A Telegram-only prepaid Visa with real costs but no published answers about who runs it

Updated October 2026

Licensed

Available in US

Fast payouts

18+ Only

ZARUB is a prepaid Visa sold through a Telegram bot rather than a bank or app store, aimed at people who already use Telegram for crypto and who may not be able to get an ordinary bank card. It works in the way that category of product usually does: you top up a balance in rubles or crypto, the balance is converted, and you spend with a virtual or physical Visa wherever Visa is taken. The mechanics are familiar; what sets ZARUB apart is how little the people behind it say about themselves.

This review is written for anyone weighing ZARUB as a way to spend a crypto balance day to day. I went through what is published, what is not, and what the only third-party sources I could find say, and I score it 5.0 out of 10. That mark is low for a reason: a prepaid card can be useful, but it has to be useful against costs and risks you can actually see, and on both fronts ZARUB is harder to read than it should be.

Conditions are current as of October 28, 2026.

Verdict

A 5.0 out of 10 is not a damning score. It is the score of a card that does the basic job in a niche where several competitors do the same job with more openness. ZARUB is light to set up, it accepts rubles and several crypto networks, and the everyday operation is simple. The deductions come from things the issuer does not publish at all: no country list, no KYC rules, no named issuer, no disclosed company behind the card. A reader who is comfortable with that ambiguity may still find ZARUB useful. A reader who is not should look at the alternatives later in this review before deciding.

What I found when I scored it, criterion by criterion:

If you are funding a Telegram card in rubles or USDT and you accept that you are trusting a bot with no visible company behind it, ZARUB is workable. If you are funding a card to spend abroad on a known budget, the absence of an FX policy and the 0.3 to 0.35 USD per non-USD payment make it hard to predict what you will pay. If the issuer is not where you can take a complaint, every figure here is a number you have to take on faith until you try the card.

The rest of the review walks through who can get the card, how the sign-up works, what it really costs, how to top it up, what daily use looks like, the risks the issuer does not talk about, and what to take instead if any of the above is a deal-breaker for you.

Who they will give you the card

ZARUB does not publish a country list. The official site did not respond when I checked it, and the Telegram bot is the only front door I could confirm. Unofficial reviews describe the card as aimed at Russian users, written in Russian, with a travel section that says the cards work abroad without currency restrictions. There is no statement about which citizenships are accepted, which residents are accepted, or which countries the issuer refuses to serve.

That gap is the whole story of who can get the card. Without a published country list, eligibility is whatever the bot says when you try, and whatever the issuer’s compliance team decides behind the scenes. The two outcomes that matter for you are these: if the bot refuses you, you do not get a reason in writing, and if the issuer later decides your country of residence or citizenship is one it does not want, your account can be closed with whatever balance is left at that moment, on terms the issuer alone defines. I have no evidence ZARUB has done this to anyone, but the absence of a policy is itself the risk.

If you are in a country where ordinary banks refuse to issue you a card — because of your citizenship, your tax residence, the type of work you do, or your immigration status — ZARUB is the kind of product that gets talked about in those conversations. The pitch is that no country list means you can probably try; the catch is that no country list also means there is no commitment that you can keep using the card once you have it.

How to get it

The sign-up story, as far as I could reconstruct it, runs like this. You open the Telegram bot @zarub_robot. There is no separate mobile app, no App Store listing, and no Google Play listing mentioned in the third-party sources I checked. Inside the bot you choose the kind of card you want, top up a balance, and the virtual card is generated. One unofficial source says there is no mandatory identity check at the start; the same source warns that this is the unofficial version of the policy and that it can change.

A second unofficial source describes a different product structure: a virtual Visa in USD for online use, a separate card built for Apple Pay, and a physical plastic card for 149 USD that ships somewhere. The sources I have do not agree on whether Google Pay is supported, which is itself a useful thing to notice. If a feature is sometimes yes and sometimes no depending on who you read, treat it as no until you have tried it yourself.

What is not in any of the sources I checked, and what the issuer does not appear to publish, is this:

• The legal name of the issuer, where it is incorporated, and under which regulator it operates.
• The country whose BIN sits at the front of the card numbers. The first six to eight digits of a card number identify the issuing bank and country; for ZARUB I could not confirm either, and merchants that look up the BIN will see a country the issuer has not named.
• The KYC level, if any, and when it is triggered. Unofficial: no mandatory KYC at sign-up, which is one of the reasons a Telegram card is convenient and one of the reasons it can be shut down without warning.
• Delivery time and cost for the 149 USD physical card, and which countries it ships to.

If you are the kind of person who reads a card’s terms page before signing up, ZARUB will frustrate you. If you are the kind of person who is happy to try a small balance first and see what happens, the sign-up itself is light.

What it really costs

This is the section where ZARUB scores lowest, and the reason is not that the fees are unusually high in any one place. It is that the fees are unusually hard to predict, and that the unofficial numbers from third-party reviewers add up faster than they look.

The costs table below uses the unofficial numbers I could find. None of them come from a ZARUB-issued fee schedule, because ZARUB does not appear to publish one. Treat them as the most likely cost you will pay, not as a guarantee.

Three everyday payments will give you a feel for how the fees stack. The numbers below are my arithmetic on top of the unofficial fee figures, not a quote from ZARUB.

A 1,000 USD online subscription paid in USD: 0.35 USD operation fee, nothing else. Total: 1,000.35 USD.

A 1,000 USD purchase at a European shop, charged to the card in euros: 0.30 to 0.35 USD on top of the interbank conversion, depending on the source. The interbank rate itself is not disclosed, so the only way to know the conversion margin is to compare the card’s settlement amount against the mid-market rate on the day.

A 50,000-ruble SBP top-up to fund the card: at 7% plus a 1.5% crediting fee. The 1.5% on the underlying conversion, if there is one, is on top. If you then spend 50,000 rubles’ worth at 0.35 USD per operation in USD, you are paying several thousand rubles of fee on a top-up and spend cycle that an ordinary Russian bank card does not charge for. The trade-off is that the bank card may not be available to you, which is the reason cards like ZARUB exist at all.

The 0.35 USD per operation is the line worth dwelling on, because it includes declined operations when the balance is sufficient. On a category of card that is known to be declined by some merchants (more on this in the risks section), paying 0.35 USD for a payment that does not go through is a real cost, and a cost that compounds the more you try. There is no way to know in advance which merchants will decline a ZARUB card.

Top up the card

Top-up is where ZARUB does its job, and it is the section where I gave the highest mark. Unofficial sources agree on the options: rubles from Russian bank cards or SBP, and crypto in USDT on TRC-20 and other networks, plus TRX, BTC and TON. A first top-up has to clear a minimum, which two sources put differently: 10 USD in one place, 100 rubles in another. The most useful interpretation is that the ruble minimum is 100 rubles and the dollar equivalent of 10 USD, whichever applies to the currency you are sending.

The two top-up routes have very different shapes.

SBP and Russian card-to-card top-ups are simple in the user experience and expensive in absolute terms. You send rubles from a Russian bank, the bot credits the equivalent in USD minus a 7% fee and a flat 1.5% crediting fee, and you have a balance. The 7% is high by ordinary card-top-up standards, but the value proposition is that you can use a Russian bank card you already have, without an exchange office or a P2P trader, to fund a Visa that is accepted abroad.

Crypto top-ups are cheaper in the spread but require more care. The 3% plus network fees plus 1.5% structure is close to what other Telegram cards charge, and the network fee is set by the blockchain, not by ZARUB. Where it goes wrong is when a user sends USDT on the wrong network, or sends a token ZARUB does not support. Blockchain transfers are irreversible, and a deposit on an unsupported network can be lost or stuck in manual support with no guarantee it will be returned. The rule is the same as for every card in this category: read the bot’s instructions, send a small test amount first, and never reuse an address from a previous top-up if the bot has rotated it.

A few practical things worth knowing, all from the same unofficial sources:

• USDT on TRC-20 is the cheapest network to send from in fee terms, because Tron fees are typically a fraction of a cent.
• ERC-20 USDT requires ETH for gas, so a wallet holding only USDT cannot send and will need a small ETH balance too.
• Tether says it disables tokens in sanctioned wallets and has frozen funds tied to illicit activity, so stablecoins are not censorship-proof at the network level even when the card is.
• Circle stopped supporting USDC on Tron in February 2024, so a USDC “TRC-20” deposit is not a native option, and any token labelled that way on a card’s accepted list deserves a second look.

Paying with it every day

Daily use is the part ZARUB does best, and the part that earns the second-highest score. Unofficial: a virtual Visa in USD for online payments, a separate card that pairs with Apple Pay, and a 149 USD plastic card for in-store and ATM use. Sources disagree on Google Pay, with one saying the cards link to both Apple Pay and Google Pay and another saying only Apple Pay works. I would plan for Apple Pay only, and treat Google Pay as a question mark.

The on-card experience is what you would expect from a prepaid Visa. You tap or insert at a shop, the terminal routes the payment through Visa to the issuer, the issuer debits your balance, and the merchant sees a Visa sale in whatever currency it trades in. The 0.30 to 0.35 USD per non-USD payment is on top of the conversion, which is the interbank rate at the moment of authorisation. The interbank rate itself is not disclosed, so the actual mark-up on a euro or pound payment is the sum of two unknowns: the rate the issuer applied and the rate the merchant’s bank used as the mid-market reference.

A small but real detail is that 3-D Secure is declared for the card. That is the online check where the issuer may send you a one-time code or ask for a biometric confirmation. Most cardholders experience it as a popup or a step in the checkout, and it is the kind of friction that is mildly annoying for low-risk purchases and mildly reassuring for high-risk ones. It is also a sign the issuer has built at least the basic online safety net.

What I could not find:

• The ATM experience: fees per withdrawal, daily ATM limits, whether the plastic card even works at an ATM. The 149 USD plastic card suggests it does, but the source I have does not confirm.
• A mobile app, a web dashboard, or any other way to see transactions other than the Telegram bot itself. One source says access is bot-only, with no store app mentioned.
• A dispute process if a payment goes wrong, if a merchant charges twice, or if a product is not delivered. The card schemes have a chargeback mechanism, but the cardholder’s ability to use it depends on the issuer, and the issuer is not identified.

What can go wrong

The honest framing of risk for ZARUB is this. I searched for complaints about ZARUB itself and found none that I could verify. That is good news and not very informative, because a Telegram card with no visible issuer, no app-store presence and no public company behind it does not have the channels through which complaints normally appear. The risks worth taking seriously are the category risks that any Telegram prepaid Visa carries, plus the specific gaps in ZARUB’s published story.

The first is the issuer itself. ZARUB does not publish the legal name of the company, the country it is in, or the regulator that supervises it. Without that, there is no place to file a formal complaint, no deposit guarantee that applies, and no obvious party to sue if the balance disappears. Other Telegram-style cards have had this exact problem: a bot is reachable one day, then it is not, and the balance is whatever the issuer’s last message said it was.

The second is the BIN. A card’s first digits tell a merchant which bank and country issued it. If the BIN points to a country the merchant does not want to deal with, or to a prepaid product the merchant has been told to scrutinise, the payment is declined. Some merchants also decline prepaid cards by category, regardless of issuer. When a payment is declined and the balance was sufficient, the unofficial rule is 0.35 USD per attempt, and that adds up fast on a card you are still getting used to.

The third is FX and fees on declined operations. A 0.35 USD fee on a declined transaction is small in isolation, but it punishes the user for trying. Address Verification Service, the system some US, Canadian and UK merchants use to compare parts of a billing address against the issuer’s records, is generally unavailable for foreign-issued cards and can cause declines that are not the user’s fault. A card with a non-disclosed BIN country will run into this more often than a card with a transparent one.

The fourth is programme changes. The category has examples: in 2018 Visa suspended WaveCrest in Europe and closed all WaveCrest-issued programmes; in November 2022 Visa terminated its global agreements with FTX and the FTX US debit card was wound down by its issuer. A card programme can be closed with notice, then spending stopped, then balances asked to be withdrawn. If that happens to a Telegram card whose company is not visible, the user has whatever notice the bot sends, and whatever balance they can move out in the window.

The fifth is the bot itself. Telegram bots are run by whoever controls the bot token, and there is no app-store review, no two-factor recovery flow and no recourse if your Telegram account is hijacked. If you are logging into a financial bot from a Telegram account with a weak password and no two-step verification, the weakest link is not the card; it is the chat app.

The sixth is sanctions and freeze risk. Tether, the issuer of USDT, has stated it disables tokens in wallets on the OFAC sanctions list and has frozen funds tied to illicit activity. The card’s compliance team can, on its own judgement, freeze a balance or close an account if the underlying stablecoin trail touches a sanctioned address, and the user may have no way to prove it did not. This is a general category risk and not a ZARUB-specific finding, but it is a reminder that “decentralised” is not the same as “uncensorable”.

A small note on safety features the issuer does mention: 3-D Secure is declared, which is the standard online-payments check. There is no published word on two-factor authentication, on an instant card-freeze button, on spending limits you can set yourself, or on what happens to a tokenised card number if your phone is lost. Apple Pay replaces the card number with a device-specific number stored in the Secure Element, and the issuer can restrict a tokenised number, so the security of a tap-to-pay transaction is mostly on the device side.

What to take instead

If any of the above is a deal-breaker, the alternatives are not dramatically better but they are differently opaque. I scored each one against the same yardstick; the score is the alternative’s own number, not a comparison to ZARUB.

What this comparison is really telling you is that ZARUB sits in a category of products where transparency is the scarce resource, not features. Ape Wallet is a closer match in spirit, with SBP funding and a Russian-language focus, but it does not publish fees either. MaxSwap publishes its fees but is more expensive on top-up. AnoCard sits on a web dashboard rather than a bot, which is a usability improvement, but the site was not reachable when I checked.

The question to ask yourself when comparing these is not “which is cheapest” but “which is most likely to still be reachable in twelve months”. A 9 out of 10 for top-up options is only worth what the issuer is worth in a year’s time.

Who I would recommend it to

I would recommend ZARUB, with eyes open, to a person who:

• Is funding a Telegram card in rubles or USDT and accepts that the issuer is not visible.
• Wants to spend a stablecoin balance online or via Apple Pay without going through an exchange.
• Has tried a small balance first, has confirmed the bot works from their country, and is willing to lose that small balance if the bot disappears.
• Is comfortable with the 7% SBP top-up fee and the 0.35 USD per operation fee as the cost of having a Visa at all.
• Has Telegram two-step verification on, and treats the bot as a financial app rather than a chat.

I would not recommend it to a person who:

• Needs a predictable FX mark-up for foreign-currency spending. The interbank rate is undisclosed.
• Wants a card with a published dispute process. The cardholder’s recourse is the issuer, and the issuer is not identified.
• Plans to keep a large balance on the card. The 1,000,000 USD monthly limit (unofficial) is a notional ceiling; the realistic risk is the issuer, not the limit.
• Needs Google Pay, ATM use, or a physical card for everyday tap-to-pay. Apple Pay and a 149 USD plastic card are the documented options; Google Pay is contested.
• Wants a card that will still be there in a year on a published set of terms. The category does not offer that guarantee.

If you are the person in the first list, the rest of the review is the kind of detail you wanted. If you are the person in the second, the alternatives section is the part that matters.

Frequently asked questions

What is the ZARUB card?

ZARUB is a prepaid Visa sold through the Telegram bot @zarub_robot, in the form of a virtual card in USD, a separate card that pairs with Apple Pay, and a 149 USD physical plastic card. It is aimed at users who fund a card in rubles or crypto and spend the balance wherever Visa is taken.

How does the ZARUB card work?

You top up a balance in rubles via SBP or in crypto such as USDT, the bot credits the equivalent in USD, and the card spends that balance. Each operation carries a 0.35 USD fee according to unofficial sources, and non-USD payments are converted at an undisclosed interbank rate plus 0.30 to 0.35 USD.

Is ZARUB a bank?

ZARUB does not present itself as a bank and does not publish the name of a bank or e-money institution behind the card. Treat the issuer as undisclosed until the company itself states otherwise; a Telegram bot is not a regulated bank by default.

Who owns ZARUB?

The company, the country of incorporation and the regulator are not stated on the public pages I could read. The bot is the only confirmed front door, and ownership behind the bot is not visible to a user before sign-up.

Is the ZARUB card available in my country?

There is no published country list. Unofficial sources describe the card as Russian-facing and say the cards work abroad without currency restrictions. The only way to know whether you can use ZARUB from your country is to open the bot and try; there is no published appeal process if the answer is no.

How do I get the ZARUB card?

Unofficial: open the Telegram bot @zarub_robot, choose the card type, complete a first top-up and the virtual card is generated. There is no app-store app, no web sign-up, and no published KYC step at the start; identity checks, if any, are triggered later on the issuer’s discretion.

Does the ZARUB card require KYC?

Unofficial sources say no mandatory identity check at sign-up, but the issuer has not published a KYC policy. If you are asked for documents later, refusal to provide them can lead to the account being closed, which is why keeping a small balance matters.

How do I top up the ZARUB card?

Unofficial: rubles via SBP or card-to-card at 7% plus 1.5% crediting fee, or crypto such as USDT on TRC-20, TRX, BTC and TON at 3% plus network fees plus 1.5%. The first top-up has a minimum of 10 USD or 100 rubles depending on the source and the route.

Is the ZARUB card free?

The card itself is not free. Unofficial issuance prices are 19 USD for a virtual card, 30 USD for the Apple Pay card, and 149 USD for the plastic card. There is also a 0.35 USD fee on every operation, including declined ones when the balance is sufficient.

How do I add the ZARUB card to Apple Wallet?

Unofficial: the Apple Pay card is a separate product rather than the virtual card added to the wallet, and the bot handles the provisioning flow. Sources disagree on whether Google Pay is supported, so plan for Apple Pay only and treat Google Pay as unconfirmed until you try it from your device.

Content created by the «cryptocardselect» team