Softwr

APIs · head to head

MX Technologies vs Trustly

MX Technologies logo

MX Technologies

APIs

US financial data aggregation with heavy transaction cleansing and enrichment

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Trustly logo

Trustly

APIs

Pay-by-bank payments network, majority-owned by private equity firm Nordic Capital

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: 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.; Trustly it is majority-owned by Nordic Capital, a private equity firm, so its long-term roadmap is ultimately oriented toward an eventual sale or IPO rather than indefinite independent operation.
  • They diverge on capability: MX Technologies covers Account aggregation, Trustly covers Pay by bank checkout.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

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

Attributes where MX Technologies and Trustly differ
AttributeMX TechnologiesTrustly
PlatformsAPI, WebWeb, API

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 MX Technologies

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

Only in Trustly

  • Pay by bank checkout
  • Instant refunds
  • Verified payouts
  • Multi-market bank connectivity
  • Merchant dashboard and reconciliation
  • Fraud and risk tooling

What people use each for

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

MX Technologies

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

Trustly

  • An e-commerce merchant wanting a lower-cost alternative or complement to card payment acceptancenot MX Technologies
  • A gaming or gambling operator needing verified, instant payouts to players' bank accountsnot MX Technologies
  • A merchant wanting instant refunds processed directly to a customer's bank account rather than card reversal delaysnot MX Technologies
  • A business in a market with strong open banking adoption wanting pay-by-bank as a checkout optionnot MX Technologies

Where each one falls short

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

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.

Trustly

  • It is majority-owned by Nordic Capital, a private equity firm, so its long-term roadmap is ultimately oriented toward an eventual sale or IPO rather than indefinite independent operation.
  • Consumer familiarity with paying by bank transfer still lags card payments in most markets, so merchants typically see it used as a secondary option rather than a full card replacement.
  • The 1.15 to 3.15% merchant fee range is not a single published rate, so a merchant cannot know its actual cost without a sales negotiation.
  • As with all open banking-dependent payment methods, reliability depends on the consistency of the underlying banks' own APIs, which Trustly does not control.
  • Its verified payout functionality is heavily used in gaming and gambling, a sector with additional regulatory scrutiny, which is worth factoring in when evaluating vendor risk exposure by association.

Pricing, plan by plan

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

Trustly

On request
  • Trustly$undefined/month
    • Typical merchant cost of 1.15% to 3.15% depending on volume and market
    • Exact rate negotiated per merchant, not published as a flat card

Which should you pick?

Choose MX Technologies if

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

Choose Trustly if

  • You need pay by bank checkout.
  • You work on Web, API.
  • You also want instant refunds.
Trustly review

Questions people ask

Is MX Technologies or Trustly better?
Neither clearly leads. MX Technologies starts at On request and Trustly at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, MX Technologies or Trustly?
MX Technologies starts at On request and Trustly at On request.
Does MX Technologies or Trustly run on more platforms?
MX Technologies runs on API, Web. Trustly runs on Web, API.
What is MX Technologies best used for?
MX Technologies is most often used for a credit union building a personal finance view in its own app that needs its own transaction descriptions made readable, a lender using cash flow underwriting that needs categorised income and expense data rather than raw transaction strings, a bank wanting account verification and balance checks before initiating ach debits to reduce returns, a fintech that already aggregates data elsewhere and licenses only the enrichment layer to clean what it has. Of those, a credit union building a personal finance view in its own app that needs its own transaction descriptions made readable and a lender using cash flow underwriting that needs categorised income and expense data rather than raw transaction strings are not what Trustly is typically brought in for.
What can MX Technologies do that Trustly cannot?
MX Technologies covers Account aggregation, Transaction cleansing, Categorisation, Merchant resolution. Trustly covers Pay by bank checkout, Instant refunds, Verified payouts, Multi-market bank connectivity.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

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.

Trustly: Who owns Trustly?

Nordic Capital, a private equity firm, holds a 51.1% majority stake; Alfven & Didrikson and BlackRock hold smaller stakes.

MX Technologies: Does it cover Europe?

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

Trustly: Is Trustly going public?

It has discussed an IPO but as of its most recent comments said one remained at least a year away.

MX Technologies: Is pricing published?

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

Trustly: What does it typically cost a merchant?

Roughly 1.15% to 3.15% of transaction value depending on volume and market, negotiated per merchant.

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 MX Technologies

More on Trustly

Keep looking

Other head to heads