What factors determine pricing tiers for fullz, CVVs, and PAN dumps on cybercrime marketplaces?
Executive summary
Market prices for CVVs, fullz and PAN/dump data reflect supply, perceived reliability, and the cashout utility criminals expect from each record: academic research and marketplace reviews show CVVs average around $10 while fullz average near $30 (higher for verified or high‑limit records) [1]. Vendor reputation, freshness, verification (test buys/mini‑transactions), country and card type (AMEX/region), and technical protections like EMV raise or shift value by changing usability and fraud risk [1] [2] [3].
1. Product type and completeness: “What you actually get” determines baseline value
CVV-only records (card number + CVV) are cheaper than fullz (CVV + PII) because fullz enable more fraud types — account takeover, loan or benefits fraud, and higher‑value cashout — so they command a premium; the dataset in an academic survey shows CVVs averaging about $10 and fullz averaging about $30 [1]. Verified dumps that include track data/PINs for cloning ATM cards or making mag‑stripe transactions are often priced separately and can exceed CVV/list prices depending on the intended cashout method [1] [4].
2. Freshness and verification: “How likely is it to work?”
Marketplace guides and vendor listings emphasise “fresh” and “verified” as price multipliers: fresh data and escrow‑backed or checker‑verified listings reduce decline rates and chargebacks, so sellers charge more [5] [6]. Practical verification steps—mini‑transactions or automated checkers—are used by shops and referenced in tutorials; verified cards and fullz with confirmed billing/SMTP access sell at higher rates because they lower buyer risk [7] [5].
3. Geography and card type: “Where the card is issued matters”
Regions and networks affect price. Market fragments and old price lists show US, UK, EU, Canada and special categories (AMEX, Discover) have different rates; some historical listings put US fullz and UK fullz at higher dollar amounts than generic CVVs [8] [9]. Higher‑income jurisdictions or cards tied to accounts with larger credit limits generally fetch higher prices because successful cashouts yield bigger spoils [2] [8].
4. Limit/balance and account features: “High balance = high price”
Sellers advertise that cards with large limits, positive balances, or linked to bank logins and transfers are more valuable. Fullz that include account access or banking credentials — not just payment card metadata — are sold as premium packages and may be priced per‑record or in bulk based on expected return [2] [9].
5. Seller reputation, platform features and friction costs: “Trust and transaction structure”
Reputable shops with escrow, refund rules, stock rotation, and active moderation can charge more because they reduce counterparty risk; conversely, cheap listings often carry higher risk of “dead” data or scams [5] [4]. Some established stores even impose registration fees or claim replacement policies which factor into the realized price and buyer willingness to pay [4].
6. Technical defenses and fraud controls: “Security reduces usability, raising value of richer data”
Technologies like EMV chips and VBV/3‑D Secure change what information is sufficient for fraud. SpyCloud notes that EMV chips and other controls have increased the premium on fullz because they provide the “something you have” context that helps bypass stronger CNP (card‑not‑present) defenses; criminals thus pay more for fuller identity packages that help impersonation or social engineering [3].
7. Scale, packaging and wholesale pricing: “Per‑record vs bulk economics”
Fullz are sold both per record and in bulk; pricing models vary from single‑unit rates to per‑thousand packages. Commercial analyses and forum postings indicate bulk fullz pricing can range from a few hundred to several thousand dollars depending on quality and vertical market [2] [9]. Wholesale purchases lower unit price but raise buyer risk and require more operational capability to monetize.
8. Market signals, risk and enforcement pressure: “Takedowns, scams and inflationary effects”
Market coverage notes that takedowns and scams push buyers toward trusted vendors and increase premiums for shops seen as reliable; meanwhile, an influx of low‑quality or law‑enforcement honey pots can depress perceived prices for “cheap” offerings [6] [5]. Academic price comparisons found statistically significant differences between CVV and fullz prices, reflecting marketplace segmentation and risk pricing [1].
Limitations and competing viewpoints
Primary coverage here is a mix of academic research, industry analysis and underground marketplace guides; academic price averages and market tutorials align on the major drivers but exact dollar figures vary widely across sources and over time [1] [2] [5]. Available sources do not provide a single authoritative, real‑time price list for PAN dumps or every regional nuance; many marketplace postings and forums quoted are ephemeral and self‑reported [4] [8].