Dotted-underlined terms open a quick definition. Close it to keep reading.
A €100 purchase is only comparable when the budget includes every charge and the result is the LTC received in your own . Our public-book snapshots show almost identical starting prices on three venues. They do not establish identical final costs. We publish the books, calculations and missing inputs so the comparison can be checked.
We captured three rounds of LTC/EUR from Kraken, Coinbase and OKX EEA, then replayed €100 and €1,000 market purchases against their displayed sell orders. We did not open accounts, deposit money, execute trades or withdraw . The wallet amounts below are clearly marked scenarios, not transaction receipts.
Observation window: 29 September 2026, 22:30:31–22:30:52 UTC, which was 30 September, 00:30 in Warsaw. Fee documentation checked at 22:40 UTC. The hero is an AI-generated editorial illustration.
What €100 could buy before any fees
A price ticker does not show how much is available at that price. To model a purchase, take coins from the lowest ask, then the next ask if the first does not cover the order. We used decimal arithmetic and retained the raw responses. The table uses the first round, selected consistently for all three venues.
First captured LTC/EUR books — indicative quantities before all fees
Public book
Best bid / ask
Full spread
LTC for €100
LTC for €1,000
Kraken
€59.070 / €59.090
3.39 bp
1.69233372
16.92299898
Coinbase Exchange book
€59.051 / €59.087
6.09 bp
1.69241965
16.92281617
OKX EEA
€59.070 / €59.090
3.39 bp
1.69233372
16.91819822
One is 0.01%. The spread shown is the full bid–ask gap divided by that book’s midpoint. A market buyer crossing from the midpoint to the incurs approximately half that spread before any depth effect; subtracting the whole spread again would double-count part of the cost.
At €100, the Coinbase book yielded only 0.00008593 LTC more than Kraken in this snapshot: about half a euro cent at the observed price. At €1,000, Kraken’s modeled quantity was slightly higher. Coinbase consumed four ask levels, Kraken two and OKX three. The lowest displayed ask therefore did not identify the best volume-weighted result for both budgets.
These are three brief observations, not a ranking. Requests overlapped but were not synchronized events. Orders can change or disappear before execution. Coinbase’s EEA execution policy also describes its execution arrangements and possible price improvement; a public Exchange book is an indicative input, not a promise of your Advanced Trade fill.
Check the product and fee tier before comparing
Public fee evidence at the time of research — not authenticated account quotes
Service
What we could verify
What still needs your order preview
Kraken Pro
Public Spot Crypto Tier 1 table: 0.80% taker; 0.40% maker.
Your applicable tier, fee currency, funding route and withdrawal terms.
OKX Europe spot
Regular tier without an X-Perps account: 0.350% taker; 0.200% maker.
Your tier and account setup; payment and withdrawal charges.
Coinbase Advanced
Official help directs users to sign in to see current rates and qualification criteria.
Actual taker fee, funding charge and withdrawal estimate. No retail fee invented here.
OKX publishes different spot rates for accounts with X-Perps enabled. Our comparison uses its ordinary spot-only account column. There is no reason to open a derivatives account merely to reproduce this worksheet. Kraken’s instant-buy product has a separate pricing structure, including a quoted spread and possible payment costs. Its Pro order-book rate cannot be pasted onto an instant-buy quote.
Calculate the amount that reaches the wallet
For a fee charged in euros, define B as the total euro budget, D as the funding cost paid from it, t as the rate and W as the LTC deducted for withdrawal. The euro amount available to trade is (B − D) / (1 + t). Walk the asks with that amount, then subtract W.
If the trading fee is instead deducted from the LTC you receive, use book quantity × (1 − t) − W, with the full post-funding euro balance used for the trade. Check the actual fee currency; these two conventions are close at small rates but are not identical. A conversion quote may already include a spread, so do not add a second invented spread on top.
The following worked example uses the first Kraken book, a 0.80% trading fee charged in EUR, and an assumed 0.002 LTC withdrawal deduction. That withdrawal figure is a sensitivity input, not a fee quoted to our account. We compare zero funding cost with an illustrative 2% funding cost. The latter is not a claim about any provider’s current card fee.
Model results — the same total budget includes funding and trading costs
Budget
Assumed funding cost
Modeled wallet LTC
Effective €/LTC
Cost vs book midpoint
€100
€0.00
1.67690250
€59.63
€0.93 (0.929%)
€100
€2.00
1.64332445
€60.85
€2.91 (2.912%)
€1,000
€0.00
16.78670951
€59.57
€8.24 (0.824%)
€1,000
€20.00
16.45098582
€60.79
€28.08 (2.808%)
Each bar shows cost per €100 of total budget. Funding and withdrawal amounts are assumptions. The benchmark is the captured €59.08 midpoint, which was not itself a buy offer.
For the €100 zero-funding-cost case, the model spends €99.206349 on coins and reserves €0.793651 for trading. It buys 1.678902508 LTC before the assumed withdrawal deduction and leaves 1.67690250 LTC after rounding down to eight decimals. The €0.928600 gap against the midpoint consists of roughly €0.793651 trading cost, €0.016789 book cost and €0.118160 withdrawal cost, plus less than one millionth of a euro of display rounding.
Changing the funding assumption to 2% reduces the modeled wallet receipt to 1.64332445 LTC. That difference is much larger than the observed gap between the best displayed €100 book quantities. A fixed withdrawal deduction matters proportionally more to a small purchase, while a percentage funding charge keeps scaling with the budget.
Bank transfer and card: record a complete quote
A bank transfer and a card purchase may lead to different products, not simply different ways to fund the same order. Record the product name shown in the interface. Compare the final LTC receipt for the same total euro debit, rather than comparing a Pro commission with a card screen’s all-in quote.
Kraken’s cash deposit documentation lists funding methods and warns that some payment routes trigger withdrawal holds. Available methods depend on account and location. A coin balance that appears immediately may not be immediately withdrawable. Its withdrawal documentation says the screen is authoritative for the final charge. We did not obtain authenticated minimums or hold information for any of the three accounts.
Fill these fields from the preview before committing money
Field
Why it changes the comparison
Total EUR leaving the bank/card
Include provider charge, bank charge and any PLN/EUR conversion.
Product and timestamp
Spot order book, conversion and instant buy have different pricing.
LTC credited after trading
If the quote already states the net amount, do not subtract its trade fee twice.
Withdrawal network, fee and minimum
Use native Litecoin; record the amount the destination will receive and whether the minimum includes fees.
Withdrawal availability
Check holds, new-address restrictions and enabled network status.
Final wallet receipt
Record transaction ID and output amount after withdrawal, not just exchange balance.
A PLN-funded card introduces another conversion into an EUR comparison. If your bank debits PLN, convert that actual debit using a stated benchmark and time; do not silently treat it as a free EUR deposit. Our guide to fees, spreads and currency effects explains how to keep those costs separate from Litecoin’s price movement.
Check the withdrawal before calling the purchase complete
Obtain a fresh from a wallet whose backup you have checked. Use the wallet recovery evidence to understand what a backup does and does not restore.
Match the full address and network to the withdrawal preview. A plausible prefix is not a substitute for checking the destination.
Save the exchange receipt and the withdrawal . An exchange’s charge can differ from the , especially if it batches withdrawals.
Use the transaction checker to locate the output to your address. Keep your chosen confirmation policy separate from the amount check.
A small test withdrawal can reduce the risk of a destination mistake, but two withdrawals may incur two provider charges. Include that in your plan rather than pretending the test is free. For normal comparison purposes, the useful unit is total spent divided by confirmed LTC received.
The package contains all nine raw books, UTC request/response times, HTTP dates, two Python scripts and the calculation outputs. Run the analysis against the saved books to reproduce this table; run the capture script only if you want a new observation. The archived replay needs no API key and makes no network requests.
We do not model venue lot increments, per-fill fee rounding, order-entry buffers, account eligibility, fiat conversion, authenticated or actual transfer time. Quantities are displayed to eight decimals. Those limits prevent an honest “cheapest exchange” verdict from this dataset alone. The worksheet is designed to make the missing evidence visible. There are no affiliate links or referral assumptions in this study.
Wallet
In brief Software or a device for managing wallet keys and payments, though a watch-only setup cannot sign on its own.
Software or a device that manages keys and helps you receive and send Litecoin. Coins are recorded on the blockchain. A watch-only wallet can show addresses and transactions without holding the keys needed to spend.
For example One wallet can generate several receiving addresses and still show them as a single combined balance.
Common mistake Thinking coins live inside the app, or that seeing a balance proves that the wallet can sign a spend.
In brief A market's displayed buy and sell orders at stated prices and quantities, which can change before a trade executes.
A venue's displayed buy and sell orders, grouped by price and available quantity. A captured book can show only a limited number of levels and can change before execution. It is not a complete, permanent view of every order or all market liquidity.
For example If 2 LTC are offered at $50 and another 5 at $50.10, a larger hypothetical purchase reaches more than the first price level.
Common mistake Treating a saved book replay as an executable offer or assuming one venue's visible depth represents the whole market.
In brief A peer-to-peer cryptocurrency with its own Scrypt proof-of-work network and a maximum issuance of 84 million LTC.
A peer-to-peer cryptocurrency launched in 2011. Litecoin uses Scrypt proof of work, targets an average 2.5-minute block interval and has an issuance schedule capped at 84 million LTC. Individual block times and payment acceptance times vary.
For example Sending 0.1 LTC on Litecoin transfers a fraction of one coin; you do not need to buy a whole LTC first.
Common mistake Assuming a token with LTC in its name on another network is automatically native Litecoin.
In brief One hundredth of a percentage point, so 100 basis points equal one percentage point.
One hundredth of a percentage point: 0.01%. Basis points make small rate differences easier to compare. One hundred basis points equal one percentage point; the unit does not tell you which price or amount is used as the reference.
For example A cost of 20 bps of an order's value is 0.20% of that value, not 20%.
Common mistake Confusing basis points with whole percentages or comparing figures that use different reference prices.
In brief A seller's offered price, with the best ask being the lowest displayed sell offer in a particular market.
A price at which a seller offers an asset. The best ask is the lowest displayed sell price on a particular order book. A buyer may pay more for a larger order that consumes several levels, and trading fees are separate.
For example If only 1 LTC is offered at a hypothetical $50 best ask, buying 3 LTC may require paying higher prices for the rest.
Common mistake Reading the best ask as the price you can sell at, or assuming your whole purchase is available at that one price.
In brief How easily an order can be filled without a large price change, depending on the market, available orders and order size.
How readily an order can be executed without moving the market price substantially. Assess order-book depth and spreads for the specific exchange, pair and order size; reported volume alone can be misleading.
For example A small purchase may fill near the quoted price while a much larger one consumes several order-book price levels.
Common mistake Using reported daily volume or a tight spread as proof that your whole order can fill at one price.
In brief A service for trading currencies or assets, whose custodial account balance does not give you control of its private keys.
A platform or service for buying and selling cryptocurrencies against fiat currencies or other assets. Trading methods, custody, supported pairs and withdrawal rules vary by service. A balance on a custodial exchange is an account claim; it does not mean you control the wallet's private keys.
For example After buying LTC on a custodial exchange, you request a withdrawal if you want it sent to your own wallet.
Common mistake Assuming an account balance means you possess the private keys, or overlooking the selected withdrawal network.
In brief An order setting a maximum buying price or minimum selling price before separate fees, which may fill partly or not at all.
An order that sets the highest unit price acceptable for a buy or the lowest acceptable for a sell, before separate fees. It can fill at that price or a better one, but may fill only partly or not at all. A limit order that matches existing orders immediately can still incur taker fees.
For example A fictional buy limit of EUR 50 per LTC does not accept a fill above EUR 50. If suitable sellers are unavailable, the order can remain unfilled.
Common mistake Treating a chart touching the limit as proof of a fill, or assuming every limit order receives maker fees.
In brief A service charge for executing a trade, distinct from funding and withdrawal costs.
A service charge for carrying out a trade. Its amount can depend on the market, fee tier, execution role and fee currency; a charge may be paid in cash or cryptocurrency. Check the actual fee breakdown. A trading fee is distinct from a quoted spread, funding costs and any later withdrawal or network fee.
For example A hypothetical 1% cash trading fee on EUR 100 of trade notional is EUR 1. A fee charged in LTC uses a different unit and changes the coin accounting.
Common mistake Treating a trading percentage as a network fee, or adding a charge already included in the quoted price.
In brief A transaction gains confirmations as blocks build on its inclusion, but those confirmations can fall if chain history changes.
A transaction receives its first confirmation when included in a block in the accepted chain. Each block then built on top adds another. A chain reorganization can reduce or remove the count. The recipient decides how many confirmations it requires. Litecoin targets an average 2.5-minute block interval; individual blocks can arrive sooner or much later.
For example A transaction in the latest accepted block has one confirmation; the next block raises that count to two.
Common mistake Confusing a wallet's sent message, a TXID or mempool visibility with the first confirmation.
In brief An encoded payment destination whose network, owner and wallet compatibility still need checking.
An encoded destination for a payment. Common transparent Litecoin addresses begin with L, M or ltc1; MWEB uses a different address format. An address is not a bank account or proof of identity. Check network and wallet compatibility before sending.
For example To receive LTC, copy a Litecoin receiving address from your wallet and check it against the address shown to the sender.
Common mistake A valid-looking address does not prove that it belongs to the intended person or uses the network the sender selected.
In brief A transaction identifier for looking up outputs and confirmations, which alone does not prove that a payment arrived.
The identifier used to look up a transaction. For an ordinary transparent Litecoin transaction it is shown as a 64-character hexadecimal string. Use it to inspect the transaction's outputs and confirmations; the ID alone does not prove a payment is confirmed.
For example Copy the TXID from your wallet's payment details into a Litecoin explorer to check the recipient output and confirmation count.
Common mistake Sharing a seed phrase to trace a payment, or treating a screenshot or TXID alone as proof that the expected amount arrived.
In brief Recorded in accepted blockchain blocks, unlike account changes a service may make only in its own records.
Recorded in the blockchain's accepted blocks. For transparent Litecoin, many transaction details are publicly visible, but an exchange's internal account changes need not create an on-chain transaction. Blockchain records alone do not establish an owner's identity or why funds moved.
For example A confirmed ordinary LTC payment appears in Litecoin blocks; an exchange moving balances between its own customer accounts may not.
Common mistake Assuming every account activity creates a blockchain transaction or that every large transfer is a trade.
In brief For ordinary transparent Litecoin transactions, the fee is total input value minus total output value, separate from a service withdrawal charge.
For an ordinary transparent Litecoin transaction, the network fee is the total input value minus all output values, including change. Wallets estimate it using transaction size and a fee rate, so sending more LTC does not automatically mean a higher fee. A service's withdrawal charge is a separate quote and may already cover network costs.
For example Fictional inputs total 1 LTC, while recipient and change outputs total 0.99999 LTC: the network fee is 0.00001 LTC.
Common mistake Confusing fee rate with total fee, leaving change out of output totals, or equating a service's withdrawal charge with the full network fee.
Compare: Network fee vs withdrawal fee
Transaction Fee
An ordinary transparent transaction's network fee is its total input value minus its total output value; transaction size and fee rate help determine the estimate.
Withdrawal Fee
A service sets its withdrawal charge under its own rules, and that charge can differ from the network fee on the transaction it broadcasts.
One example If a fictional service deducts a 0.001 LTC charge from a 1 LTC withdrawal, the recipient receives 0.999 LTC; these figures do not reveal the transaction's network fee.
Remember: Check the final account debit, recipient amount and minimum separately; add a network-fee estimate only if it is an additional charge, so the same cost is not counted twice.
In brief Government-issued money such as EUR or USD, including cash and bank deposits, separate from a wallet's displayed LTC valuation.
Government-issued money such as USD, EUR or GBP, whose value does not depend on redemption for a fixed quantity of gold or another commodity. It can exist as cash or bank deposits. An LTC price displayed in a fiat currency is a valuation, not an extra cash balance.
For example USD, EUR and PLN are fiat currencies; an LTC/EUR quote expresses one coin's price in euros.
Common mistake Confusing the fiat value shown by a wallet with an extra cash balance held in that wallet.
In brief A service's smallest allowed withdrawal, whose stated amount may be before fees or the net amount delivered.
The smallest withdrawal a service accepts for a particular asset and transfer route. Check whether the stated quantity includes the withdrawal fee or describes the net amount delivered. It is a service rule, separate from the fee itself and from Litecoin transaction relay rules. A balance can be tradable but still too small to withdraw.
For example With a fictional 1 LTC minimum measured before a 0.01 LTC fee, 1 LTC can leave 0.99 LTC delivered. A 1 LTC net minimum would require 1.01 LTC before that fee.
Common mistake Assuming that the quoted minimum is the amount the recipient receives, or that every service uses the same fee basis.
Downloadable data or code · Observed data / replay.
Content review recorded: 2026-09-29. The review record does not identify a separate independent reviewer. An edited date above records an edit, not a new fact-check. AI-assisted editing or new artwork alone does not complete a source review.
Editor-in-chief of Litecoin.watch and founder of MyBank.pl. His published work covers foreign exchange, financial education and Litecoin. On Litecoin.watch, his remit includes editorial direction, source transparency and the practical guides and research published by the site.
