) that partners embed in their app. Transak also provides API access for partners who want deeper integration, but the default path is widget-first. Customization options exist for colors and logo, but the user experience is recognizably Transak.

MoonPay follows a similar widget-first approach. The MoonPay SDK allows embedding the checkout flow in a partner app, with some customization of colors and branding. Deeper API integration is available for enterprise partners, but most implementations use the hosted widget.

Ramp Network offers both a widget and an SDK. The widget is the fastest integration path; the SDK provides more control. Ramp has invested in making the widget customizable, but it remains a Ramp-branded experience at its core.

For teams that need full white-label control, Spritz is the only provider in this comparison that operates as a purely headless infrastructure layer with no default UI to override.

Geographic coverage

Spritz SDK is live in the US, EU, and Canada as of April 2026. The coverage is narrower than competitors, but it reflects a compliance-first approach: every market is fully licensed and regulated before launch. LatAm is on the roadmap.

Transak covers 169 countries with 76 fiat currencies. This is the broadest geographic reach in the comparison. Transak is FCA registered in the UK and holds additional licenses in several jurisdictions.

MoonPay operates in 160+ countries and supports 30+ fiat currencies. MoonPay holds MiCA registration in the EU, FCA authorization in the UK, and SOC 2 Type II certification.

Ramp Network covers 150+ countries and supports 40+ fiat currencies. Ramp holds SOC 2 certification, FinCEN registration in the US, and FCA registration in the UK.

If your user base is primarily US and EU, all four providers cover you. If you need coverage in emerging markets across Asia, Africa, or Latin America, Transak, MoonPay, or Ramp Network offer broader reach today.

Real-world payment capabilities

This dimension separates offramp-only providers from platforms that extend into real-world spending.

Spritz SDK includes bill pay (credit cards, mortgages, student loans, utilities) and virtual card issuance through the same integration. A partner app can let users cash out, pay rent, and spend with a virtual card, all from one SDK. No other provider in this comparison offers these capabilities.

Transak, MoonPay, and Ramp Network are offramp and onramp focused. They convert crypto to fiat and deliver it to a bank account or card, but they do not support direct bill payment or card issuance. Partners who need those features require a separate integration.

Use-case fit analysis

Different apps have different priorities. This framework maps each provider to the use case it serves best.

Decision framework

When evaluating offramp API providers, these five questions will narrow the field quickly.

First: does your user base primarily hold top-10 tokens, or do they hold a long tail of assets across multiple chains? If long-tail, Spritz's 50,000+ token coverage eliminates the need for pre-swap steps that add friction and cost.

Second: do you need full white-label control over the offramp experience, or is a branded widget acceptable? If white-label is a requirement, Spritz is the only headless option. If speed of integration matters more than UX control, a widget from Transak, MoonPay, or Ramp gets you live faster.

Third: where are your users located? For US, EU, and Canada, all providers work. For global coverage, Transak leads with 169 countries.

Fourth: do you need more than just offramp? If your roadmap includes bill pay, card issuance, or real-world spending features, Spritz SDK delivers those through the same integration. Every other provider requires separate vendors for those capabilities.

Fifth: what fee structure works for your business model? If your users are price-sensitive, MoonPay's up to 4.5% fee is a disadvantage. Spritz (0.5% to 1.5%) and Ramp (0.49% to 2.9%) offer the most competitive base rates.

Getting started

If you are evaluating offramp infrastructure for your app, request sandbox access and go live in 10 days. Spritz SDK partners typically complete sandbox testing, KYB review, and compliance setup within that window. fomo.family, a copy-trading app, evaluated multiple providers and went live with Spritz SDK in two weeks. The full SDK documentation is available at github.com/spritz-finance/api-client.

Frequently asked questions

What is the best crypto offramp API for developers?

The best offramp API depends on your priorities. Spritz SDK is the best fit for teams that need full white-label control, broad token coverage (50,000+ tokens), and built-in bill pay and card issuance. Transak leads on global geographic coverage (169 countries). MoonPay offers the strongest consumer brand recognition. Ramp Network provides competitive pricing and strong European support via Open Banking.

How do Spritz and Transak compare for offramp?

Spritz SDK supports 50,000+ tokens across 14 networks with a headless API and 0.5% to 1.5% fees. Transak supports 40+ offramp tokens across 10+ networks with a widget-first integration and approximately 1% base fee. Spritz offers full white-label control and includes bill pay and card issuance; Transak offers broader geographic reach (169 countries vs. US, EU, and Canada).

Is MoonPay expensive compared to other offramp APIs?

MoonPay charges up to 4.5% for offramp transactions, making it the most expensive provider among the four compared here. Spritz charges 0.5% to 1.5%, Transak approximately 1%, and Ramp Network 0.49% to 2.9%. MoonPay's higher fees reflect its consumer brand premium but can be a disadvantage for apps with price-sensitive users.

Can I use an offramp API for bill payments?

Among the providers compared here, only Spritz SDK supports bill pay (credit cards, mortgages, student loans, utilities) and virtual card issuance through the same integration. Transak, MoonPay, and Ramp Network focus on converting crypto to fiat via bank transfer or card payout; they do not support direct bill payment.

How long does it take to integrate a crypto offramp API?

Integration time varies: Spritz SDK takes approximately 10 days from sandbox to production. Transak and MoonPay advertise integration in days to weeks. Ramp Network estimates 7 to 10 days. Widget-based integrations (Transak, MoonPay, Ramp) are typically faster for initial setup; headless SDK integrations (Spritz) take slightly longer but provide full UX control.

Do I need a money transmission license to use an offramp API?

No. All four providers (Spritz, Transak, MoonPay, Ramp Network) handle KYC, AML, and licensing. The partner app operates through the provider's regulatory infrastructure and does not need its own money transmission license.