If you want to accept crypto payments, you’ll face a classic choice: build your own rails or partner with a vendor. “Build” sounds attractive—full control, custom features—but the 12-month total cost of ownership (TCO) is almost always underestimated. Below is a practical framework (with an illustrative calculation) to help you decide with clear eyes.
What “build your own” really includes
A production-grade crypto payment gateway isn’t just one service. To reliably accept bitcoin payments and stablecoins at scale, you’ll need:
- Core payments: address/invoice generation, quote locking, on-chain monitoring, confirmations, callbacks/webhooks.
- Wallet orchestration & custody model: hot/cold management, key rotation, signing flows, spend controls.
- Network integrations: BTC, EVM chains, fee estimation, mempool logic, reorg handling.
- Checkout UX & SDKs: web/mobile modal, deep link + QR, bitcoin payment button, test sandbox.
- Reconciliation & ledgering: on/off-chain ledger, FX rates, over/underpayment logic.
- Refunds & payouts: batch flows for crypto mass payouts, auditing and approval steps.
- Compliance & security: KYC/KYB hooks, sanctions lists, AML rules, logging, HSMs/secure enclaves, pen tests.
- Ops & observability: alerting, SLOs, on-call, incident runbooks, uptime dashboards.
That’s table stakes for a modern crypto payment platform.
The 12-month TCO framework
Use this checklist to scope costs for the first year:
1. Engineering & Product — backend, frontend, QA, DevOps, product/PM.
2. Security & Compliance — audits, AML tooling, key management, policy.
3. Infra & Tooling — nodes/providers, RPC, databases, observability, build pipelines.
4. Network Upkeep — protocol changes, fee model updates, chain add/remove, SDK maintenance.
5. Payments Operations — refunds, exceptions, treasury moves, reconciliation.
6. Support — merchant support SLAs, docs, developer relations.
7. Risk & Incidents — time spent on outages, false positives, upgrades gone wrong.
8. Opportunity Cost — what your core team didn’t ship because they were rebuilding rails.
A simple way to estimate
Let’s model a conservative mid-market scenario (illustrative only):
- Engineering & Product: 3 engineers + 0.3 PM + QA/DevOps share → ~$480k/yr
- Security & Compliance: audit(s), AML/sanctions API, KMS/HSM, policy work → ~$120k
- Infra & Tooling: nodes/RPC, storage, logs, monitoring, CI/CD → ~$60k
- Network Upkeep: protocol work, SDKs, testnets → ~$40k
- Payments Ops & Support: 0.8 FTE ops + L2 support → ~$70k
- Risk & Incidents contingency: hotfix time, vendor overages → ~$30k
In-house year-one TCO (illustrative): ≈ $800k
Real figures vary by salaries, geos, and scope, but this baseline is common once you include security and ops—not just “coding time.”
Partnering cost (how it’s usually priced)
In practice, most providers charge a percentage of processed volume (tiered % pricing). You may also see:
- Monthly minimums for very low volumes (to cover SLA/support).
- Volume tiers/discounts (the % drops as you process more).
- Optional paid add-ons (advanced analytics, custom SLA, white-label) — not mandatory by default.
Net-net, partnering cost is typically usage-based rather than a fixed “platform subscription,” which makes it easier to start and scale without large upfront spend.
Hidden line items teams forget
- Compliance drift: sanctions/KYC rules evolve; workflows must be updated and re-tested.
- Mempool & protocol surprises: fee spikes, reorgs, chain upgrades break naïve confirmation logic.
- Edge cases: partial/late payments, duplicates, dust handling.
- Refund UX: customers expect fast, predictable refunds; manual flows don’t scale.
- SDK gravity: merchants want plug-and-play (checkout modal, button) rather than weeks of custom build.
Plus three critical operational items teams often miss:
- Market monitoring & asset/chain expansion: continuously track market demand and add new blockchains and assets (risk assessment, fee model, wallet support, docs, support t* raining).
- Liquidity management for payouts: you need readily available liquidity (e.g., stablecoins/BTC/ETH across networks) to execute fast mass payouts, plus treasury controls (limits, multi-sig, key rotation).
- Integrations with liquidity providers/aggregators: for conversions and rebalancing (best execution, slippage control, fee routing) with failover during peak conditions.
Capability comparison (build vs. partner)
- Speed to market: Partner → days; Build → months.
- Feature depth: Partner ships payment links, button, multi-chain, status pages, webhooks out of the box.
- Security posture: Partner brings audits, KMS, mature key ceremonies; Build must earn it.
- Operational maturity: Partner has 24/7 monitoring, on-call, and playbooks; Build must assemble the engine while driving.
- Roadmap: With a vendor, you inherit upgrades (new chains, better fees). With build, you own backlog forever.
When building might still make sense
- Ultra-specific requirements (custom risk models, proprietary wallets, niche protocols).
- Regulatory constraints that require deep on-prem control and custom policies.
- Scale economics large enough that long-term internal cost clearly undercuts vendor pricing.
If you go this route, scope a phased plan: start with a thin layer to accept bitcoin payments and one stablecoin, then iterate toward parity (payment links, payout rails, analytics) only when data proves the need.
Decision checklist
- Do we need to accept crypto payments in <90 days?
- What’s our 12-month TCO including security, ops, and compliance—not just code?
- Which features are must-have at launch: crypto payment gateway, bitcoin payment button, payment links, refunds, crypto mass payouts?
- Who will carry on-call and incident ownership?
- What value would our team ship if we didn’t rebuild payment rails this year?
Bottom line
Building gives control, but year-one reality means engineering, security, ops, and compliance costs that rarely fit initial spreadsheets. Partnering with a mature crypto payment platform gets you live sooner, with proven rails (checkout modal, payment links, payouts, reporting) and predictable spend that scales with volume. Run the 12-month math honestly—and choose the path that maximizes learning speed and minimizes risk.
