Fiat payment processing in igaming has broken down. My prediction

[AV43]

I have been monitoring payment processing in iGaming for a while now, and the trends are obvious: crypto payment processing becomes an integral part of the casino payment solution rather than being an additional payment method.

Numbers:

iGaming card declines ratio: ~13% compared to 1–2% in general e-commerce;
Chargebacks: 4% compared to 0.5–1%;
A single $1 dispute costs an operator $2.07;
Visa VAMP dispute threshold decreases to 1.5% starting from April 2026;
Mastercard starts charging $0.03 for each declined CNP transaction starting from January 2026;
85% of the players prefer cryptos withdrawals options.

It is not only about payments gateways: gambling transactions involve additional fraud controls regarding MCC 7995/7801 and therefore, even licensed casinos may experience payment processing issues.

This is the reason why more and more operators decide to follow crypto-first casino payment solution instead of having crypto as one more payment button.

Crypto does not make any difference in terms of KYC/AML and regulatory compliance but still allows for faster settlement, eliminates traditional card chargebacks and simplifies cross-border payment processes.

What really matters is how it is integrated into the casino platform.

That's one reason NuxGame, an iGaming software provider, has been interesting to me. Their casino and sportsbook platform supports both crypto and fiat payment infrastructure, so payments can be integrated into the core casino architecture.

Two years ago, crypto was often an additional request. Today, for many new crypto casino and iGaming platform projects, it's one of the first things discussed.

The technology isn't the biggest obstacle anymore. Regulation is.

[Cypra]

The shift toward crypto-first payments is understandable, but I’d argue regulation isn’t the only major obstacle. Liquidity, volatility, responsible-gambling requirements, fraud prevention, and user trust still create significant friction. Crypto can reduce chargeback exposure and speed up settlement, but it doesn’t automatically solve payment risk—it often shifts that risk to custody, on/off-ramp providers, and compliance infrastructure.

Also, player preference for crypto withdrawals doesn’t necessarily mean players want crypto deposits exclusively. A hybrid fiat + crypto model may remain more practical for mainstream operators.

So the real competitive advantage may not be simply “crypto-first,” but building flexible payment infrastructure that can adapt to regulation, player preferences, and market conditions without forcing operators into one payment model.