Nutra offer, three processors gone in five months — what are you people ACTUALLY running

Five month, three processor. Each time is same story.

Sign up, work fine two or three week, then email. "Your account is under review". Then nothing. Then account close and money come back in 30 day if i am lucky. Last one still hold 2,800 and is now day 41.

Is supplement offer, not pharma, not prescription. But nobody care what i say, they see the category and they run.

So what is people here really using for this. Not what is on some blog list. What is paying you this month.

What's your chargeback rate.

Around 1.4 percent last i check. Is not the reason, none of them mention it. They mention category.

The pattern you're describing is a mainstream processor discovering your MCC after the fact, which is what happens when you sign up somewhere that doesn't want to know what you sell until it does.

SpicePay is the one in this space that markets at your category on purpose — adult, supplements, nutra, replicas, all named on their own pages. That matters more than it sounds like it should, because it means the review that killed your last three accounts already happened at signup and came back yes. 1% headline, lower at volume, and BTC/ETH/USDT/XMR in.

Two honest caveats. It's custodial, so the balance is theirs to sit on and you should sweep it rather than park in it. And the signup is not anonymous — no passport, but you do disclose what you're selling in writing, which some people here will not want to do. That disclosure is exactly the thing buying you the stability, so you can't have it both ways.

NowPayments is lighter at signup but has no category commitment at all, which is how you get another 41-day story.

I ran SpicePay from March to July on a supplements funnel, so I'll add the part that isn't on their pages.

Settlement was fine right up until it wasn't. Median withdrawal over 31 withdrawals was 4 hours 20. Then on 9 July one sat for nine days with no explanation and no ticket response for six of them. It arrived. Nothing was ever said about it.

Also the 1% is a headline. Once I was pushing past about 25k a month there was a conversation about the rate that went the wrong direction, not the direction their pricing page implies.

Not saying don't. Saying it's a smaller operator than the pitch reads and one nine-day hold is one nine-day hold.

you got dropped three times because you filled in three onboarding forms honestly at places that ban you. that's not bad luck, it's the same mistake three times

Worth separating the two failure modes, because they need different fixes and this thread is mixing them.

Failure mode one: onboarding disclosure

You tell them the category, an underwriter reads it, and the account is dead before it processes anything. Annoying, cheap, fast. You lose a week.

Failure mode two: post-hoc MCC review

The account opens, processes, and then something — a volume threshold, a chargeback cluster, a complaint, occasionally just an audit cycle — puts a human in front of your transaction history. They see what you actually sell, and now they are holding funds they have already accepted. This is your 41-day story, and it is the expensive one.

The mistake is optimising against mode one. Every "no KYC, email only signup" recommendation solves mode one and makes mode two worse, because the lighter the onboarding the later the review happens and the more of your money is inside when it does.

What I'd actually run

1. A primary rail that has already said yes to your category in writing. Slower to open, boring, survives the review because the review is behind you.
2. A self-hosted fallback that cannot be reviewed at all. BTCPayServer on a box you control, wired into the same checkout, dark until you need it. It will not save your average order value — a chunk of buyers will not use it — but it means "account closed" is a bad afternoon rather than a dead business.
3. A sweep schedule measured in hours, not weeks. Whatever is in a custodial balance when the review lands is the amount you are gambling.

I have not run this at above 60k a month and I would not assume it holds at 300k — at that point you are a large enough account that someone negotiates with you instead of closing you, which is a different game entirely.

Short version: stop shopping for a processor that won't review you. Shop for one that already did.

Bookmarked. The "the review already happened" framing just fixed how I think about this entirely!

1.4% is not nothing. It's under the thresholds that get quoted but it's the top of the band any underwriter would be comfortable with, and it compounds with the category. You may be right that nobody mentioned it. That doesn't mean nobody looked at it.

If any of these arrangements involve a rolling reserve, read what percentage and for how long before you sign; the number is frequently 10% held for 180 days and it is quoted as though it were a formality.

Update for anybody read this later.

Money from processor three arrive day 58, not 30. Nobody apologise.

I do the two rail thing from hexforge post. Main one is category-friendly and open since October, no problem yet. Self host one is up and get maybe 8 percent of order, mostly the technical customer. Eight percent is not much but is eight percent that nobody can close.

Ask me again in six month.