Authorize.net vs Tilled
A feature-by-feature comparison for ISVs integrating payments.
Does the platform want to become the facilitator, or just pass transactions to a processor? Tilled exists for the first case: a PayFac-as-a-Service with a REST API and webhooks, compliance included, processing in the US through its acquiring partners. Authorize.net serves the second. It is a gateway, part of the CyberSource side of Visa for well over a decade, that forwards each payment to a separate processor and has no facilitation product of its own.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Authorize.net | Tilled |
|---|---|---|
| Integration Architecture | 5 | 7 |
| API & Developer Experience | 5 | 7 |
| White-Label Capabilities | 3 | 8 |
| Processor Flexibility | 4 | 4 |
| Pricing & Fee Structure | 5 | 7 |
| Omnichannel & In-Person Payments | 4 | 4 |
| Fraud & Security | 6 | 6 |
| Revenue Sharing | 3 | 8 |
| Merchant Onboarding | 6 | 8 |
| Global Reach | 5 | 3 |
| Recurring Billing | 6 | 6 |
| Customer Support | 5 | 7 |
| PayFac Options | 3 | 9 |
Get this comparison as a shareable PDF
We'll send the Authorize.net vs Tilled breakdown to your inbox — ready to share with your team.
Best for
Authorize.net
Best for ISVs integrating with merchants who already use Authorize.net, or ISVs wanting multi-processor flexibility through a widely-supported gateway. Not ideal for ISVs building modern embedded payment experiences.
Best for
Tilled
Best for ISVs wanting a pure PFaaS solution with maximum transparency and control over payment economics. Direct competitor to Finix for ISVs focused on payment monetization.
Authorize.net vs Tilled: What ISVs Need to Know
Choosing between Authorize.net and Tilled for embedded payments is a decision that directly impacts your ISV’s revenue model, merchant experience, and technical architecture. This comparison breaks down where each platform excels from an ISV integration perspective.
Key Differences for ISVs
The most important distinction between Authorize.net and Tilled comes down to how each platform approaches ISV payment facilitation. Authorize.net and Tilled take fundamentally different approaches to merchant onboarding, revenue sharing, and platform integration — and those differences matter when you’re building payments into your software.
Integration architecture varies significantly between the two. ISVs evaluating Authorize.net vs Tilled should consider how each platform handles sub-merchant onboarding, payment splitting, and settlement timing. The right choice depends on your specific vertical, transaction volumes, and how much control you need over the merchant payment experience.
Pricing and revenue economics also differ. ISVs earn money from embedded payments through the spread between what they charge merchants and what the processor charges them. The pricing model each platform uses — flat-rate, interchange-plus, or custom — directly affects your payment revenue per transaction.
Which Platform Fits Your ISV?
The best choice between Authorize.net and Tilled depends on your ISV’s specific requirements:
- Transaction volume: Higher-volume ISVs may benefit from interchange-plus pricing, while lower-volume platforms often prefer flat-rate simplicity
- Merchant type: B2B merchants have different payment needs than consumer-facing businesses
- Geographic scope: International payment support varies significantly between providers
- Integration depth: Some ISVs need white-label checkout while others are fine with co-branded experiences
- Revenue model: How much of the payment margin you want to capture determines which platform’s economics work better
The ISV Payment Integration Perspective
For ISVs evaluating Authorize.net vs Tilled, the comparison shouldn’t stop at processing fees. Consider the total cost of integration, ongoing maintenance, and the revenue opportunity from embedded payments. The platform that generates the most payment revenue for your ISV while providing the best merchant experience is the right choice — and that calculation is different for every software company.
Evaluate both platforms against your specific use case. Request ISV-specific pricing from each, and compare the total economics including setup costs, per-transaction revenue, and the engineering investment required to integrate and maintain each platform.