Payment Gateway / PSP
Adyen and Checkout.com both show up under the payment gateway category, but they solve slightly different jobs. Adyen uses pricing that starts at EUR 0.11 + scheme fee, while Checkout.com runs on usage-based from custom pricing. Both sit at moderate lock-in. Transparency lands at 3/5 versus 4/5. Adyen fits teams working on enterprise with $10M+ TPV needing global coverage, while Checkout.com is a closer match when the job is SaaS with online payments. Worth noting: Adyen is explicitly not for solo projects; Checkout.com is explicitly not for offline, Internal projects. The honest trade-off: Adyen trades off on startup with <$1M TPV — minimum fees are high; Checkout.com trades off on offline-only retail. On the plus side, Adyen highlights enterprise with $10M+ TPV needing global coverage, while Checkout.com points to SaaS with online payments. Adyen's documentation also calls out unified online + in-store (POS) payments. Checkout.com similarly notes e-commerce checkout. For teams evaluating payment gateway options today, the right choice usually comes down to pricing model, lock-in, and which tool's stated use-case maps to yours.
Quick take
Adyen is for enterprise with $10M+ TPV needing global; Checkout.com is for SaaS with online payments; decide on pricing model.
 Adyen | | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Payment Gateway / PSP | Payment Gateway / PSP |
| Pricing Model | hybrid | usage |
| Entry Price | EUR 0.11 + scheme fee | custom pricing |
| Free Tier | No | No |
| Billing Complexity | medium | medium |
| Developer Experience | 5/5 | 5/5 |
| Pricing Transparency | 3/5 | 4/5 |
| Lock-in Level | medium | medium |
| Migration Complexity | medium | medium |
| Data Portability | CSV import/export recurring payment details | Via API export |
| Enterprise | Available | Available |
| GitHub Stars | 245 | 1.3k |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
Medium — proprietary tokens, but CSV import/export under
Migration difficulty: medium
Data you keep: CSV import/export recurring payment details
API standard: Proprietary
Risk notes: Medium — proprietary tokens, but CSV import/export under
💡 Moderate effort required. Export data before canceling
Medium — proprietary tokens
Migration difficulty: medium
Data you keep: Via API export
API standard: Proprietary
Risk notes: Medium — proprietary tokens
💡 Moderate effort required. Export data before canceling
Choose Adyen if your project is enterprise with $10M+ TPV needing global coverage, medium lock-in is an acceptable trade-off.
Not for: Solo projects
Choose Checkout.com if your project is SaaS with online payments, usage-based billing at custom pricing matches your volume, medium lock-in is an acceptable trade-off.
Not for: Offline, Internal projects
Check each tool's dedicated page for deeper reviews, setup notes, and pros/cons.
Adyen uses pricing that starts at EUR 0.11 + scheme fee, and Checkout.com uses usage-based from custom pricing. The pricing models are different, so a direct cheaper-than comparison depends on your volume and usage pattern.
Our data puts Adyen at medium lock-in (proprietary tokens, but csv import/export under), and Checkout.com at medium lock-in. Migration is feasible but not trivial — budget time for re-integration, data export, and parallel running before cutover.
Both score 5/5 on developer experience in our data, so there's no clear winner on that axis. Checkout.com does edge ahead on pricing/docs transparency (4/5 vs 3/5), which can make evaluation faster.
Checkout.com is a reasonable alternative to Adyen when your workload leans more toward SaaS, E-commerce, Marketplace than enterprise. The pricing model shifts too — Adyen is pricing that starts at EUR 0.11 + scheme fee, Checkout.com is usage-based from custom pricing — so expect the cost profile to change as well. One caveat: Checkout.com is explicitly not for offline, Internal projects, so check that constraint against your use-case before switching.
Comments powered by Giscus (GitHub Discussions). You need a GitHub account to comment.