Build your own processing or pay an aggregator?
We often think that controlling payments means controlling the business. In reality, it can mean controlling a headache that eats into your margins 🥲
We often think that controlling payments means controlling the business. In reality, it can mean controlling a headache that eats into your margins 🥲
An aggregator is a universal key to all doors.
One integration — and you get dozens of payment methods: cards, crypto, local wallets.
What you gain:
— Go live in a couple of weeks, not months
— Compliance, fraud monitoring, and bank negotiations are not your problem
— "Rented" reputation: your traffic is mixed into the aggregator’s pool, lowering the risk of blocks
But rent always has a price:
1️⃣ Higher fees — the aggregator adds its margin on top of bank rates
2️⃣ Dependence on someone else’s relationships: if the aggregator falls out with a key bank, your business in that region can stall
3️⃣ No access to data — no deep analytics, no chargeback forecasting, no real understanding of VIP user behavior
In-house processing is the owner’s path.
Direct contracts with banks and payment systems give you:
— A 2−5% margin uplift. At scale, that’s new markets or an extra team
— Direct access to funds and data: faster settlements, more control
— A proprietary asset. Processing is infrastructure, not an expense — competitors can’t just copy it
How to choose?
Focus on three things:
1. Business stage. If you’re testing a market — use an aggregator. If you have stable turnover of $ 1M+ per month — run the numbers for direct integration.
2. Region. Europe is a fee game: in-house processing improves margins. Asia is a jungle of local methods — an aggregator can save you years.
3. Chaos tolerance. Ready to maintain a payments team, build fraud rules, and talk to banks at night? Then in-house is for you. If not — pay for convenience.
The biggest mistake is trying to sit on two chairs at once: using an aggregator, then adding direct integrations for VIPs or specific methods.
Your processing setup is not about IT. It’s about finance and relationships.
If you’re not ready to manage both — pay the aggregator’s fee and sleep well 😁
One integration — and you get dozens of payment methods: cards, crypto, local wallets.
What you gain:
— Go live in a couple of weeks, not months
— Compliance, fraud monitoring, and bank negotiations are not your problem
— "Rented" reputation: your traffic is mixed into the aggregator’s pool, lowering the risk of blocks
But rent always has a price:
1️⃣ Higher fees — the aggregator adds its margin on top of bank rates
2️⃣ Dependence on someone else’s relationships: if the aggregator falls out with a key bank, your business in that region can stall
3️⃣ No access to data — no deep analytics, no chargeback forecasting, no real understanding of VIP user behavior
In-house processing is the owner’s path.
Direct contracts with banks and payment systems give you:
— A 2−5% margin uplift. At scale, that’s new markets or an extra team
— Direct access to funds and data: faster settlements, more control
— A proprietary asset. Processing is infrastructure, not an expense — competitors can’t just copy it
How to choose?
Focus on three things:
1. Business stage. If you’re testing a market — use an aggregator. If you have stable turnover of $ 1M+ per month — run the numbers for direct integration.
2. Region. Europe is a fee game: in-house processing improves margins. Asia is a jungle of local methods — an aggregator can save you years.
3. Chaos tolerance. Ready to maintain a payments team, build fraud rules, and talk to banks at night? Then in-house is for you. If not — pay for convenience.
The biggest mistake is trying to sit on two chairs at once: using an aggregator, then adding direct integrations for VIPs or specific methods.
Your processing setup is not about IT. It’s about finance and relationships.
If you’re not ready to manage both — pay the aggregator’s fee and sleep well 😁