Head to head
Coca Card vs Avici
Both cards run on the same benchmark test, so this compares deducted cost rather than advertised rates.
| Metric | Co Coca Card | Av Avici |
|---|---|---|
| Overall rank | #1 of 13 | #13 of 13 |
| Gross FX spread | 1.18% | 1.15% |
| Net cost on test | $1.47 after cashback | N/A |
| Base cashback | 1% in USDC, paid on the 10th | 0 |
| Custody | Non-Custodial | Non-Custodial |
| Virtual card | Free | $15 once off/ $30 yearly premium |
| Physical card | $1 + international shipping | Physical Platinum is $50; Physical Signature is $75 |
| Spend limit | $30,000 / month | Undisclosed |
| ATM withdrawals | Fee-free up to $250/month, network fees apply above | $1 Fee + 0.65 |
| Setup time | ~8 minutes | ~10 minutes |
| KYC steps | 4 | 4 |
| Score | 9.2/10 | 5/10 |
Coca Card
Coca lands at the top because it pairs a fully non-custodial architecture with stablecoin cashback that actually cancels out its spread. One tier upgrade makes it the strongest card in the test.
Avici
Avici functions as a self-custodial secured Visa credit card rather than a traditional direct-spend debit card. You must lock USDC into a smart contract to access an equivalent USD credit line. While the underlying account abstraction technology is excellent for security, the steep physical card issuance fees and reported hidden spreads on top-ups make it a heavily restrictive option compared to standard crypto debit cards.
Who ranks these cards
I'm Tristyn Pawson, founder of ConsistenC.xyz. Over the last five years I've worked on marketing, development and growth across five crypto cards and neobanks, building at least three of them from scratch.
Alongside that I've run in-depth research on 20+ crypto banks to understand what actually makes someone keep a card in their wallet. These rankings reflect that: which problems are tolerable, and which ones are genuine deal breakers.
- Years in market
- 5
- Cards built on
- 5
- Neobanks researched
- 20+