Scoring method and independence

A comparison site is worth only as much as its reasoning can be checked. So we publish the entire formula — including what it deliberately does not measure.

Editorial: SoftPOS24 Payment ResearchUpdated: 15.08.2026Data set: 121 providers, 14 criteria
In one sentence

The SoftPOS24 score runs from 0 to 100 points, converted to a 1–5 star rating, and measures how transparent, far-reaching and independently certified an offer is. It is explicitly not a hands-on test of the app, and it is not for sale.

The formula

CriterionWeightHow it is measured
<strong>Price transparency</strong>30 pts18 points for a publicly stated percentage rate, 8 for a qualitative price statement, 0 for "on request". A further 7 points for a stated monthly fee and 5 for stated setup costs.
<strong>Market coverage</strong>25 ptsBanded by the number of documented markets: 25 or more markets scores full marks, 15 or more scores 22, 8 or more scores 18, 4 or more scores 13, 2 or more scores 9, otherwise 5.
<strong>Platform coverage</strong>15 pts15 points for iOS <em>and</em> Android, 9 for a single platform, 5 where it cannot be established.
<strong>Security certification</strong>15 pts15 points for documented PCI MPoC, 12 for CPoC or SPoC, 8 for general PCI DSS, 3 where nothing is stated.
<strong>Card acceptance</strong>15 ptsPoints per supported scheme and wallet: Visa 3, Mastercard 3, Apple Pay 3, Google Pay 2, Amex 2, and 2 for a supported domestic debit scheme — capped at 15.

From points to a grade

Alongside the score, each result card carries a grade. It is not a second assessment but a straight conversion of the same points total:

Grade = 1.0 + (100 − points) × 0.04, rounded to one decimal place and capped between 1.0 and 5.0

So 100 points is 1.0, 75 points is 2.0 and 50 points is 3.0. The words behind the numbers are fixed: up to 1.5 very good, up to 2.5 good, up to 3.5 satisfactory, above that adequate. We do not award anything worse than 5.0 — a provider we list at all exists and can be evidenced.

Deduction for data quality

We take points off when we could not verify a figure at the source ourselves. Of the 105 providers in the database, the split is currently:

What the score deliberately does not measure

We think it is dishonest to award a test verdict for something we have not tested. The following therefore carry no points at all:

Why providers from different countries are not directly comparable

A Brazilian rate of 0.75% and a UK rate of 0.79% describe completely different realities: interchange caps, card mix and competitive intensity are not the same, and the UK's position changed again after Brexit for cross-border transactions. The score therefore measures transparency and reach, not "cheap versus expensive" across borders. For a genuine price comparison, use the region filter in the full comparison and read the costs page for your own market.

How SoftPOS24 is funded

SoftPOS24 is funded by monthly listing and advertising fees paid by providers and by labelled placements. We would rather say that plainly than bury it. Three rules follow from it, and they are not negotiable:

  1. The ranking order is not for sale. It comes solely from the formula above. No provider can buy points, and no payment has ever changed a position.
  2. Advertising is labelled as advertising. Paid placements carry a visible "Ad" label and sit outside the ranking, never inside it.
  3. Providers with no commercial relationship are treated identically. We list every provider we can evidence, including direct competitors of our advertisers.

Corrections and updates

Payment pricing changes constantly. We re-check the terms of the top 30 providers monthly and the rest of the database quarterly, and every change is dated. Are you a provider and is something here wrong? We correct data free of charge and regardless of whether there is any commercial relationship — write to info@softpos24.com. Where our data does not yet cover a market well, we say so on the page rather than filling the gap with guesswork.