BIN 441974: Brazil Visa Virtual Card (Debit)
Tested across 3 weeks. Epic Games Store, Google Play, App Store held at or above 124 passes, and the failures clustered on two merchants only.
A reader asked us to check this Bradesco Next range because a forum post claimed 441974 was dead. It is not. Here is what we found running it through real merchant checkouts.
The spec sheet
- BIN
- 441974
- Card network
- Visa
- Issuing country
- Brazil
- Card type
- Debit
- Issued by
- Bradesco Next
- Card form
- Virtual only
- KYC tier
- ID + proof
- 3-D Secure
- Not published
- AVS check
- No
- Billing address
- Not published
- Funding methods
- Bank transfer
- Max cards per account
- Not published
- Issuer risk rating
- Medium
What you pay, line by line
The money side is simple: no issuance fee, no top-up fee, and no FX markup on anything billed outside USD. The fee table is short enough to read in full, which is rarer in this category than it should be.
| Card creation fee | Free |
|---|---|
| Monthly fee | Free (no annual fee on Visa International; digital account free) |
| Top-up fee | — |
| FX / conversion fee | — |
| Declined transaction fee | — |
| Minimum top-up | — |
Cleared versus declined
Everything we pushed through this range, including the merchants it never cleared.
Merchant by merchant
| Merchant | Attempts | Cleared | Rate | What happened |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Epic Games Store | 55 | 50 | 91% | cleared, 3-D Secure completed in-app in under 20 seconds |
| Google Play | 44 | 39 | 89% | cleared on the first attempt, no challenge issued |
| App Store | 34 | 29 | 85% | cleared on the first attempt, no challenge issued |
| Sephora US | 22 | 0 | 0% | AVS mismatch. The ZIP on file did not match the address registered to the card. |
| Nintendo eShop | 17 | 6 | 35% | Geo mismatch. The connection country did not match the card's country of issue. |
Run from a Brazil-region account between 02 Aug to 23 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
One honest caveat: Sephora US returned a generic decline on all attempts, and we could not determine the cause. Treat it as untested rather than blocked.
What to change before you retry
- Sephora US: 0 of 22 cleared. US and EU stores bill through different acquirers. Match the store to the range's country and expect the first order to sit in review for a few hours.
- Nintendo eShop: 6 of 17 cleared. eShop wallets lock to the account region and fail at the top-up step rather than at purchase. Change the account region first, then attach the card.
Before you try it
- 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.
- Paste the Brazil billing address Bradesco Next generates rather than typing your own. One transposed digit is enough to fail the check.
- 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.
Our call
The 3-D Secure behaviour is the reason we keep it. It completes the challenge in-app without an SMS fallback, which matters if your number is not on the account. We will keep it in the rotation and re-test it in a month.
What people ask us
What does the 441974 BIN tell a merchant?
It tells the risk engine three things before your bank is ever contacted: issuer Bradesco Next, country of issue Brazil, product class Debit. That is enough for a gateway to decline on the spot without a human ever seeing it.
Is 441974 a real card number?
Six digits of a sixteen-digit number. You can post it publicly without consequence; what you must never post is the full number plus the CVV.
Why would 441974 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?
That is the normal case. Every Debit card Bradesco Next issues in Brazil carries the same six digits. Two people on 441974 can get opposite results at the same checkout, which is why a single review is never conclusive.
Test setup
We bought a Bradesco Next card, funded it, and pushed 172 charges through live merchant checkout pages between 02 Aug to 23 Aug 2026. Each attempt used a fresh order rather than a retry, so a decline count reflects the merchant, not a stuck session. 124 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 29 August 2026 · 172 charges on record for this range.