Which Network Your Deposit Travels On, and What the Wait Costs

A coin name is not a route. USDT alone moves over several separate blockchains, and a transfer that names the right coin but the wrong network arrives nowhere the receiver can see.

This page sets out what the operators in our reference library actually publish about coins and networks, where the fee and the wait come from, and which parts of the picture the documents do not cover. The lists were read on 26 August 2026.

How many operators publish a coin list at all?

Thirty of the 100 brands in the library publish a readable list of the coins they accept. Seventy do not, and that silence is a gap in the reading rather than a finding about the operator: 21 of the hundred returned nothing usable from either a live page or an archived copy.

Among the 30 that do publish, the range is extreme. One brand’s list contains a single coin; the longest runs to 40. Two brands in the library accept Bitcoin and nothing else.

Which coins appear most often?

Coin	Lists naming it, out of 30
BTC	29
ETH	28
LTC	23
USDT	23
DOGE	18
BNB	15
XRP	15
BCH	14
TRX	14
SOL	13
USDC	13
ADA	11

Below ADA the tail drops fast: TON appears on five lists, DAI and SHIB on four, POL and EOS on three, and dozens of names on one list each.

USDT and USDC together are the only stablecoins with meaningful coverage, at 23 and 13 lists respectively.

Why does the network matter more than the coin?

Because the coin name is what the interface shows and the network is what determines whether the money arrives. USDT is issued on multiple chains; the TRON version and the Ethereum version are different tokens on different ledgers that happen to share a ticker.

Three practical consequences follow:

• The fee is a property of the network, not the coin. The same nominal amount of USDT costs very different sums to move depending on which chain carries it.
• The confirmation time is a property of the network. Block intervals differ by an order of magnitude between chains.
• A deposit sent on a chain the receiver does not support may be unrecoverable, and recovery, where it is possible at all, depends entirely on the receiving company’s goodwill.

The address format is the only warning most interfaces give, and it is a weak one, because several chains share address formats.

What do the operators’ documents say about fees?

Almost nothing, and this is the largest hole in this subject. None of the terms read in our library states a network fee figure, because the network fee is not the operator’s to set. It is paid to the chain’s validators and changes with congestion from hour to hour.

What some operators do set is a minimum deposit and a withdrawal processing fee of their own. Those figures were not captured as a structured field in this library, so we do not publish a comparison of them. Where a document has not been read, the honest cell is empty.

An empty cell is a gap in our reading, never a claim that the operator charges nothing.

What determines how long a deposit waits?

Two things stacked on top of each other. First the chain has to include the transaction in a block and then build further blocks on top of it. Second the receiving operator decides how many of those blocks it wants to see before crediting an internal balance, and that number is a policy choice that differs between operators and between coins at the same operator.

The operator’s confirmation threshold is the part that is decided by a company rather than by physics, and it is rarely published.

Does the choice of coin change anything downstream?

It changes what happens to the value while it sits still. A balance held in a coin whose price moves is exposed to that movement between the deposit and the payout, whatever the game does. A balance held in a stablecoin is exposed to the peg instead.

It also interacts with the way operator limits are written. Of the 14 brands in the library that publish a withdrawal ceiling, only two state it in USDT; eight state it in euro, three in dollars and one in both. So a ceiling can be denominated in a currency the account never holds, converted at a rate the clause does not name.

That mismatch is worked through on our pages about the rate between deposit and withdrawal and withdrawal limits.

What the on-chain record does and does not show

Every hop across a public chain leaves a permanent, public entry: the sending address, the receiving address, the amount and the time. That record does not carry a name, and this is where the word “anonymous” gets used far too loosely.

The chain shows addresses. The exchange at the start of the route shows names, because since the Ministry of Finance notification of 7 March 2023 entities providing virtual-digital-asset services are reporting entities under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. A chain of addresses that begins at a verified account is a chain that begins at a name.

The full hop-by-hop route, and who holds the money at each stage, is set out on our page about the rupee route.

What to check before sending anything

1. The network, not the coin, and check it on both sides of the transfer.
2. Whether the receiving side lists that network explicitly, rather than assuming a coin name implies one.
3. The minimum the receiver accepts, since a transfer below it can be credited late or not at all.
4. The number of confirmations the receiver requires before the balance is usable.
5. The current network fee at the moment of sending, which no document can tell you in advance.

None of this addresses whether a transfer should be made. Indian law on online money gaming is a separate question with its own text, summarised in the legal note on our USDT and verification guide, and this page is not legal advice.