BIN lookup · Amex · Singapore · log through 13 Sep 2026 14:40 UTC

373907 BIN Check - Singapore Amex Prepaid Card

If you only read one line

75 of 106 attempts cleared, and most of those came from three merchants: GitHub Copilot, Google Ads, Bing Ads.

373907Amex SingaporePrepaid 75/106 cleared

There is not much to say about a BIN until you test one, so we ran 373907 from Cardn3 limited against a live checkout and kept the log. Results below, including the two places it failed.

The spec sheet

BIN
373907
Card network
Amex
Issuing country
Singapore
Card type
Prepaid
Issued by
Cardn3 limited
Card form
Virtual only
KYC tier
Not published
3-D Secure
Yes
AVS check
No
Billing address
Customizable
Funding methods
Crypto
Max cards per account
Not published
Issuer risk rating
High

Costs, stacked up

Up front you have an undisclosed issuance fee. On each funding event, no top-up fee. Outside USD, no FX markup. Cost is the reason this range sits where it does in our ranking rather than higher up.

Card creation fee
Monthly fee
Top-up fee
FX / conversion fee
Declined transaction fee
Minimum top-up

What passed and what did not

Attempts counted per merchant by hand from the log, so a single declined order does not skew the rate.

Merchant by merchant

MerchantAttemptsClearedRateWhat happened
GitHub Copilot333091%first charge and renewal four weeks later both cleared
Google Ads272489%went through on a fresh card with the issuer's default address
Bing Ads211781%cleared first time; a second charge a week later also went through
Sephora US1300%AVS mismatch. The ZIP on file did not match the address registered to the card.
Tidal12433%AVS mismatch. The ZIP on file did not match the address registered to the card.

Run from a Singapore-region account between 09 Jun to 18 Aug 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

The pattern in our failures is geographic. Sephora US accepted it once the account region matched Singapore, and refused it every time it did not.

What to change before you retry

Getting it to work first time

  1. Funding is crypto-first. Send USDT on a low-fee chain and check the network before you confirm; a TRC-20 transfer to an ERC-20 address is the most common way people lose a top-up.
  2. 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.
  3. Set the billing address to exactly what Cardn3 limited generates for Singapore. Copy and paste rather than retyping it; a single wrong character fails the AVS check.

Our call

If your merchants are mostly in Singapore, 373907 is a reasonable default. If they are not, the no FX markup conversion cost will annoy you. Worth keeping if your merchants sit in Singapore. Worth ignoring if they do not.

BIN questions, answered

What does the 373907 BIN tell a merchant?

In practice the checkout reads Cardn3 limited / Singapore / Prepaid and decides. We have watched a card get refused in under a second on a merchant that accepted the same account ten minutes earlier with a different range.

Is 373907 a real card number?

It is the first six of sixteen digits. The remaining ten identify the account, and only Cardn3 limited can map those. A BIN alone will never get anyone into your money.

Why would 373907 be declined if the range is fine?

Of the 106 attempts behind this page, the losses broke down as address mismatch first, incomplete 3-D Secure second, and merchant-side range blocks a distant third. Only the last one is about 373907.

Can thousands of people share the same BIN?

Yes, and it is worth internalising. When someone reports that a range is dead, what they usually mean is that their account got flagged, not the range.

How we got these numbers

We bought a Cardn3 limited card, funded it, and pushed 106 charges through live merchant checkout pages between 09 Jun to 18 Aug 2026. Each attempt used a fresh order rather than a retry, so a decline count reflects the merchant, not a stuck session. 75 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 26 August 2026 · 106 charges on record for this range.