APIs · head to head
Basis Theory vs Swan
Basis Theory
APIs
Developer tokenisation platform that holds card and sensitive data inside a PCI Level 1 environment you do not operate
- From
- $995/month
- Rated
- -
Swan
APIs
European banking-as-a-service platform for embedding accounts, cards and payments into other products
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Basis Theory the Starter plan is 995 US dollars a month before any volume, which is a real floor for an early stage company and puts the product out of reach of teams tokenising a few thousand records.; Swan its regulatory base and strongest local account coverage are French and European, so companies needing US, UK-post-Brexit-specific, or broader global banking-as-a-service need an additional provider.
- They diverge on capability: Basis Theory covers Tokenisation API, Swan covers Embedded business accounts.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Basis Theory and Swan actually diverge.
| Attribute | Basis Theory | Swan |
|---|---|---|
| Starting price | $995/month | On request |
| Pricing model | Per month by token volume | quote |
| Platforms | Web, iOS, Android, Linux | Web, API |
Identical on both: free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated), category (APIs).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in Basis Theory
- Tokenisation API
- Hosted elements
- Outbound proxy
- PCI attestation of compliance
- Processor portability
- Reactors
- Access controls and audit
- PII and PHI options
Only in Swan
- Embedded business accounts
- Card issuing
- SEPA payments
- Local account localisation
- ACPR regulation
- Usage-based pricing
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Basis Theory
- A payments company that wants card on file without bringing its own infrastructure into PCI scope and paying for the assessment that followsnot Swan
- A merchant locked into a processor by that processor vault that wants to hold its own tokens and route to more than one acquirernot Swan
- A fintech collecting bank account and identity data that needs it isolated from its application database before an enterprise security reviewnot Swan
- A team that needs to send stored card data to a third party for a one-off integration without that data traversing its own serversnot Swan
Swan
- A vertical SaaS platform wanting to embed business bank accounts under its own brandnot Basis Theory
- A marketplace wanting to issue cards to sellers or partners without becoming a licensed banknot Basis Theory
- A company wanting SEPA payment initiation embedded directly into its own productnot Basis Theory
- A European fintech wanting to avoid a six-figure setup fee and long lock-in typical of legacy banking-as-a-service dealsnot Basis Theory
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Basis Theory
- The Starter plan is 995 US dollars a month before any volume, which is a real floor for an early stage company and puts the product out of reach of teams tokenising a few thousand records.
- Starter is limited to the US region, so a company with European data residency requirements is pushed into a quoted Scale or Enterprise agreement immediately.
- Log retention on Starter is 24 hours, which is well below what most security teams expect for a system holding cardholder data and forces an upgrade for reasons unrelated to volume.
- Migrating away means moving card data out of the vault, which requires processor and assessor involvement and is slow, so the portability argument that attracts buyers cuts against them at exit.
- An attestation of compliance covers the vendor environment, not your assessment; your assessor still decides what is in scope, and buyers occasionally discover their integration pattern pulled systems back into scope anyway.
Swan
- Its regulatory base and strongest local account coverage are French and European, so companies needing US, UK-post-Brexit-specific, or broader global banking-as-a-service need an additional provider.
- Pricing is described only philosophically (usage-based, no big setup fee) rather than published as an actual rate card, so a company still needs a sales conversation to get real numbers.
- Embedding banking features into a product is a substantial compliance and design undertaking regardless of the vendor, and Swan handling the licence does not remove a platform's own KYC, AML and customer support obligations for the accounts it offers.
- As a comparatively young, single-country-licensed e-money institution, its balance sheet and regulatory standing carry more concentration risk than a banking-as-a-service offering backed by an established, multi-jurisdiction bank.
- Local account depth is explicitly limited to France, Germany and Spain, so a platform needing native local accounts in other European countries may find coverage thinner than expected.
Pricing, plan by plan
Basis Theory
$995/month- Starter$995/month
- 20,000 tokens included
- Production PCI Level 1 environment
- US region only
- Scale$undefined/month
- Quoted
- Higher token volumes
- Additional regions
- Enterprise$undefined/month
- Quoted
- Additional compliance options for PII and PHI
- Responses for 95 percent of PCI SAQ D
Swan
On request- Swan$undefined/month
- Usage-based pricing, no published rate card
- No long-term contract or large setup fee required
- Custom quote based on current, not forecast, usage
Which should you pick?
Choose Basis Theory if
- You need tokenisation api.
- You work on Web, iOS, Android, Linux.
- You also want hosted elements.
Choose Swan if
- You need embedded business accounts.
- You work on Web, API.
- You also want card issuing.
Questions people ask
- Is Basis Theory or Swan better?
- Neither clearly leads. Basis Theory starts at $995/month and Swan at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Basis Theory or Swan?
- Basis Theory starts at $995/month and Swan at On request.
- Does Basis Theory or Swan run on more platforms?
- Basis Theory runs on Web, iOS, Android, Linux. Swan runs on Web, API.
- What is Basis Theory best used for?
- Basis Theory is most often used for a payments company that wants card on file without bringing its own infrastructure into pci scope and paying for the assessment that follows, a merchant locked into a processor by that processor vault that wants to hold its own tokens and route to more than one acquirer, a fintech collecting bank account and identity data that needs it isolated from its application database before an enterprise security review, a team that needs to send stored card data to a third party for a one-off integration without that data traversing its own servers. Of those, a payments company that wants card on file without bringing its own infrastructure into pci scope and paying for the assessment that follows and a merchant locked into a processor by that processor vault that wants to hold its own tokens and route to more than one acquirer are not what Swan is typically brought in for.
- What can Basis Theory do that Swan cannot?
- Basis Theory covers Tokenisation API, Hosted elements, Outbound proxy, PCI attestation of compliance. Swan covers Embedded business accounts, Card issuing, SEPA payments, Local account localisation.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Basis Theory: Does this make us PCI compliant?
It removes cardholder data from your systems and gives you an AOC plus documented responses for most of a SAQ D. Your assessor still determines your scope, and a careless integration can pull systems back in.
Swan: Which countries does Swan offer local accounts in?
France, Germany and Spain specifically, alongside broader SEPA payment coverage.
Basis Theory: What does it cost to start?
995 US dollars a month on Starter, including 20,000 tokens, a production PCI Level 1 environment and US hosting. Higher tiers are quoted.
Swan: Is pricing published?
No, Swan describes a usage-based, no-large-setup-fee philosophy but requires a quote for actual numbers.
Basis Theory: Can we switch payment processors without re-collecting cards?
Yes, that is the main non-compliance reason to buy it. You hold the tokens and detokenise into whichever processor you route to.
Swan: Who regulates Swan?
France's ACPR (Autorite de Controle Prudentiel et de Resolution), as a licensed e-money institution.
Basis Theory: Is data stored outside the United States?
Not on Starter, which is US only. Other regions require a Scale or Enterprise agreement.
Related pages
More on Basis Theory
Other head to heads
- Basis Theory vs Skyflow
- Basis Theory vs Increase
- Basis Theory vs Lithic
- Basis Theory vs Volt
- Basis Theory vs Moov
- Basis Theory vs Trustly
- Basis Theory vs Vodeno
- Basis Theory vs TrueLayer
- Basis Theory vs Paymentology
- Basis Theory vs Akoya
- Basis Theory vs Sila
- Basis Theory vs Backbase
- Basis Theory vs Enfuce
- Basis Theory vs Griffin
- Basis Theory vs Stoplight
- Basis Theory vs Yapily
- Basis Theory vs Unit
- Basis Theory vs Weavr
- Basis Theory vs Fintech Farm
- Basis Theory vs Solaris
- Basis Theory vs Treasury Prime
- Basis Theory vs Synctera
- Basis Theory vs Astra
- Basis Theory vs Treblle
- Basis Theory vs Tribe Payments
- Basis Theory vs Tuum
- Swan vs Skyflow
- Swan vs Increase
- Swan vs Lithic
- Swan vs Volt
- Swan vs Moov
- Swan vs Trustly
- Swan vs Vodeno
- Swan vs TrueLayer
- Swan vs Paymentology
- Swan vs Akoya
- Swan vs Sila
- Swan vs Backbase
- Swan vs Enfuce
- Swan vs Griffin
- Swan vs Stoplight
- Swan vs Yapily
- Swan vs Unit
- Swan vs Weavr
- Swan vs Fintech Farm
- Swan vs Solaris
- Swan vs Treasury Prime
- Swan vs Synctera
- Swan vs Astra
- Swan vs Treblle
- Swan vs Tribe Payments
- Swan vs Tuum