SKU: 52395270825
heirloom money plant

heirloom money plant Chinese Money Plant ‘Pilea peperomioides’ 4" Pot / Black / With Pot

$22.53 $25.03
Save 10%
No.2 Bestseller on jetex.de >

Pay in installments of $6.26 with ShopPay, AfterPay and Klarna

Shipping Estimate
USA
  • USA
  • CAN

Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Sep 30 - Oct 5

Promo Codes Available:

For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15

Description

heirloom money plant Chinese Money Plant ‘Pilea peperomioides’ 4" Pot / Black / With PotThe Chinese Money Plant, known as Pilea peperomioides, is one of the most beloved houseplants in the world, admired for its coin shaped leaves, minimalist look, and ease of care. Often seen gracing modern interiors and Instagram feeds, this quirky plant brings a charming architectural quality to any space. Traditionally, the Chinese Money Plant is believed to bring prosperity, good fortune, and financial abundance, which is why its often given as a

The Chinese Money Plant, known as Pilea peperomioides, is one of the most beloved houseplants in the world, admired for its coin-shaped leaves, minimalist look, and ease of care. Often seen gracing modern interiors and Instagram feeds, this quirky plant brings a charming architectural quality to any space.  

Traditionally, the Chinese Money Plant is believed to bring prosperity, good fortune, and financial abundance, which is why it’s often given as a gift. This plant goes by many names, including the UFO Plant, Pancake Plant, Missionary Plant, and simply the Money Plant (not to be confused with Crassula ovata or Epipremnum aureum).  

According to feng shui, the Chinese Money Plant is more than just a decorative addition, it's considered a symbol of prosperity and good luck.

The round, shiny leaves resemble coins, making it a go-to plant for those hoping to attract wealth and positive energy into their homes or offices.

To bring prosperity and good luck into your life, feng shui practice suggests placing the plant in the southeast corner of your living space, which is associated with wealth and abundance.

It’s also popular to give the plant as a gift, especially when it has produced “pups” or offsets, which are thought to spread fortune when shared. 

The plant grows in a mounded shape and stays compact, typically reaching a mature size of about 12 inches tall and 12 inches wide.

It can grow to double its size in a year with proper lighting. Its symmetry and upright growth habit make it perfect for shelves, desks, or as a tabletop focal point. 

Native to the mountainous regions of Yunnan Province in southern China, the Chinese money plant is defined by its shiny, round, flat leaves perched above long, slender stems that radiate from a central point. 

The Chinese Money Plant can produce tiny, pale-pink to white flowers on thin stalks in ideal indoor conditions, usually during spring. However, blooming is rare and not its main feature. What makes this plant especially unique is its tendency to produce numerous offsets or “pups” at the base and even along its roots, which can be gently removed and propagated with ease. 

The full-grown Chinese Money Plant is popular for its easy-care nature, unique round leaves, and air-purifying qualities, making it a great decorative houseplant for modern interiors. Its upright, architectural look adds charm to tabletops, shelves, or hanging planters. 

When and How to Water Your Chinese Money Plant 

The Chinese Money Plant is mildly drought-tolerant and does not like sitting in wet soil, which can quickly lead to root rot. During average conditions, let the top 1–2 inches of soil dry out between waterings. If you’re unsure, it’s safer to wait a day or two longer than to water too soon.

The plant can tolerate short dry spells better than overwatering. Water your Chinese Money Plant every 7–10 days during its growing season (March to September) using about 1/4 to 1/2 cup of water and reduce watering to every 14–21 days during dormancy (October to February). 

From March to September, during its growing season, water the plant every 7–10 days with about 1/4 to 1/2 cup of water, depending on pot size and indoor climate. You’ll notice it grows faster and pushes out new leaves during this time, so more frequent watering is appropriate. Make sure to use a pot with good drainage and empty any saucers to prevent soggy soil. 

From October to February, in its dormant season, reduce watering to every 14–21 days using around 1/4 cup, only when the soil feels completely dry. Growth will slow down or stop, and watering too much during this period increases the risk of root rot. Place it in a slightly cooler location during dormancy, if possible, to help mimic natural seasonal changes. 

Light Requirements – Where to Place Your Chinese Money Plant 

When growing indoors, place your Chinese Money Plant near a bright east or north-facing window with indirect light for 6–8 hours daily.

Chinese Money Plant thrives in bright, indirect indoor light and grows best near east- or north-facing windows.

Avoid intense, direct midday sunlight, which can scorch the leaves.

If you only have south- or west-facing windows, place it a few feet back or use a sheer curtain. Under low-light conditions, it may become leggy, producing fewer and smaller leaves.

When growing outdoors, give your plant filtered morning sun and bright shade in the afternoon, ideally 3–4 hours of gentle light daily. It can be placed on a shaded patio or balcony during warm months; but must be brought indoors before temperatures drop.

Avoid direct sun exposure during summer afternoons, which can burn the delicate foliage. 

Optimal Soil & Fertilizer Needs 

The Chinese Money Plant prefers a well-drained, airy, slightly acidic to neutral soil (pH 6.0–7.0), and should be fertilized once a year. A quality indoor potting mix amended with perlite or pumice ensures proper drainage. Planet Desert specializes in succulents and has Go to cactus mix blend 1 gal 4 qt cacti succulent dirt compost growing media that includes an organic substrate with mycorrhizae to help with the growth of a healthy root system, to help your succulents thrive. Avoid compacted or moisture-retentive soils, as they increase the risk of rot.  

Fertilize your plant once a year in spring using a diluted balanced liquid NPK fertilizer of about 5-10-5. Too much feeding can lead to salt buildup or leggy growth. No fertilizer is needed during the dormant season (October to February), as the plant slows its growth and won’t benefit from added nutrients. Flush the soil occasionally with plain water to remove any accumulated salts. 

Pro Tip: It’s perfectly natural for your Chinese Money Plant to shed an occasional older leaf as it focuses energy on fresh growth. But if you notice multiple leaves dropping at once, overwatering and potential root rot are often to blame. Act quickly by checking the soil and root-adjust watering to help your plant bounce back.

Chinese Money Plant Indoor Requirements 

The best place to grow a Chinese Money Plant indoors is near an east- or north-facing window where it can receive bright, indirect light throughout the day. Avoid placing it directly in harsh afternoon sun, which may scorch its delicate, round leaves. When grown indoors, the Chinese Money Plant thrives in temperatures between 60–75°F, with moderate humidity levels of 40% to 60%. It does well in typical household conditions but appreciates extra humidity, which you can provide with a pebble tray or by grouping it with other plants. Always position it away from cold drafts, air conditioners, and direct heat sources like radiators to prevent stress. 

Hardiness Zones & More 

In all other U.S. states, where winter temperatures dip below this threshold, it is best grown indoors or kept as a seasonal outdoor plant during warm months. 

If you choose to place it outside during summer, be sure to bring it back indoors by late September or early October to protect it from cold damage. 

The Pilea peperomioides can only be grown outdoors year-round in Hawaii, where USDA Zones 10–11 provide the consistently warm, frost-free climate it needs.

In these tropical conditions, the plant enjoys filtered sunlight, mild humidity, and temperatures that stay safely above 50°F.  

Wildlife – Pilea peperomioides Flowers Attract the Following Friendly Pollinators 

When in bloom, Pilea peperomioides may draw a few tiny flies or gnats, but it is not a plant that is known to draw bees, hummingbirds, or butterflies. This plant is more decorative than wildlife-supportive, but its tiny pale flowers can sometimes catch the attention of small insects. However, it’s not a nectar-rich plant and shouldn’t be relied upon to attract pollinators like salvia or milkweed. 

Butterflies
Bees
Hummingbirds
Lady Bugs
Multi Pollinators
Other Birds

According to the ASPCA, Pilea peperomioides is non-toxic to dogs, cats, and horses. This makes it a pet-friendly houseplant option and a great choice for families. Even if ingested, it rarely causes more than mild stomach upset. Still, always supervise pets around houseplants to discourage chewing. 

How to Propagate Your Chinese Money Plant  

Pilea peperomioides is easily propagated from baby plantlets, which grow from the base or roots of mature plants. When a healthy plant matures, it produces offsets (also called pups) that can be removed and replanted. Wait until the baby plant is 2–3 inches tall, then gently dig around the base and snip it from the parent with a clean knife or scissors.

Ensure the pup has some roots for faster establishment. Plant the offset in a small pot with moist, well-draining soil. Keep it in bright, indirect light and water lightly. Within a few weeks, it should root and begin growing independently. You can also try propagating leaf cuttings in water, but this method is slower and less reliable. 

Potting and Repotting Chinese Money Plant 

Chinese Money Plant prefers a small to medium-sized pot with excellent drainage, and it typically needs repotting once every 1–2 years as it outgrows its container. When potting or repotting, choose a container that has drainage holes and use a light, well-draining soil mix, such as a blend designed for indoor plants or a succulent mix with added perlite or coconut coir. Repotting is best done in spring, just before or as the plant enters its active growing season.

If you notice roots circling the bottom or poking through the drainage holes, or if water drains too quickly, it’s a sign your Pilea has outgrown its current pot. While repotting, it's a great opportunity to separate and propagate any baby offsets (“pups”) growing around the base. After repotting, water the plant lightly and place it in indirect light to help it adjust to its new environment without stress. 

Key Takeaways

  1. The Chinese Money Plant is one of the most popular houseplants, known for its charming coin-shaped leaves, low maintenance, and modern aesthetic appeal.
  2. Feng Shui enthusiasts believe the Chinese Money Plant brings prosperity and positive energy, especially when placed in the southeast corner of your home or office.
  3. This plant is drought-tolerant, capable of thriving with minimal watering, making it ideal for busy plant owners or those in drier indoor environments.
  4. The Chinese Money Plant is safe for pets, as it is non-toxic to cats and dogs according to the ASPCA—perfect for pet-friendly households.
  5. It produces easy-to-propagate pups, allowing plant lovers to grow new plants from the mother plant and share them with others.

The Bottom Line 

Overall, the Chinese Money Plant ‘Pilea peperomioides’ is a stylish, easy-care indoor plant with charming round leaves and simple care needs.  With its charming look, symbolic significance in feng shui, and reputation for easy care, it has become a staple in modern plant collections around the world. It adds visual appeal with its upright stems and coin-like foliage, requires minimal watering, and thrives in bright, indirect light. Pet-friendly and easy to propagate, it’s an ideal choice for beginners or seasoned plant lovers alike. With the right watering schedule, soil mix, and light exposure, this trendy houseplant can reward you with lush growth and an ever-growing family of new pups. Order your very own Chinese money plant for sale today!

Shipping Notes
  • Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
  • Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
  • Delivery to the USA:
  1. Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
  • If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
  • We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
  • Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
  • To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
  • Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
SKU: 52395270825

Discover Niche Categories That Outsell heirloom money plant

Top-Converting Item to Boost Your Average Order

4.0 ★★★★★
Based on 20 reviews
Sort
Highest Rating
Newest First
Oldest First
Product Reviews
A
[email protected]
Belleville, US
★★★★★ 3
Good to excellent content - terrible publishing policy
Format: Hardcover
Lewis (Not "Flewis") wrote a decent text a number of years ago. It was then expanded to a companion volume (Analytical Sedimentology) with another author. The two nicely complement each other but the mind boggles at a price of almost $100 per each. The publisher has clearly made little effort to control the cost. Redundancy between the two volumes is excessive, hard cover rather than soft is used and, indeed, both could easily have been combined in one less pricey volume. A valuable resource to students and professionals has therefore been compromised by publisher, author or both due to ignorance, greed or stupidity. A terrible shame!
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on January 5, 1998
J
Verified Purchase
JMB1014
Natrona Heights, US
★★★★★ 5
An Excellent Introduction to Legal and Constitutional Reasoning
Format: Hardcover
This is an excellent introductory volume for people who feel confused by the debate over "original intent" versus a "living Constitution." David A. Strauss is a law professor at the University of Chicago. His book is a quick read (139 pages), with no notes, bibliography or other impedimenta - just an index. It's a very lucid explanation of legal reasoning and how the Supreme Court has followed this basic process over time. Hence the "living constitution" is really just an instance of the English common law tradition functioning normally. This book will teach many Americans how legal reasoning actually operates in practice. It is a common-sensical and conservative process that seeks at once to promote predictability and fairness. By and large, it has worked well. The phrase "living Constitution" has been denigrated by people who seek to turn back the calendar to a day when more "traditional" values were imposed by law. In so doing, they have invoked an historical fiction, the "original intent" of the framers of the Constitution. The myriad problems arising from this effort, if not its disingenuousness, have been discussed with insight and erudition by such excellent minds as Jack Rakove ("Original Meanings")and Akhil Reed Amar ("The Bill of Rights," and "The American Constitution: A Biography"), to name just two. The real point of this book, I think, is to explain basic legal reasoning to a mass audience. This does a great service. It also shows how naturally the common law evolves, how it tends to restrain judicial activism and yet to permit flexibility as times and circumstances change. As Dean Roscoe Pound of the Harvard Law School put it in his book, "The Spirit of the Common Law," the common law is "essentially a mode of judicial and juristic thinking, a mode of treating legal problems rather than a fixed body of definite rules...." This is a critical distinction. Some so-called conservatives insist that judges must simply apply the law like automatons, as if it were a "fixed body of definite rules." They then seek to enlist the founding fathers in declaring what those rules are, or how definite they must be. But as Dean Pound and centuries of legal history demonstrate, this notion is far removed from the truth, and remote from any useful notion of adjudication. All Anglophone law schools, lawyers and judges are engaged in the process Dean Pound discusses. The common law tradition arose in England over the course of centuries. We imported it to this country in part because it was workable and practical, and because it was brilliantly and systematically expounded by Chief Justice Edward Coke in the 17th century and by Lord William Blackstone shortly before the American Revolution. No one would suggest that the common law tradition means the law is the captive of judges' subjective whims. Such an assertion would have sounded ludicrous to the English as well as to the founders. But as Strauss - and volumes of legal history - unsurprisingly demonstrate, the common law tradition is the key to constitutional interpretation. The common law is an inherently conservative instrument. It evolves incrementally. Those who complain about the "living Constitution" argue that judges merely rule according to their subjective prejudices. They contend that it is the legislative branch that should be charged with interpreting the Constitution. Of course, all three branches of government must interpret the Constitution from time to time. But the legislative branch should not have the last word in determining whether its own enactments meet constitutional scrutiny: To borrow from Chief Justice Coke, no one (including the legislature) may be the judge of his own cause. The function of determining whether legislation conforms to the Constitution has been and still is wisely confided to the courts, which by virtue of centuries of practice (as reflected in published opinions) have substantial expertise in the area and are independent. One also hears complaints that judges are insulated from reality. But courts are not insulated - they are independent. And they are independent precisely so they are not subject to being influenced by lobbyists or terrified by a challenger in a primary election. To show how the common law works, Strauss discusses the evolution of constitutional thought in relation to two major issues: freedom of speech and segregation in public schools. He explains how the "clear and present danger" test in freedom of speech cases evolved, implicating not just such considerations as the threat of imminent harm, but also that some kinds of speech have lower societal value (libel, obscenity, fighting words), while other kinds of speech have more societal value (great literature, political speech). Strauss goes on to discuss how Brown v. Board of Education (1954) was far less a radical overturning of an entrenched precedent, Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), than a logical step in the development of the law. In so doing, he uses an example from the law of torts, where customers injured by dangerous products originally were barred from suing the manufacturer unless they had a contractual relationship with it. At first, the fact that a product was inherently dangerous overcame the requirement of a contractual relationship. As it became harder to draw a line between ordinary products and those that were inherently dangerous, however, the old requirement of a contractual relationship was found to have outworn its purpose and customers were permitted to sue the manufacturer who had created a foreseeable risk of harm. Thus, in products liability cases, as in racial equality cases, the law evolved to meet the new demands posed by changed circumstances. Strauss shows the development of the law by discussing cases on racial equality decided after Plessy that gradually undercut the Plessy decision until it was no longer tenable. Strauss does what law professors do every day: teach the law by showing how it evolved. His explanation, however, is so concise and clear that it makes the discussion seem not just sensible but compelling. Thus we see that the law works. As Strauss points out, we never wrangle over some constitutional issues because they are cut and dried (you have to be 30 years old to be a senator) or because certainty is required (January 20 is the day the new president takes office, no matter how unstable the current domestic or world situation). Other provisions require more effort to interpret, but this is because the founders brilliantly provided that some matters could be spelled out specifically in advance, while others would have to be expressed in more general terms, which could be adjusted to changing needs and times (e.g., the "necessary and proper" clause in Article I, Sec. 8). Interestingly, Strauss does not consider amendments to the Constitution to be part of what makes it a living document, since the amendment process is so onerous, slow, and seldom used. He points out how some amendments merely ratified the status quo, or served to clean up outliers, resolved technical issues, or were ahead of their time. As he offers these judgments, which seem balanced and reasonable, he also explains some of the less familiar amendments in a way that will have readers raising their eyebrows and saying "Oh, so that's where that came from." At the outset of the book, Strauss sets out three objections to originalism: That it is often, as a practical matter, impossible even for professional historians to discover what the intentions were of various founders with respect to matters discussed in the Constitution. That even if an intent of the founders could be discovered, it would pertain to the understanding they had about their world: how does one go about trying to fit that understanding to our world? That as Thomas Jefferson pointed out, one generation is to another as one sovereign nation is to another. The world belongs to the living. The notions of people long dead cannot bind us in the present or future. Strauss correctly observes that the third of these objections is by itself fatal to originalism. The founders were not so impressed with themselves that they felt their "intentions" should be forever imposed on posterity. Had they been dedicated to such a dubious project, they would surely have done a better job of documenting their debates and compromises during the Philadelphia convention. But little remains of those deliberations aside from the notes kept by James Madison. The Constitution, moreover, reflects their understanding that the future could not be shackled forever to the time in which they lived. They realized that the slave trade, for example, would prove intolerable and therefore provided that it could be abolished by at least 1808. So was their "original intent" to permit the slave trade, or was it that the slave trade should be abolished? And what does this say, if anything, about their intentions toward the institution of slavery - a word that did not even appear in the Constitution until the Thirteenth Amendment was adopted in 1865? Most damning of all to the originalist position is what Thomas Jefferson said on the subject. In a letter dated July 12, 1816, to Samuel Kercheval, Jefferson wrote "Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. I knew that age well; I belonged to it, and labored with it. It deserved well of its country. It was very like the present, but without the experience of the present; and forty years of experience in government is worth a century of book-reading; and this they would say themselves, were they to rise from the dead. I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." He added, "Let us follow no such examples nor weakly believe that one generation is not as capable as another of taking care of itself, and of ordering its own affairs." He even called for revision of the constitution at stated periods. While originalists would love to claim Jefferson as one of their own, his words - and indeed his whole life - prove that he was completely at odds with their approach. Men like Jefferson and Franklin, who were devotees of science, were fascinated by the progress men could make in trying to understand and improve their lives. Jefferson was an eager student of nature and did considerable experimentation with crops on his plantation. He famously wrote his "Notes on the State of Virginia" to refute the widely read claims of the French naturalist Buffon about the supposedly weak, degenerate, and insipid life forms to be found in the New World. The idea that such men, who were committed to the growth of knowledge, would seek to confine all future generations to the limited understanding they possessed of the universe in 1787, is worse than laughable. It can only be explained by the polemical purposes of those whose arguments for a regressive social order are so feeble that they have to seek refuge behind an imaginary "original intent" that they erect - as if the founders wanted their limited knowledge and often unarticulated, conflicting, or ambivalent intentions to restrict the great national experiment forever. Given the explicit language of Thomas Jefferson, quoted above, it is apparent that "originalism" actually belies and defies the express intent of Jefferson, one of the most eminent of the founders. It seems paradoxical but it was his original intent that his original intent should not govern future generations! Original intent also appears anomalously restrictive when one considers that the founders never contemplated the existence of an Air Force, though they expressly provided for the Army and the Navy. And ask an originalist what the original intent was with respect to the Second Amendment's use of the term "arms." The founders had no concept of assault rifles or machine guns, let alone nerve gas, laser-guided bombs, predator drones, or nuclear weapons. How do we impose an intention on them to assert what they could not have foreseen, namely, that ordinary householders in the 21st century should have a personal, constitutional right to be able to obliterate a small army in a matter of seconds, based on the founders' notions about the 18th century saber, musket or pistol? Likewise, the Eleventh Amendment says nothing to prohibit a person from suing her own state - just other states. Yet even "textualists" read an unwritten provision into the Eleventh Amendment because it suits their view of how "sovereign" the states should be. When given this kind of a taste of their own medicine, originalists collapse in helpless sputtering and exasperation. Exposed to Strauss' very sensible discussion, the concerns of originalists reflect opportunism and disingenuousness. After all, we should not expect lawyers and judges to become armchair historians, especially under the time pressures of litigation and in the face of hotly contested issues. We should not pretend the founders had some monolithic intent, least of all with respect to matters of which they had no concept. And as Jefferson pointed out, the relationship of one generation to another is like that of one sovereign nation to another: we cannot expect to bind future generations by the intentions of people who are long since dead. In short, there will always be those who resist change and those who welcome it. If you really want to see "judicial activism" at work, you will not find much of it in the common law tradition. A far better example is the recent decision - by the so-called conservatives on the Supreme Court - in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 18, 2010
B
Verified Purchase
Benjamin Douglass
Louisville, US
★★★★★ 5
An Excellent Read
Format: Kindle
The author talks about our constitution as a "living document" and expertly draws the distinction between this and the originalist interpretation as a "dead document."
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on October 5, 2018
F
Verified Purchase
Frederick S. Goethel
Draper, US
★★★★★ 4
The Constitution: A Living or Static Document
Format: Hardcover
There has been a debate over the past several decades on whether the US Constitution is a living document that should be interpreted according to current mores and standards or whether it is a static document that should be interpreted using only the meaning found in the original wording of the document. The author, in this book, makes the case that the Constitution is, in fact, a living document that should be interpreted by modern standards and by using principles of common law. There are examples given that, quite frankly, are very persuasive. For instance, if the Constitution were interpreted using original language, we would not have the freedom of speech that we now enjoy. A careful reading of the First Amendment will show that only Congress was prohibited from making laws that abridged free speech. There were no constraints on the states or on other governmental bodies. Whether or not you agree with the author on how the Constitution should be interpreted, this book will make for some though provoking reading and interesting discussion. The book was well written, fairly easy to understand and should be read by all who are concerned about where the Supreme Court is now and where it is headed.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 23, 2010
G
Verified Purchase
garynini
Battle Creek, US
★★★★★ 5
Clear, cogent, and illuminating
Format: Kindle
Clear, cogent, and illuminating explanation of the difference between two approaches to interpreting the Constitution: originalism and the Living Constitution
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on September 18, 2015

recommand products

UPPAbaby Aria V2 Lightweight Infant Car Seat
20.72
UPPAbaby Minu V3 + Aria V2 Travel System Greyson
24.02
UPPAbaby Bassinet V3 – Baby & Kids 1st
27.65
UPPAbaby Mesa Max Infant Car Seat
24.82
UPPAbaby Vista V3 Stroller + Bassinet Bundle
24.29