Guides · Bitcoin markets
Bisq vs RoboSats vs Peach: requirements, costs and trade-offs
Sources checked 17 September 2026. Research comparison; no funded trades were performed for this guide.
Choosing a peer-to-peer Bitcoin service starts with three questions: are you buying or selling, do you already have bitcoin, and which payment method can you use? A small advertised platform fee does not answer those questions. Nor does “no KYC” describe everything a bank, payment provider or trading partner may learn.
Bisq also needs two separate entries: Bisq 1 and Bisq Easy use different trade mechanisms. Treating their fees and deposit requirements as interchangeable produces a misleading comparison.
The main differences
| Product | What you need | Published platform fee | Main trade-off |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bisq 1 | Bitcoin for the deposit and fees, plus the agreed payment method | BTC payment: maker 0.15%; taker 1.15%; minimum 0.000075 BTC | Collateral must be available before trading |
| Bisq Easy in Bisq 2 | An agreed payment method; buyers do not need a Bitcoin deposit | No trading fee | Buyer pays first; seller reputation matters |
| RoboSats | A compatible Lightning wallet for the trade flow and bond, plus the agreed fiat method | Maker 0.025%; taker 0.175% | Lightning requirements and coordinator-mediated disputes |
| Peach | An eligible offer and payment method; seller access is restricted | Latest operating announcement states 2% from release transactions | Temporarily operating without Peach’s former escrow role |
Sources: Bisq fees, Bisq deposits, Bisq Easy, RoboSats fees, RoboSats trade flow and Peach’s operating change.
Bisq: distinguish collateral from reputation
In Bisq 1, both parties lock a security deposit alongside the trade funds in a two-party multisignature arrangement. The documented deposit range is 15–50%, with a minimum of 0.001 BTC. A successful trade returns the deposit; breaking trade rules can cost some or all of it. This is capital you must supply, not a routine fee to add to every completed purchase. Deposit documentation.
The table shows BTC-denominated trading fees. Network fees are additional. BSQ is an alternative fee asset; inspect the amount quoted in the application rather than assuming a fixed discount. Maker and taker rates belong to different participants—you do not automatically pay both. Fee documentation.
Bisq Easy removes the trade deposit and trading fee, but changes the protection model. The buyer sends payment first, relying on seller reputation and access to mediation. The seller pays the Bitcoin delivery network fee. A seller’s quoted price can still contain a premium. “No trading fee” therefore does not mean buying at the market reference price. Bisq Easy documentation.
RoboSats: understand the Lightning requirement
RoboSats uses a robot identity controlled by a private token rather than a conventional email account. The documented flow includes a fidelity bond and a seller’s Lightning hold invoice. A bond is released after a successful trade but can be forfeited for non-performance. Keep the token and use a wallet compatible with the flow. Robot identities, bonds and escrow.
Its 0.2% combined platform fee is split between maker and taker, not charged in full to each. Routing costs can be additional. A buyer choosing an on-chain payout also faces the displayed mining and swap fees. That payout option should not be mistaken for a promise that a seller can fund the trade directly with on-chain BTC. Fees and trade flow.
Peach: older escrow comparisons need updating
Peach’s 31 August 2026 announcement temporarily removed its involvement in escrow. In-app dispute assistance remains, but Peach no longer has the escrow signature described in its previous model.
Selling is restricted to verified users, manually approved users or existing traders meeting demanding trade-history and dispute criteria. Unverified users can have only one trade at a time. A new user should not assume immediate access to no-ID selling. These are the latest operating changes verified for this guide. Provider announcement.
Peach also warns of jurisdiction restrictions, including possible non-compliance in the EU/EEA after 1 July 2026. This is not evidence of universal availability or a definitive country-by-country legal assessment. Current support notice.
Compare the payment route and final amount
Platform onboarding and payment privacy are separate. A bank transfer can disclose account information to the other participant and remains subject to the bank’s own checks. Bisq documents payment-method-specific limits and chargeback exposure; RoboSats likewise treats the fiat method as part of the trade’s risk. Bisq payment methods and RoboSats payment methods.
For a meaningful price comparison, record total fiat paid and spendable bitcoin received for the same payment method and time. Include the offer premium, your platform fee, network costs and any payment-provider fee. Record refundable collateral separately. Missing fees make the result an incomplete estimate.
There is no universal winner here. Existing bitcoin, Lightning compatibility, seller eligibility and acceptable counterparty exposure determine which route is worth investigating. This guide uses primary documentation, not live liquidity measurements, successful payment tests or a guarantee against later checks. It contains no affiliate links.
Explore the exchange comparison →
Read our methodology. General information, not a personal recommendation.