Softwr

APIs · head to head

Lithic vs Paymentology

Lithic logo

Lithic

APIs

API-first card issuing platform with direct Visa, Mastercard and Amex network connections

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Paymentology logo

Paymentology

APIs

Cloud issuer processing across emerging and developed markets

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Lithic pricing is entirely undisclosed, so a company cannot compare total cost against Marqeta, Galileo or Highnote without a sales conversation.; Paymentology paymentology processes but does not hold issuing licences, so every market still needs your own licence or a sponsor bank, which is usually the slowest and most expensive part of a launch.
  • They diverge on capability: Lithic covers Direct network connections, Paymentology covers Global issuer processing.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Lithic and Paymentology actually diverge.

Attributes where Lithic and Paymentology differ
AttributeLithicPaymentology

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), platforms (Web, API), 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 Lithic

  • Direct network connections
  • Processor Client mode
  • Lithic Program Management
  • Card lifecycle APIs
  • Sandbox environment
  • Real-time authorization controls

Only in Paymentology

  • Global issuer processing
  • Real time transaction data
  • Virtual and physical issuance
  • Tokenisation
  • Multi currency and multi product
  • Card controls
  • Programme management tools
  • Fraud and risk integration

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Lithic

  • A fintech wanting direct Visa or Mastercard network access rather than routing through a third-party processornot Paymentology
  • A company that already holds its own issuing licence and wants API access without full programme managementnot Paymentology
  • A neobank or expense platform wanting Lithic to manage bank and network relationships end to endnot Paymentology
  • A product team prototyping a card programme in sandbox before committing to a launchnot Paymentology

Paymentology

  • A neobank launching cards in an African or South East Asian market where hosted United States processors have no certificationnot Lithic
  • A mobile money operator adding a card product on top of an existing wallet basenot Lithic
  • A bank consolidating several regional card processors onto one platformnot Lithic
  • A fintech expanding an existing card programme into the Gulf without re platformingnot Lithic

Where each one falls short

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

Lithic

  • Pricing is entirely undisclosed, so a company cannot compare total cost against Marqeta, Galileo or Highnote without a sales conversation.
  • Choosing Processor Client mode still leaves the company responsible for holding its own issuing licence and managing the regulatory relationship, which is a substantial undertaking many teams underestimate.
  • As with any card infrastructure provider, an outage or network issue at Lithic becomes a direct outage for every card programme built on it, and a customer has limited visibility into root cause during an incident.
  • Building a card programme on API infrastructure requires real engineering investment; it is not a plug-and-play product for a non-technical team.
  • Switching card infrastructure providers after launch is a major undertaking involving card reissuance and programme migration, so the initial choice carries lasting lock-in.

Paymentology

  • Paymentology processes but does not hold issuing licences, so every market still needs your own licence or a sponsor bank, which is usually the slowest and most expensive part of a launch.
  • Fees include per active card charges and monthly minimums, so a portfolio with many dormant cards pays for plastic that generates no interchange.
  • Certification, settlement and scheme relationships differ by country, so a multi market rollout is a series of separate projects rather than one integration.
  • As a processor it sits between your product and the networks, meaning outages and scheme mandate changes reach your cardholders through a party you do not control.
  • Documentation and developer self service are weaker than the United States hosted processors, so early integration depends heavily on Paymentology implementation staff.

Pricing, plan by plan

Lithic

On request
  • Lithic$undefined/year
    • Volume and interchange-based pricing, not published
    • Separate Processor Client and Program Management pricing tracks
    • Custom quote required via sales

Paymentology

On request
  • Paymentology processing$undefined/year
    • Quoted per programme and per market
    • Typically per transaction and per active card fees plus a monthly minimum
    • Issuing licence or sponsor bank required in each market and not provided

Which should you pick?

Choose Lithic if

  • You need direct network connections.
  • You work on Web, API.
  • You also want processor client mode.
Lithic review

Choose Paymentology if

  • You need global issuer processing.
  • You work on Web, API.
  • You also want real time transaction data.
Paymentology review

Questions people ask

Is Lithic or Paymentology better?
Neither clearly leads. Lithic starts at On request and Paymentology at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Lithic or Paymentology?
Lithic starts at On request and Paymentology at On request.
Does Lithic or Paymentology run on more platforms?
Both run on Web, API, so platform support will not decide this one for you.
What is Lithic best used for?
Lithic is most often used for a fintech wanting direct visa or mastercard network access rather than routing through a third-party processor, a company that already holds its own issuing licence and wants api access without full programme management, a neobank or expense platform wanting lithic to manage bank and network relationships end to end, a product team prototyping a card programme in sandbox before committing to a launch. Of those, a fintech wanting direct visa or mastercard network access rather than routing through a third-party processor and a company that already holds its own issuing licence and wants api access without full programme management are not what Paymentology is typically brought in for.
What can Lithic do that Paymentology cannot?
Lithic covers Direct network connections, Processor Client mode, Lithic Program Management, Card lifecycle APIs. Paymentology covers Global issuer processing, Real time transaction data, Virtual and physical issuance, Tokenisation.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Lithic: Does Lithic publish pricing?

No, pricing is volume-based and requires a sales conversation.

Paymentology: Does Paymentology provide the BIN and licence?

No. You need your own issuing licence or a sponsor bank in each market; Paymentology processes the transactions.

Lithic: What is the difference between Processor Client and Program Management?

Processor Client suits companies with their own issuing licence and bank relationships; Program Management is for companies wanting Lithic to coordinate those relationships on their behalf.

Paymentology: What is the actual pricing model?

Per transaction and per active card, with a monthly minimum. Dormant cards still cost, so model your activation rate.

Lithic: Which networks does it connect to?

Visa, Mastercard and American Express directly.

Paymentology: Why choose it over a United States issuer processor?

Network certification and live programmes in markets where those processors do not operate, which decides feasibility rather than preference.

Share

Related pages

More on Lithic

More on Paymentology

Keep looking

Other head to heads