APIs · head to head
Increase vs Neonomics
Increase
APIs
Direct banking API for ACH, wires, real-time payments, accounts and cards
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
Neonomics
APIs
Nordic open banking payments and data, now with UK coverage through Ordo
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Increase the published per transaction rates exclude a monthly platform fee that Increase states varies by use case, so the transparent price page cannot produce a total cost and the material part of the deal is still negotiated privately.; Neonomics coverage outside the Nordics and the UK is comparatively shallow, so a pan European merchant will find gaps and inconsistent bank behaviour in southern and eastern markets.
- They diverge on capability: Increase covers ACH origination and receipt, Neonomics covers Payment initiation.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Increase and Neonomics actually diverge.
Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), 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 Increase
- ACH origination and receipt
- Domestic wires
- Real-time payments
- Bank accounts
- Cards
- Cheques
- Sandbox and simulations
- Audit and reconciliation data
Only in Neonomics
- Payment initiation
- Account information
- Nordic bank depth
- UK coverage via Ordo
- Variable recurring payments
- Request to pay
- White label journeys
- Reconciliation data
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Increase
- A payroll or treasury product that needs to originate same-day ACH and wires under its own control rather than through a payment processornot Neonomics
- A marketplace that must hold seller balances in ledgered accounts with real account and routing numbersnot Neonomics
- A fintech that wants FedNow and RTP payouts so recipients are paid outside banking hoursnot Neonomics
- An engineering team that needs the underlying return codes and settlement timing visible in order to build correct reconciliation and retry logicnot Neonomics
Neonomics
- A Norwegian or Swedish merchant collecting payments directly from bank accounts to avoid card feesnot Increase
- A debt collection agency sending request to pay messages instead of chasing bank transfers manuallynot Increase
- A software vendor embedding pay by bank into an accounting or invoicing product for Nordic customersnot Increase
- A business needing both UK and Nordic bank payment coverage from one suppliernot Increase
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Increase
- The published per transaction rates exclude a monthly platform fee that Increase states varies by use case, so the transparent price page cannot produce a total cost and the material part of the deal is still negotiated privately.
- Free allowances are deliberately small at ten account numbers and five physical cards, so any programme issuing accounts or cards at volume moves to quoted pricing almost immediately.
- Banking is provided through partner banks, so programme approval, compliance obligations and the ability to launch at all depend on a bank relationship you do not control, and post-Synapse bank risk appetite has tightened considerably.
- The API deliberately exposes payment rail mechanics rather than smoothing them, which is correct engineering but means a team without payments expertise will build reconciliation and return handling wrongly and only discover it when funds go astray.
- Coverage is United States only, so a company with international payout needs runs a second provider and reconciles two ledgers, and the single API argument disappears at the first cross border customer.
Neonomics
- Coverage outside the Nordics and the UK is comparatively shallow, so a pan European merchant will find gaps and inconsistent bank behaviour in southern and eastern markets.
- It is a small company relative to Tink and TrueLayer, so supplier viability and the depth of engineering support behind bank API changes are genuine procurement questions.
- Payment initiation only means the merchant handles settlement, reconciliation and refunds, and there is no chargeback framework to fall back on.
- Integrating a recently acquired UK business means two regulatory entities and, for a period, two technology stacks, so cross market feature parity is a promise rather than an existing state.
- Conversion is governed by each bank's own authentication experience, and Nordic BankID flows behave differently from UK app redirects, so a single UX cannot be assumed across the footprint.
Pricing, plan by plan
Increase
On request- Increase Platform$undefined/month
- Monthly fee quoted by use case and not published
- Next-day ACH origination listed at 0.50 US dollars per transaction
- Same-day ACH origination listed at 2.00 per transaction
Neonomics
On request- Neonomics platform$undefined/year
- Quoted per customer, typically per initiated payment or per API call
- Volume commitments and monthly minimums are common
- Payment initiation only; merchant handles settlement and refunds
Which should you pick?
Choose Increase if
- You need ach origination and receipt.
- You work on API, Web.
- You also want domestic wires.
Choose Neonomics if
- You need payment initiation.
- You work on Web, API.
- You also want account information.
Questions people ask
- Is Increase or Neonomics better?
- Neither clearly leads. Increase starts at On request and Neonomics at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Increase or Neonomics?
- Increase starts at On request and Neonomics at On request.
- Does Increase or Neonomics run on more platforms?
- Increase runs on API, Web. Neonomics runs on Web, API.
- What is Increase best used for?
- Increase is most often used for a payroll or treasury product that needs to originate same-day ach and wires under its own control rather than through a payment processor, a marketplace that must hold seller balances in ledgered accounts with real account and routing numbers, a fintech that wants fednow and rtp payouts so recipients are paid outside banking hours, an engineering team that needs the underlying return codes and settlement timing visible in order to build correct reconciliation and retry logic. Of those, a payroll or treasury product that needs to originate same-day ach and wires under its own control rather than through a payment processor and a marketplace that must hold seller balances in ledgered accounts with real account and routing numbers are not what Neonomics is typically brought in for.
- What can Increase do that Neonomics cannot?
- Increase covers ACH origination and receipt, Domestic wires, Real-time payments, Bank accounts. Neonomics covers Payment initiation, Account information, Nordic bank depth, UK coverage via Ordo.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Increase: Does Increase publish its pricing?
Partly. Per transaction fees for ACH, wires, RTP, FedNow and cards are listed publicly. The monthly platform fee is not, and it is described only as varying by use case.
Neonomics: Is Neonomics authorised in the UK?
Yes, through the acquisition of Ordo, an FCA authorised open banking payments firm, approved by the FCA and the Norwegian regulator.
Increase: Who holds the deposits?
Partner banks, not Increase itself. That relationship determines your programme approval, your compliance obligations and your risk if the bank changes appetite.
Neonomics: Does it support variable recurring payments?
Yes in the UK through the Ordo capability, subject to which banks support commercial VRP; support elsewhere is more limited.
Increase: Is it international?
No. Increase covers United States rails only, so cross border payouts require a second provider.
Neonomics: Does Neonomics hold merchant funds?
No. It initiates payments; settlement, reconciliation and refunds remain with the merchant or its payment provider.
Increase: How is it different from a middleware BaaS platform?
It exposes the rails rather than abstracting them, showing real return codes and settlement timing. That suits teams who understand payments and punishes teams who do not.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Increase vs Dwolla
- Increase vs Astra
- Increase vs Unit
- Increase vs Treasury Prime
- Increase vs Sila
- Increase vs Moov
- Increase vs Column
- Increase vs Lithic
- Increase vs Volt
- Increase vs Swan
- Increase vs TrueLayer
- Increase vs Griffin
- Increase vs KeystoneJS
- Increase vs Kong
- Increase vs Liveblocks
- Increase vs Moesif
- Increase vs Ozone API
- Increase vs Parse Server
- Increase vs Token.io
- Increase vs Tink
- Increase vs Enable Banking
- Increase vs Zimpler
- Increase vs Trustly
- Increase vs Fintecture
- Increase vs Salt Edge
- Increase vs Yodlee
- Increase vs Brite Payments
- Increase vs Tribe Payments
- Increase vs Pusher
- Increase vs Skyflow
- Increase vs Backbase
- Increase vs Enfuce
- Neonomics vs Dwolla
- Neonomics vs Astra
- Neonomics vs Unit
- Neonomics vs Treasury Prime
- Neonomics vs Sila
- Neonomics vs Moov
- Neonomics vs Column
- Neonomics vs Lithic
- Neonomics vs Volt
- Neonomics vs Swan
- Neonomics vs TrueLayer
- Neonomics vs Griffin
- Neonomics vs KeystoneJS
- Neonomics vs Kong
- Neonomics vs Liveblocks
- Neonomics vs Moesif
- Neonomics vs Ozone API
- Neonomics vs Parse Server
- Neonomics vs Token.io
- Neonomics vs Tink
- Neonomics vs Enable Banking
- Neonomics vs Zimpler
- Neonomics vs Trustly
- Neonomics vs Fintecture
- Neonomics vs Salt Edge
- Neonomics vs Yodlee
- Neonomics vs Brite Payments
- Neonomics vs Tribe Payments
- Neonomics vs Pusher
- Neonomics vs Skyflow
- Neonomics vs Backbase
- Neonomics vs Enfuce