# Crypto payment gateway vs custodial processor

Canonical: https://apa.app/resources/guides/crypto-payment-gateway-vs-processor
Category: Comparison

How a non-custodial crypto payment gateway differs from custodial processors that hold merchant balances.

Many crypto payment products look similar on the surface: checkout pages, supported coins, dashboards and webhooks. The important difference is where merchant funds go after payment.

## Custodial processors hold a balance

A custodial processor receives customer funds into infrastructure it controls, credits the merchant internally and later lets the merchant withdraw. That can be convenient, but it creates counterparty, freeze, withdrawal and solvency exposure.

## Non-custodial gateways coordinate payment

A non-custodial gateway provides checkout, status and integration tooling without holding a merchant balance. The merchant payout wallet is the settlement destination, not a later withdrawal target.

Apa is designed this way: payment links and checkout sessions reference saved payout wallets, and payments settle to the merchant wallet as the direct transfer or route completes.

## The tradeoff is responsibility

Non-custodial payments remove platform custody but put wallet operations and refunds under merchant control. Merchants should choose secure payout wallets, verify webhooks and handle refunds from their own wallet when needed.

## FAQ

### Is Apa a custodial crypto processor?

No. Apa provides merchant checkout tooling, but funds settle to the merchant payout wallet instead of an Apa-held balance.

### Why does custody matter?

Custody determines whether the merchant is exposed to platform-held balances, withdrawal delays, freezes or solvency risk.