BIN lookup · Visa · Lithuania · log through 13 Sep 2026 14:40 UTC

BIN 401955 (Lithuania, Visa) - What It Works On

In short

Strongest results on Epic Games Store, Google Play, App Store. Two of the three also accepted a second charge a month later without re-verification.

401955Visa LithuaniaDebit 119/167 cleared

There is not much to say about a BIN until you test one, so we ran 401955 from Touch 'n Go eWallet against a live checkout and kept the log. Results below, including the two places it failed.

401955, decoded

BIN
401955
Card network
Visa
Issuing country
Lithuania
Card type
Debit
Issued by
Touch 'n Go eWallet
Card form
Virtual only
KYC tier
ID + proof
3-D Secure
Not published
AVS check
No
Billing address
Not published
Funding methods
Not published
Max cards per account
Not published
Issuer risk rating
Medium

Costs, stacked up

The signup cost is easy to compare and mostly irrelevant. What follows you around is a 1% top-up fee, with no FX markup sitting behind it. Everything is quoted in USD. Fund the card in the same currency wherever the issuer allows it.

Card creation feeRM20
Monthly feeRM8/year
Top-up fee1% (MY card reload); up to ~2.6% (non-MY card)
FX / conversion fee0% card payments (cross-border waived); 1% eWallet QR
Declined transaction fee
Minimum top-up

Results by merchant

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

Merchant by merchant

MerchantAttemptsClearedRateWhat happened
Epic Games Store534789%went through on a fresh card with the issuer's default address
Google Play433888%cleared, 3-D Secure completed in-app in under 20 seconds
App Store332885%went through on a fresh card with the issuer's default address
Nike US2100%Geo mismatch. The connection country did not match the card's country of issue.
Walmart17635%AVS mismatch. The ZIP on file did not match the address registered to the card.

Run from a Lithuania-region account between 29 Jul to 26 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

It failed twice on Nike US, both times on an AVS mismatch rather than a range block. Setting the billing address to the issuer default fixed it.

What to change before you retry

Do these first

  1. This range does not advertise 3-D Secure. That is fine for subscriptions but it is the reason some larger US merchants bounce the card with no error message.
  2. Paste the Lithuania billing address Touch 'n Go eWallet generates rather than typing your own. One transposed digit is enough to fail the check.
  3. 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.

What the numbers add up to

We would rank it above average and below the top tier. The difference is the 0% card payments (cross-borde… conversion fee, which the better ranges do not charge. Ranked on cost alone it sits mid-table. Ranked on consistency it moves up a few places.

What people ask us

What does the 401955 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 401955 a real card number?

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

Why would 401955 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?

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 Touch 'n Go eWallet card, funded it, and pushed 167 charges through live merchant checkout pages between 29 Jul to 26 Aug 2026. Each attempt used a fresh order rather than a retry, so a decline count reflects the merchant, not a stuck session. 119 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 31 August 2026 · 167 charges on record for this range.