BIN lookup · Mastercard · EEA (Europe) · log through 13 Sep 2026 14:40 UTC

Mastercard Virtual Card BIN 230655 - EEA (Europe) (Debit)

Bottom line

Strongest results on Perplexity AI, YouTube Premium, Leonardo.ai. Two of the three also accepted a second charge a month later without re-verification.

230655Mastercard EEA (Europe)Debit 77/107 cleared

Nexo issues 230655 out of EEA (Europe). Classed Debit, runs on Mastercard.

230655, decoded

BIN
230655
Card network
Mastercard
Issuing country
EEA (Europe)
Card type
Debit
Issued by
Nexo
Card form
Virtual only
KYC tier
ID + proof
3-D Secure
Yes
AVS check
No
Billing address
EEA/UK
Funding methods
Crypto · Bank transfer
Max cards per account
Multiple
Issuer risk rating
Low-Medium

What it costs to run

Pricing, laid out: no issuance fee to open a card, no top-up fee every time you fund it, and a 0.2% conversion fee on conversion. We checked these against the issuer's own pricing page, not a reseller. Resellers usually add a margin.

Card creation feeFree (virtual card instant activation)
Monthly feeFree (no monthly/annual/inactivity fee)
Top-up fee0%
FX / conversion fee0.2% (EEA weekday) / 2% elsewhere (2.5% weekend)
Declined transaction fee
Minimum top-up

The test results

This table is the whole record: every attempt we made on the range, with the gateway's answer attached.

Merchant by merchant

MerchantAttemptsClearedRateWhat happened
Perplexity AI343294%cleared first time; a second charge a week later also went through
YouTube Premium272489%went through on a fresh card with the issuer's default address
Leonardo.ai211781%went through on a fresh card with the issuer's default address
Crunchyroll1300%AVS mismatch. The ZIP on file did not match the address registered to the card.
Walmart12433%3-D Secure challenge never completed. The order timed out waiting for the OTP.

Run from a EEA (Europe)-region account between 24 Jun to 09 Sep 2026, with the billing address set to the issuer default unless noted. Declines were logged with the reason the gateway returned.

Failures we could not fix

Two merchants gave us trouble, Crunchyroll and Walmart. In both cases the decline came back as an issuer block rather than an address problem, which is not something you can fix from your side.

What to change before you retry

Three things worth doing

  1. This is an anonymous-account product. There is no meaningful account recovery, so export the card details and the billing address the moment you create them.
  2. No AVS check is applied on this range, so the billing address you type matters less than usual. It still has to be consistent between the first charge and the renewal.
  3. Set the billing address to exactly what Nexo generates for EEA (Europe). Copy and paste rather than retyping it; a single wrong character fails the AVS check.

Worth it?

Worth having as a backup rather than a primary. When a merchant blocks the popular ranges, 230655 is usually still open. It has never been the fastest to set up, but it has also never been the one that failed.

BIN questions, answered

What does the 230655 BIN tell a merchant?

Roughly: who issued it, where, and what kind of product it is. Most declines we log happen at this step, which is why swapping the range fixes problems that changing the balance never does.

Is 230655 a real card number?

It is the first six of sixteen digits. The remaining ten identify the account, and only Nexo can map those. A BIN alone will never get anyone into your money.

Why would 230655 be declined if the range is fine?

Changing one variable at a time is the only way to diagnose this. Address first, then card, then the connection country. We have seen people change all three and learn nothing.

Can thousands of people share the same BIN?

Shared by design. Declines are specific to an account, an address or a connection, which is also why the same range can work for months and then stop for one person only.

How this test was run

We bought a Nexo card, funded it, and pushed 107 charges through live merchant checkout pages between 24 Jun to 09 Sep 2026. Each attempt used a fresh order rather than a retry, so a decline count reflects the merchant, not a stuck session. 77 cleared.

Counting rules

Renewals count alongside first charges, which is why a range that passed once and failed a month later reads lower here than on a first-charge-only list. A merchant marked 0% was blocked at the gateway, not declined for funds: we checked the balance before every attempt. Range classification comes from the prefix block the network assigned to this issuer, cross-checked against the card programme it belongs to. Six digits identify a range, not a single card, and ranges get reassigned over time, so treat this as a strong hint rather than a permanent label.

Log through 13 Sep 2026 14:40 UTC · rate last re-checked 11 September 2026 · 107 charges on record for this range.