From Fee Wars to Trust: How to Choose a Cryptocurrency Exchange in Brazil

Source: PortaldoBitcoin Original Title: From Fee Wars to Trust: How to Choose Your Cryptocurrency Exchange in Brazil Original Link: Choosing an exchange in Brazil has become a form of identity verification. Some see this decision as simple price competition, where the winner is the platform with the lowest spot trading fees for cryptocurrencies.

Others prioritize a variety of coins, advanced tools, and global integration. There is also a growing user base that places other “invisible” but critical standards first: predictability of BRL withdrawals, clarity of limits, responsive customer support, and clear regulatory compliance and security signals.

This shift in discussion means that rankings based solely on fees are useful but incomplete. The percentage of order fees is just the visible cost of operating crypto assets. Investors also pay for poor execution during volatility, access friction, document and tax processing times, and legal uncertainty risks—often unknowingly.

In reality, competition is no longer just about “who charges the lowest,” but about “who provides the most reliable and predictable experience for Brazilian investors.”

Rates and execution in the order book

On platforms with an order book, rates usually vary depending on the type of execution. Entering the order book and waiting for a counterparty’s order is typically classified as market making because it adds liquidity. Orders that execute immediately across prices are usually classified as taker orders because they consume liquidity. On some platforms, the same order may be partially maker and partially taker, depending on how it is filled.

MB’s market maker fees range from 0.015% to 0.30%, and taker fees from 0.25% to 0.70%, depending on order type and trading volume. Earlier this year, MB started offering 48-hour zero-fee trading for all new users. In practice, from January 12, users opening accounts on the exchange have two days to trade without paying any fees. This is a new policy with an uncertain duration, not a limited-time promotion.

From the perspective of new users, MB directly competes with a leading exchange and another platform that can offer lower spot market fees to standard investors, while a different exchange and a compliant platform use fee tables that vary based on trading volume and customer profile.

Fee comparison table

BRL deposits/withdrawals, clear limits, and zero-cost basics

Most Brazilian users choose exchanges because they can deposit and withdraw in BRL with clear limits and costs. On MB, BRL deposit/withdrawal fees are zero, with a minimum amount of 1 BRL. Limits differ for standard and verified accounts. For example, standard accounts can withdraw up to 1,000 BRL per 24 hours, while verified accounts can withdraw up to 50,000 BRL per 24 hours.

In contrast, some leading exchanges and platforms operating in Brazil offer BRL deposit/withdrawal services but rely more on pathways, conditions, and product eligibility. Foxbit also uses tiered structures and limits, publicly displaying VIP programs and limit tables. A compliant platform provides BRL deposit/withdrawal channels, but the experience varies depending on eligibility, methods, and verification requirements.

Security and governance, focusing on audits and controls

Security comparisons are often vague because nearly every company claims to have “robust technology.” The real difference lies in objective evidence pointing to actual security.

For example, MB is audited by KPMG (one of the Big Four), maintains asset segregation, and has not recorded any major security incidents in 13 years. Its systems have prevented over 1 billion BRL in fraud attempts in 2024-2025.

A more traditional market structure is used by some compliant platforms, with audited financial statements and custody services under SOC standards. Foxbit reports SOC 2 certification and mentions global audit and security privacy standards in its institutional materials. Some exchanges face regulatory pressures in certain markets but have strengthened compliance measures to mitigate risks. The leading exchange faces regulatory issues in different jurisdictions; the most impactful case involved a $4.3 billion fine in the US for AML failures and sanctions violations. The CEO at the time resigned after pleading guilty and paid a $50 million fine. He was imprisoned for four months in the US and later pardoned.

Despite past regulatory uncertainties, the leading exchange claims to have self-protection mechanisms and a history of incident coverage.

Public evidence of audits and controls

These factors help explain why, in broader analysis, the “best exchange” concept depends not only on fee competitiveness. The discussion shifts from “operational costs” to “predictability when issues arise.”

Customer support, reputation, and problem-solving ability

When users need customer support, quick resolution and avoiding long deadlocks are often more important than saving a few basis points in fees. For example, MB has received RA1000 certification for four consecutive years, awarded by a complaint website for customer service excellence.

Recent data from the complaint site shows Mercado Bitcoin leading other major exchanges operating in the country. While this metric does not replace independent service quality audits, it serves as a public signal of consumer perception regarding responsiveness and problem-solving.

Average complaint site scores (last 6 months)

Product offerings

To escape ongoing fee wars, exchanges try to differentiate by offering adjacent products that meet the typical needs of local investors.

For MB, there are over 800 digital assets, staking options for more than 15 assets with instant withdrawals, crypto-backed loans, and digital fixed income (averaging 140% of CDI in 2025).

In contrast, the leading exchange and another platform are recognized for their global ecosystem and product breadth, but the experience for Brazilian users may vary depending on BRL entry pathways, local availability, and support.

A compliant platform has institutional strength and controls closer to traditional finance standards, though it may not always be the least frictional choice for users prioritizing local daily operations. Foxbit aims to compete through clear trading volume plans and local positioning.

Conclusion: not everything depends on fees

If the only criterion for choosing an exchange is the lowest fee percentage, other aspects of user experience tend to be secondary.

A comparison aligned with the reality of Brazilian investors usually considers objective evidence of governance and controls, predictability of BRL withdrawals, quality of customer support, and the ability to reduce tax and operational frictions—factors that help justify operational costs.

Looking at domestic exchanges, MB combines KPMG audits, asset segregation, a history free of major incidents, large-scale fraud prevention, and zero-fee BRL deposits with clear account type limits. It also boasts strong public reputation for customer support and a 48-hour zero-fee window for new users, reducing friction while investors test the platform and build habits.

Another increasingly important dimension in comparison is regulation. MB has obtained authorization from the Central Bank of Brazil to operate as a payment institution and is among the first major exchanges in the country to collaborate with regulators on industry oversight. In tax matters, exchanges have operated within reporting and documentation frameworks for years, providing information and support to help investors organize crypto asset income tax declarations and avoid inconsistencies.

With the new rules for virtual asset service providers coming into effect in November 2026 and increased information requests from the Federal Revenue Service, the gap between “cheap exchanges” and “exchanges prepared for Brazil” may become more apparent. Platforms that adopted processes, governance, compliance, and reporting standards closer to Brazilian regulations from the start will have an advantage in adapting.