This site takes positions on named companies. That is only defensible if the method behind those positions is published, so here it is in full.
How companies are selected
Companies are selected on three criteria, in this order: how often the company is actually being searched for and asked about; whether independent, non-affiliate coverage of it already exists; and whether including it makes an industry page more complete. The third criterion is why a few companies appear here specifically so that we can explain why they are the wrong choice for a given use case.
No company is included because it asked, and none is excluded because it asked.
Sources
Facts are taken, in descending order of preference, from: the company's own published terms of service, merchant agreements and fee schedules; regulatory filings, including SEC filings for listed companies; regulatory registers such as NMLS and the FCA register; court records; central-bank and card-network publications; and the company's own newsroom. Below that, reputable trade press.
Affiliate "best processor" listicles are not used as a source for anything. They are paid placement almost without exception, and they reproduce each other's errors for years.
Every profile publishes its source list.
The capability ratings
Every company is assessed against the same eighteen capability dimensions. Each dimension gets one of five ratings and one sentence of evidence.
- Core strength — a primary, differentiating capability the company leads with and demonstrably delivers.
- Supported — genuinely offered and documented, but not a differentiator.
- Limited — partial, geographically restricted, gated behind an enterprise tier, or delivered only through a third party.
- Not offered — not offered.
- Unclear — the company markets the capability but does not document it well enough to judge.
There is no score out of ten and no star rating, and this is deliberate. A composite score implies a precision that does not exist, invites comparison between companies serving completely different markets, and cannot be defended line by line when a company objects. A sentence of evidence can be.
Unclear is used honestly and reasonably often. A company that markets a capability prominently and then declines to document how it works has told the reader something, and burying that behind a generous rating would be a disservice.
Why every profile names who the company is wrong for
A reference that only flatters is not a reference. Every profile includes a section naming the merchant profiles for which that company is a poor choice, and the reasoning is specific rather than general — a named contract term, a documented restricted-business policy, a published reserve practice, a regulatory action.
Criticism is held to a higher standard than praise. Any critical claim must trace to a documented source: a published agreement, a filing, an enforcement action, a court record, or a dated archived page. Opinion informed by those documents is permitted and labelled as such. Unsourced allegation is not published at all.
Why we never publish rates
Payment pricing changes constantly, and it varies by merchant, volume, category, region and negotiation. A specific rate published here would be wrong for most readers on the day it was written and wrong for everyone within a year. So pricing is described structurally instead: which model the company uses, whether it publishes pricing at all, whether there is a monthly minimum, how long the contract runs, what happens on early termination, and which ancillary fees exist.
Whether a company publishes its pricing at all is itself one of the eighteen rated capabilities, because in this industry it is genuinely informative.
Currency
Every profile carries a "last reviewed" date. Payments consolidates fast — during the research for this site alone, one major acquirer was absorbed by a competitor, two brands were retired, and four companies changed owners. Undated payment content is unreliable content, so ours is dated.
Independence and funding
No company pays for placement, for a rating, for removal, or for a link. There are no
affiliate links on this site and no paid reviews. Outbound links to profiled companies carry
rel="nofollow".
Corrections
Send a correction with a source and it will be reviewed promptly, corrected if it is right, and the page's reviewed date updated. Requests to remove sourced criticism, to soften accurate characterisation, or to remove a profile entirely are declined. Email info@paymentcompanies.com or use the contact form.