APIs · head to head
Tink vs Toqio
Tink
APIs
European open banking platform for account data and payment initiation
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
Toqio
APIs
No code platform for building embedded finance products on your own providers
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Tink visa owns Tink, and pay-by-bank exists to move payments off card rails, so the roadmap and pricing of the product you are using to reduce interchange are set by the company that earns the interchange.; Toqio toqio holds no licence and provides no sponsor bank, so you must find, contract and manage regulated providers yourself, which is the slowest part of any embedded finance launch.
- They diverge on capability: Tink covers Account data access, Toqio covers No code product builder.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Tink and Toqio 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 Tink
- Account data access
- Payment initiation
- EEA passporting
- Categorisation
- Account verification
- Risk and affordability signals
- Variable recurring payments support
- Consent management
Only in Toqio
- No code product builder
- Provider orchestration
- Account and card modules
- Embedded financing
- Back office tooling
- Multi entity and multi brand
- White label mobile apps
- Marketplace of providers
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Tink
- A European lender that needs verified income and expense data from a borrower bank account across several EEA markets under one licencenot Toqio
- A merchant offering pay-by-bank at checkout to avoid card acceptance costs on high value basketsnot Toqio
- A fintech that does not hold its own PSD2 licence and needs to operate under an authorised provider passported across the EEAnot Toqio
- A bank building an account aggregation view of a customer external accounts without negotiating with each institution individuallynot Toqio
Toqio
- A manufacturer offering branded working capital finance to its dealer networknot Tink
- A B2B marketplace launching accounts and cards for its sellers without becoming regulated itselfnot Tink
- A corporate that wants to switch card issuer without rebuilding its customer facing productnot Tink
- A group launching the same embedded finance product across several markets with different local providersnot Tink
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Tink
- Visa owns Tink, and pay-by-bank exists to move payments off card rails, so the roadmap and pricing of the product you are using to reduce interchange are set by the company that earns the interchange.
- Coverage is Europe only, so a product serving both European and United States users runs a second aggregator with a different data model and a separate contract.
- PSD2 connection quality varies sharply by bank, and headline connection counts hide wide differences in success rate, consent lifetime and re-authentication frequency that determine what users actually experience.
- Consent under PSD2 expires and requires periodic re-authentication, so any product depending on continuous data access has a recurring user friction it cannot design away, and drop-off at re-consent is a real product problem.
- Pricing is quoted with data access and payment initiation priced separately, and there is no published rate card, so small merchants cannot compare pay-by-bank economics against card acceptance without a sales process.
Toqio
- Toqio holds no licence and provides no sponsor bank, so you must find, contract and manage regulated providers yourself, which is the slowest part of any embedded finance launch.
- Because it orchestrates rather than provides, the customer experience is only as good as the underlying bank or issuer, and Toqio cannot fix a partner's settlement delays or outages.
- Pricing is quoted with no public rate card, so comparing it against building in house or against a bundled banking as a service provider requires a full sales process.
- With around EUR 30 million raised in total it is a small supplier to underpin a financial product a large corporate expects to run for a decade, which raises real continuity questions in procurement.
- No code configuration covers standard patterns well but bespoke customer journeys eventually require custom development, at which point the main advantage over building directly on provider APIs narrows.
Pricing, plan by plan
Tink
On request- Tink Platform$undefined/year
- Priced by product, market and volume
- Data access and payment initiation priced separately
- Annual commitments typical for enterprise agreements
Toqio
On request- Toqio platform$undefined/year
- Quoted per customer, typically setup plus recurring platform fee
- Regulated provider fees are separate and contracted by you
- Card interchange and lending economics belong to your provider agreements
Which should you pick?
Choose Tink if
- You need account data access.
- You work on API, Web.
- You also want payment initiation.
Choose Toqio if
- You need no code product builder.
- You work on Web, iOS, Android, API.
- You also want provider orchestration.
Questions people ask
- Is Tink or Toqio better?
- Neither clearly leads. Tink starts at On request and Toqio at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Tink or Toqio?
- Tink starts at On request and Toqio at On request.
- Does Tink or Toqio run on more platforms?
- Tink runs on API, Web. Toqio runs on Web, iOS, Android, API.
- What is Tink best used for?
- Tink is most often used for a european lender that needs verified income and expense data from a borrower bank account across several eea markets under one licence, a merchant offering pay-by-bank at checkout to avoid card acceptance costs on high value baskets, a fintech that does not hold its own psd2 licence and needs to operate under an authorised provider passported across the eea, a bank building an account aggregation view of a customer external accounts without negotiating with each institution individually. Of those, a european lender that needs verified income and expense data from a borrower bank account across several eea markets under one licence and a merchant offering pay-by-bank at checkout to avoid card acceptance costs on high value baskets are not what Toqio is typically brought in for.
- What can Tink do that Toqio cannot?
- Tink covers Account data access, Payment initiation, EEA passporting, Categorisation. Toqio covers No code product builder, Provider orchestration, Account and card modules, Embedded financing.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Tink: Who owns Tink?
Visa, since 2022. That is directly relevant if you are adopting pay-by-bank specifically to reduce card costs.
Toqio: Does Toqio provide the banking licence?
No, deliberately. You contract your own bank, issuer or lender, which is why you can replace them without rebuilding the product.
Tink: Do I need my own PSD2 licence?
No. Tink holds AIS and PIS licences from the Swedish FSA passported across the EEA, and customers can operate as its agent rather than obtaining their own authorisation.
Toqio: Who is it aimed at?
Large corporates and B2B ecosystem operators embedding finance for suppliers, dealers or marketplace sellers, not consumer fintech startups.
Tink: Does Tink cover the United States?
No. It is a European platform. US coverage requires a separate provider.
Toqio: How much does it cost?
Not published. Expect a setup fee plus a recurring platform fee, with all regulated provider costs on top and separately contracted.
Tink: How reliable are the bank connections?
It varies by institution far more than the headline count of roughly 6,000 connections suggests. Ask for per market and per bank success rates and consent lifetimes for the banks your users actually hold accounts with.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Tink vs TrueLayer
- Tink vs Token.io
- Tink vs Enable Banking
- Tink vs Yodlee
- Tink vs Bud Financial
- Tink vs MX Technologies
- Tink vs Neonomics
- Tink vs Yapily
- Tink vs Enfuce
- Tink vs Trustly
- Tink vs Volt
- Tink vs Salt Edge
- Tink vs Skaleet
- Tink vs Svix
- Tink vs Synctera
- Tink vs Treblle
- Tink vs Tribe Payments
- Tink vs Highnote
- Tink vs Unit
- Tink vs Solaris
- Tink vs Thredd
- Tink vs Swan
- Tink vs Weavr
- Tink vs Fintech Farm
- Tink vs Lithic
- Tink vs Vodeno
- Tink vs Column
- Tink vs Astra
- Tink vs Marqeta
- Tink vs Meniga
- Tink vs Moov
- Tink vs PubNub
- Toqio vs TrueLayer
- Toqio vs Token.io
- Toqio vs Enable Banking
- Toqio vs Yodlee
- Toqio vs Bud Financial
- Toqio vs MX Technologies
- Toqio vs Neonomics
- Toqio vs Yapily
- Toqio vs Enfuce
- Toqio vs Trustly
- Toqio vs Volt
- Toqio vs Salt Edge
- Toqio vs Skaleet
- Toqio vs Svix
- Toqio vs Synctera
- Toqio vs Treblle
- Toqio vs Tribe Payments
- Toqio vs Highnote
- Toqio vs Unit
- Toqio vs Solaris
- Toqio vs Thredd
- Toqio vs Swan
- Toqio vs Weavr
- Toqio vs Fintech Farm
- Toqio vs Lithic
- Toqio vs Vodeno
- Toqio vs Column
- Toqio vs Astra
- Toqio vs Marqeta
- Toqio vs Meniga
- Toqio vs Moov
- Toqio vs PubNub