Which Network to Use for USDT Transfers in 2026

USDT is issued on different networks. The choice affects address compatibility, fees and speed. In this article we look at the popular networks where USDT is issued, their main advantages and disadvantages, and give recommendations on how to choose.

To choose a network, it is enough to remember three basic rules:

1. Check the deposit network on the recipient side. If the wallet shows TRC-20, send only TRC-20; if ERC-20, then only ERC-20, etc.
2. Check the fee and minimum withdrawal amount on your exchange or in your wallet. Fees differ and change over time.
3. Take into account how you will use USDT further: for payments and frequent transfers choose a network with low costs and broad support; for a specific application choose the network that this application accepts.

Overview of popular USDT networks

Below is a brief overview of the popular networks where USDT is issued. This will help quickly understand how networks differ in terms of fees, speed and service support, and choose the right option for your task – from everyday transfers to payments in specific applications.

TRON (TRC-20)

One of the most popular options for everyday transfers thanks to low fees and fast crediting. Almost all major exchanges and wallets support TRC-20, so there are usually no problems with compatibility. If you make many transfers, you can reduce costs by purchasing energy.

Recommendation: when entering an address, carefully check that it belongs exactly to TRON. For the first transfers, make a test transaction to make sure that the recipient has enabled receiving USDT TRC-20.

Ethereum (ERC-20)

An option that is often chosen for working with large professional providers and custodial platforms. The sending fee is often higher, but compatibility with applications and services in the Ethereum ecosystem is very broad. If you plan further operations in Ethereum-based applications, withdrawing USDT directly in ERC-20 simplifies further work and avoids extra moves between networks.

Recommendation: carefully compare the deposit network on the recipient side: addresses in Ethereum start with 0x, but this is also true for other EVM networks, so do not confuse them.

BNB Smart Chain (BEP-20)

A practical balance between speed and transfer cost. It is also supported by many exchanges, wallets and applications, so USDT in BEP-20 is convenient for everyday settlements and cash buffers.

Important point: do not confuse BEP-20 (BNB Smart Chain) and BEP-2 (the older format in BNB Beacon Chain) – they have different addresses and incompatible deposits. On the withdrawal page always select exactly BEP-20 if the recipient shows a deposit in BSC. Addresses in BSC look similar to Ethereum (they start with 0x), so rely on the selected network in the interface, not only on the address format.

Polygon

Suitable for those who already use wallets and applications where Polygon support is common. Fees are usually low and transfers are fast, so the network is convenient for small and regular operations.

Recommendation: before sending, make sure the recipient explicitly shows a deposit specifically for USDT on Polygon – addresses also start with 0x and can easily be confused with Ethereum or BSC. If you plan to use USDT further in applications with Polygon support, it makes sense to withdraw directly to this network.

Solana

The network is often chosen for very low fees and fast crediting, which is convenient for frequent micro-payments. Many exchanges support USDT on Solana, but check that a particular wallet has deposits enabled precisely for this network. Addresses in Solana have a format that differs from EVM networks, which reduces the risk of accidental confusion of networks. If you interact with applications and services in the Solana ecosystem, withdrawing directly to this network saves time and funds.

TON

A rational choice if you pay or receive payments in the TON ecosystem, including via Telegram bots. Fees are low and transfers are fast, but support for TON deposits on different exchanges and wallets is still expanding, so checking deposit/withdrawal availability is mandatory.

Recommendation: pay attention to the correct address format and make sure the recipient has enabled receiving exactly USDT on TON, and not another token. If your everyday activity is linked to Telegram, TON will be convenient due to integrations. As always, start with a small transfer, then send the main amount.

For convenience, we have collected a summary table for the networks described above with the key nuances of using them:

Practical scenarios

• Exchange → exchange. TRC-20 is most often chosen because of low fees and broad support. But always focus on which networks are enabled for deposits on the recipient side.
• Exchange → personal wallet for payments and transfers. TRC-20 is often optimal. If you pay in Telegram, TON may be convenient.
• Transfers to a specific application/service. Use the network that the service accepts. This helps avoid extra transactions and conversions.

Saving in TRON by using energy

When sending USDT TRC-20, network resources are consumed. If you make many transfers, it is convenient to top up Energy in advance – the fee in TRX becomes lower and more predictable. You can find more details about purchasing energy in this article .

General recommendations before sending

• Make a test transfer of a small amount, then send the main amount.
• Always check that the address network and the sending network fully match.
• Make sure the recipient really has USDT reception enabled exactly in the chosen network.

Conclusion

The algorithm for choosing a network is generally quite simple: first look at which network the recipient address accepts, then compare fees, and after that take your further tasks into account. For regular and mass transfers TRC-20 is usually convenient. For working with large services and infrastructure, ERC-20 is often used. For payments in Telegram, consider TON. If you actively transfer in TRON, save by purchasing energy through FeeSaver.

FAQ