Softwr

APIs · head to head

Lithic vs MX Technologies

Lithic logo

Lithic

APIs

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

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
MX Technologies logo

MX Technologies

APIs

US financial data aggregation with heavy transaction cleansing and enrichment

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.; MX Technologies coverage is United States focused, so any product with European or other international users runs a second aggregator and reconciles two data models, which removes most of the single vendor argument.
  • They diverge on capability: Lithic covers Direct network connections, MX Technologies covers Account aggregation.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Lithic and MX Technologies actually diverge.

Attributes where Lithic and MX Technologies differ
AttributeLithicMX Technologies
PlatformsWeb, APIAPI, Web

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 Lithic

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

Only in MX Technologies

  • Account aggregation
  • Transaction cleansing
  • Categorisation
  • Merchant resolution
  • Account verification
  • Balance and funds checks
  • Data enhancement APIs
  • Consent and connection management

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 MX Technologies
  • A company that already holds its own issuing licence and wants API access without full programme managementnot MX Technologies
  • A neobank or expense platform wanting Lithic to manage bank and network relationships end to endnot MX Technologies
  • A product team prototyping a card programme in sandbox before committing to a launchnot MX Technologies

MX Technologies

  • A credit union building a personal finance view in its own app that needs its own transaction descriptions made readablenot Lithic
  • A lender using cash flow underwriting that needs categorised income and expense data rather than raw transaction stringsnot Lithic
  • A bank wanting account verification and balance checks before initiating ACH debits to reduce returnsnot Lithic
  • A fintech that already aggregates data elsewhere and licenses only the enrichment layer to clean what it hasnot 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.

MX Technologies

  • Coverage is United States focused, so any product with European or other international users runs a second aggregator and reconciles two data models, which removes most of the single vendor argument.
  • Nothing is published on price and contracts are enterprise shaped, so a small fintech cannot estimate cost or start building without a sales process, unlike self-serve competitors.
  • Data enhancement is the differentiator and is licensed separately from aggregation, so the quoted aggregation price is not the price of the product people actually buy it for.
  • Categorisation and merchant resolution are statistical and get business to business and unusual transactions wrong more often than consumer retail, so lending decisions built on categorised data need their own review layer.
  • As the United States moves to regulated API access, connection quality depends on what each institution exposes, and the long tail of small banks and credit unions remains the weakest part of any aggregator including this one.

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

MX Technologies

On request
  • MX Platform$undefined/year
    • Priced by connected users, API calls and modules
    • Data enhancement licensed separately from aggregation
    • Enterprise contracts aimed at financial institutions

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 MX Technologies if

  • You need account aggregation.
  • You work on API, Web.
  • You also want transaction cleansing.
MX Technologies review

Questions people ask

Is Lithic or MX Technologies better?
Neither clearly leads. Lithic starts at On request and MX Technologies at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Lithic or MX Technologies?
Lithic starts at On request and MX Technologies at On request.
Does Lithic or MX Technologies run on more platforms?
Lithic runs on Web, API. MX Technologies runs on API, Web.
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 MX Technologies is typically brought in for.
What can Lithic do that MX Technologies cannot?
Lithic covers Direct network connections, Processor Client mode, Lithic Program Management, Card lifecycle APIs. MX Technologies covers Account aggregation, Transaction cleansing, Categorisation, Merchant resolution.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Lithic: Does Lithic publish pricing?

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

MX Technologies: What does MX do that Plaid does not?

It sells transaction cleansing, categorisation and merchant resolution as a first class product, including on data you already hold, which is why financial institutions rather than startups are its core customers.

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.

MX Technologies: Does it cover Europe?

No. MX is United States focused. European coverage requires a different provider such as Tink.

Lithic: Which networks does it connect to?

Visa, Mastercard and American Express directly.

MX Technologies: Is pricing published?

No. Contracts are quoted by connected users, call volume and modules, with enhancement licensed separately from aggregation.

MX Technologies: Does it use screen scraping?

It uses direct bank APIs where institutions expose them and credential based connections elsewhere. The credential path is being deprecated across the industry, and coverage quality now tracks which banks have real APIs.

Share

Related pages

More on Lithic

More on MX Technologies

Keep looking

Other head to heads