Softwr

APIs · head to head

Griffin vs Swan

Griffin logo

Griffin

APIs

UK banking-as-a-service from a company that holds its own full banking licence

From
£100/month
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Swan logo

Swan

APIs

European banking-as-a-service platform for embedding accounts, cards and payments into other products

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Griffin platform banking carries a one-off onboarding fee from 15,000 pounds and a 3,500 pound monthly minimum, which prices out early-stage companies entirely.; 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: Griffin covers Bank accounts by 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 Griffin and Swan actually diverge.

Attributes where Griffin and Swan differ
AttributeGriffinSwan
Starting price£100/monthOn request
Pricing modelPer month with usage drawdownquote
PlatformsWeb, REST APIWeb, 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 Griffin

  • Bank accounts by API
  • UK payment rails
  • Integrated ledger
  • Automated onboarding
  • Debit cards
  • Interest on balances

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.

Griffin

  • A wealth platform that must hold client money in a licensed bank rather than an EMI safeguarding accountnot Swan
  • A lender wanting UK accounts and payment rails without becoming a bank itselfnot Swan
  • A fintech burned by sponsor bank instability that wants the deposit holder and the API provider to be the same entitynot Swan
  • A platform needing sub-account ledgering for pooled client funds with a clean audit trailnot Swan

Swan

  • A vertical SaaS platform wanting to embed business bank accounts under its own brandnot Griffin
  • A marketplace wanting to issue cards to sellers or partners without becoming a licensed banknot Griffin
  • A company wanting SEPA payment initiation embedded directly into its own productnot Griffin
  • A European fintech wanting to avoid a six-figure setup fee and long lock-in typical of legacy banking-as-a-service dealsnot Griffin

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Griffin

  • Platform banking carries a one-off onboarding fee from 15,000 pounds and a 3,500 pound monthly minimum, which prices out early-stage companies entirely.
  • It is UK-only, so a business with European or US operations needs a second banking provider and a second integration for those entities.
  • It is a young bank with a small balance sheet relative to incumbents, and enterprise counterparties still ask hard questions about concentration risk.
  • Holding a banking licence means Griffin applies bank-grade due diligence to its own clients, so onboarding is slower and more selective than an EMI-based provider.
  • Feature breadth is narrower than long-established providers, particularly in card programme management and in payment types beyond core UK rails.

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

Griffin

£100/month
  • Business Banking$100/month
    • From 100 pounds per month
    • Interest or commission from around 1.75 percent AER variable
    • Operational accounts and UK payment rails
  • Platform Banking$3500/month
    • One-off onboarding fee from 15,000 pounds
    • Minimum monthly spend of 3,500 pounds, drawn down by usage
    • Higher committed tiers at 5,000 and 10,000 pounds with discounts
  • Enterprise$undefined/month
    • Custom pricing
    • Bespoke account structures and volumes
    • Negotiated interest or commission share

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 Griffin if

  • You need bank accounts by api.
  • You work on Web, REST API.
  • You also want uk payment rails.
Griffin review

Choose Swan if

  • You need embedded business accounts.
  • You work on Web, API.
  • You also want card issuing.
Swan review

Questions people ask

Is Griffin or Swan better?
Neither clearly leads. Griffin starts at £100/month and Swan at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Griffin or Swan?
Griffin starts at £100/month and Swan at On request.
Does Griffin or Swan run on more platforms?
Griffin runs on Web, REST API. Swan runs on Web, API.
What is Griffin best used for?
Griffin is most often used for a wealth platform that must hold client money in a licensed bank rather than an emi safeguarding account, a lender wanting uk accounts and payment rails without becoming a bank itself, a fintech burned by sponsor bank instability that wants the deposit holder and the api provider to be the same entity, a platform needing sub-account ledgering for pooled client funds with a clean audit trail. Of those, a wealth platform that must hold client money in a licensed bank rather than an emi safeguarding account and a lender wanting uk accounts and payment rails without becoming a bank itself are not what Swan is typically brought in for.
What can Griffin do that Swan cannot?
Griffin covers Bank accounts by API, UK payment rails, Integrated ledger, Automated onboarding. Swan covers Embedded business accounts, Card issuing, SEPA payments, Local account localisation.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Griffin: Is Griffin actually a bank?

Yes. It received a UK banking licence with restrictions in March 2023 and a full licence in March 2024 after exiting mobilisation.

Swan: Which countries does Swan offer local accounts in?

France, Germany and Spain specifically, alongside broader SEPA payment coverage.

Griffin: What does it cost?

Business banking from 100 pounds a month; platform banking from a 15,000 pound onboarding fee plus a 3,500 pound monthly minimum drawn down by usage.

Swan: Is pricing published?

No, Swan describes a usage-based, no-large-setup-fee philosophy but requires a quote for actual numbers.

Griffin: Does it cover Europe?

No. Griffin is a UK bank serving UK accounts and UK payment rails.

Swan: Who regulates Swan?

France's ACPR (Autorite de Controle Prudentiel et de Resolution), as a licensed e-money institution.

Share

Related pages

More on Griffin

More on Swan

Keep looking

Other head to heads