Recurly vs Lago
subscription-flat · usage-based · enterprise-custom
·open-source · hosted-paid · enterprise-custom
Lago wins · 13–25 (12 drawn)
Agenticness — how well agents can access and operate the productAgenticness
How well agents can access and operate the product
Agent access
ai-native userPoint an agent at llms.txt or agent-oriented docs
weight 2 · round drawnA live llms.txt is confirmed via direct probe (HTTP 200) at docs.recurly.com/llms.txt, and Recurly also documents a public MCP server (Compass) that connects AI dev tools directly to its documentation and API knowledge, giving agents a first-party structured path to Recurly's docs. missing for 10: independent/community confirmation of agents actually using these endpoints successfully.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.recurly.com/llms.txt # Recurly Documentation Documentation > Welcome to the Recurly Documentation …”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
Lago has a confirmed live llms.txt at the root domain (HTTP 200) plus a docs-specific llms.txt index and .md-formatted doc pages, explicitly designed for agent consumption, alongside an OpenAPI schema and MCP server for programmatic access. This directly satisfies pointing an agent at agent-oriented docs, with only independent third-party confirmation of agent usage missing for a perfect score. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on verification that an agent successfully consumes these files end-to-end.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/llms.txt # Lago > Lago is the open-source billing platform for usage-based, subscription-ba…”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/docs/api-reference/intro.md > ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index…”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://getlago.com/docs/guide/ai-agents/mcp-server”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
ai-native userRun the product headlessly / in CI for automation
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurly offers a full REST API and official client libraries (Ruby, Node, Python, .NET, Java, PHP, Go) which could be scripted headlessly in CI, but there is no explicit documentation of a CLI, CI/CD examples, or automation-focused tooling for headless/agentic workflows. missing for 10: explicit CI/headless usage examples, a documented CLI tool, evidence of non-interactive/automation-first design beyond generic API/SDK availability.
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
- [claimed-docs] “The Recurly Native Mobile SDKs allow you to integrate recurrent payments in your existing Android or iOS apps in a matter of minutes.”
Lago is self-hostable via Docker (docs-11), fully API/CLI-driven with a generated command for every endpoint (docs-1) and an OpenAPI 3.1 schema for scripting/client generation (docs-16), and the GitHub repo contains a script that spins up a disposable local Lago instance and runs automated pricing scenarios (gh-1), all consistent with headless/CI automation. However there is no explicit CI/headless-mode documentation, example CI pipeline config, or independent report of running Lago fully headless in a pipeline. Missing for 10: dedicated CI/headless-mode docs, a documented CI pipeline example, and independent confirmation of headless automated runs.
- [claimed-docs] “Docker is the easiest way to get started with the self-hosted version of Lago.”
- [claimed-docs] “Every endpoint in this reference has a generated command.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [github] “It starts the Lago version that matches this checkout, creates a disposable local organization, and prices three illustrative AI requests.”
ai-native userPlug MCP servers into this product so it can use their tools
weight 3 · round drawnRecurlynone0/10Evidence only shows Recurly publishing its own MCP server (Compass) so external AI tools can query Recurly's docs/API — this is Recurly acting as an MCP server provider, not as a client that can plug in and use other MCP servers' tools. No evidence Recurly itself can consume/plug in external MCP servers.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Lagonone0/10The evidence shows Lago exposes its own MCP server so external AI assistants can access Lago's billing data (lago-docs-9, lago-probe-4) and has AI agents (Dunning Agent) that read Lago's own account data (lago-docs-10) — this is Lago acting as an MCP server/tool provider, not as a client that plugs in external MCP servers to gain new tools. No evidence shows Lago's agents or platform consuming/connecting to third-party MCP servers.
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
- [claimed-docs] “The Dunning Agent reads the account first: twelve months of invoices and payments, the disputes, the provider status.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://getlago.com/docs/guide/ai-agents/mcp-server”
ai-native userConnect an agent via an official MCP server
weight 3 · round to LagoRecurly ships an official 'Compass' MCP server that connects AI dev tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge, confirmed both in docs and via a live probe of the docs page. However, evidence only describes it as a documentation/knowledge connector, not a full agentic interface for performing billing actions (e.g., managing subscriptions, invoices) via MCP. Missing for 10: evidence of MCP tool-calling for actual account/subscription operations, independent hands-on validation of the MCP server in use.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Lago is not itself an AI agent but a billing platform, so publishing an official MCP server is a fair axis; docs explicitly confirm a dedicated MCP server giving AI assistants like Claude direct access to Lago's billing data, plus a probe confirming the page exists. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on third-party verification of the MCP server working in practice.
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://getlago.com/docs/guide/ai-agents/mcp-server”
ai-native userUse an official CLI
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10No evidence of an official Recurly CLI; documentation instead references client libraries (Ruby, Node.js, Python, etc.), mobile SDKs, and an MCP server for AI tools, but nothing about a command-line interface.
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
- [claimed-docs] “The Recurly Native Mobile SDKs allow you to integrate recurrent payments in your existing Android or iOS apps in a matter of minutes.”
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
Docs mention that 'every endpoint in this reference has a generated command,' implying an official CLI exists, but there is no dedicated CLI documentation, install instructions, or AI-native framing (e.g., LLM-friendly usage, agent integration) beyond this single line. Missing for 10: explicit CLI install/setup docs, AI-native use-case description, independent confirmation of CLI usage.
- [claimed-docs] “Every endpoint in this reference has a generated command.”
ai-native userDrive the product through a documented public API
weight 3 · round to LagoRecurly documents a full public API with official client libraries in seven languages, entitlements checkable via API, and even an MCP server (Compass) exposing API/doc knowledge to AI tools, indicating strong API-first, AI-accessible design. missing for 10: independent developer corroboration of API robustness/rate limits and no evidence of API versioning or webhooks documentation depth.
- [claimed-docs] “Entitlements can be applied across platforms (web, mobile, and app stores) and checked in real time via the Recurly API.”
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.recurly.com/llms.txt # Recurly Documentation Documentation > Welcome to the Recurly Documentation …”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Lago publishes a full public API reference with generated commands per endpoint, an OpenAPI 3.1 schema (verified live at /openapi.json), explicit versioning/stability guarantees, and docs/llms.txt aimed at AI-native consumption; it even documents an MCP server exposing billing data to AI agents. This is strong first-party and probe-verified evidence of a documented, machine-consumable public API. Missing for 10: independent third-party developer testimonials specifically about API usage/integration experience (community evidence is mostly about billing product value, not API DX).
- [claimed-docs] “Every endpoint in this reference has a generated command.”
- [claimed-docs] “Clients should tolerate additive changes within v1, including new response fields, enum values, endpoints, optional request fields, and webh…”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/llms.txt # Lago > Lago is the open-source billing platform for usage-based, subscription-ba…”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/docs/api-reference/intro.md > ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index…”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://getlago.com/docs/guide/ai-agents/mcp-server”
ai-native userIssue scoped/least-privilege API credentials for an agent
weight 2 · round drawnRecurlynone0/10No evidence of scoped or least-privilege API key/credential issuance for agents; the MCP server (recurly-docs-12, recurly-probe-2) only connects AI tools to documentation, not scoped API credentials, and no API key management or permission-scoping docs are present.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Lagonone0/10Lago's docs describe an MCP server and API access for AI agents but provide no evidence of scoped or least-privilege API key/credential issuance (e.g., role-based keys, permission scopes) for agents; existing docs only mention general API keys and OpenAPI schema access without granular scoping controls.
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://getlago.com/docs/guide/ai-agents/mcp-server”
ai-native userBuild against official SDKs
weight 2 · round to RecurlyRecurly documents official client libraries across seven languages (Ruby, Node.js, Python, .NET, Java, PHP, Go) plus native mobile SDKs for iOS/Android, giving AI-native developers a solid multi-language SDK surface, and an official Compass MCP server ties AI tools into its API docs. Missing for 10: independent hands-on developer confirmation of SDK quality/reliability and no explicit mention of AI-specific SDK tooling beyond the MCP docs connector.
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
- [claimed-docs] “The Recurly Native Mobile SDKs allow you to integrate recurrent payments in your existing Android or iOS apps in a matter of minutes.”
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Lago publishes an OpenAPI 3.1 spec and API reference with per-endpoint generated commands, explicitly positioned for generating clients or exposing actions to AI agents, but the evidence never names concrete official first-party SDKs (e.g., language libraries) beyond spec-generated clients. missing for 10: named official SDK packages/libraries, independent developer confirmation of SDK usage, versioning/maintenance details for SDKs.
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [claimed-docs] “Every endpoint in this reference has a generated command.”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
- [claimed-docs] “Clients should tolerate additive changes within v1, including new response fields, enum values, endpoints, optional request fields, and webh…”
ai-native userSubscribe to events via webhooks
weight 2 · round to LagoThe only mention of webhooks in the evidence pack is an indirect community comparison noting Recurly automates retention 'without needing to implement webhooks' for dunning, implying webhook functionality exists, but no first-party documentation, API reference, or event-list evidence describes how to subscribe to or configure webhooks. Missing for 10: official webhook API/docs, list of subscribable events, setup instructions, and any AI-agent-specific webhook integration guidance.
- [community] “Comparing Stripe and Recurly: It's faster to get going with Stripe (no merchant account required) but Recurly appears to offer more automate…”
Lago documents a webhook system with HMAC signing options (lago-docs-7) and explicit API versioning guarantees for webhook event types (lago-docs-8), meaning any consumer—including an AI agent—can subscribe to billing events via webhooks. missing for 10: a full catalog/list of supported webhook event types, and independent/hands-on confirmation of webhook reliability in production use.
- [claimed-docs] “The second is `HMAC`, which features a shorter payload header and no size restrictions.”
- [claimed-docs] “Clients should tolerate additive changes within v1, including new response fields, enum values, endpoints, optional request fields, and webh…”
Agentic features
ai-native userGet AI-generated insights and suggestions from my data inside the product
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10No evidence Recurly generates AI-driven insights or suggestions from a merchant's own subscription/billing data; the only AI-related feature (Compass MCP) merely connects AI dev tools to documentation/API knowledge, not to account data analytics.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Lago documents specific AI-agent features—an MCP server that gives assistants like Claude direct access to billing data, and a 'Dunning Agent' that reads 12 months of invoices/payments/disputes to inform actions—showing some in-product AI analysis of data. However, this is narrow (payment collection) rather than a general AI-insights/suggestions layer across revenue analytics, plans, or usage data. missing for 10: evidence of AI-generated insights/suggestions surfaced in the main product UI (e.g., revenue analytics, plan optimization), independent/hands-on confirmation the Dunning Agent's outputs are used, and broader scope beyond dunning/collections.
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
- [claimed-docs] “The Dunning Agent reads the account first: twelve months of invoices and payments, the disputes, the provider status.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://getlago.com/docs/guide/ai-agents/mcp-server”
ai-native userSet up automations that run autonomously in the background
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurly ships built-in autonomous background processes—dunning campaigns (up to 50 targeted campaigns), automatic backup payment method fallback, and involuntary churn recovery tools—that run without manual intervention once configured. However, there is no evidence of a general-purpose automation/workflow builder, triggers, or agent-configurable rules engine that an AI-native user could set up beyond these fixed billing-retention features. Missing for 10: a configurable automation/rules engine, evidence of user-defined triggers/actions beyond dunning, and any AI-agent-specific automation tooling.
- [claimed-docs] “merchants on Professional and Elite plans can create up to 50 targeted campaigns for different customer segments or plans”
- [claimed-docs] “Involuntary churn happens when customers are lost due to factors outside their intent — expired cards, bank changes, or failed payments. Rec…”
- [claimed-docs] “Let customers designate a backup payment method so service continues automatically if their primary payment fails.”
Lago documents a Dunning Agent that autonomously reads account/invoice/payment history and presumably acts on overdue accounts, plus an MCP server exposing billing data to AI agents like Claude, showing some autonomous background automation capability. However, evidence doesn't show a general-purpose automation/agent-builder framework, scheduling, or independent confirmation of the Dunning Agent running unattended in production. missing for 10: broader autonomous automation framework beyond dunning agent, independent/hands-on verification of autonomous background operation, details on triggering/scheduling/monitoring these agents.
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
- [claimed-docs] “The Dunning Agent reads the account first: twelve months of invoices and payments, the disputes, the provider status.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://getlago.com/docs/guide/ai-agents/mcp-server”
ai-native userDelegate tasks to a built-in AI assistant inside the product
weight 3 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10Recurly is a subscription billing platform; evidence shows an MCP server for connecting AI dev tools to documentation/API knowledge, but nothing indicates a built-in AI assistant within the product that users can delegate tasks to.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Lago ships an 'AI agents' documentation section describing a built-in Dunning Agent that autonomously reads invoices, disputes, and payment provider status to act on overdue accounts, and an MCP server that gives external AI assistants (e.g., Claude) direct access to billing data. This shows some built-in agentic delegation for a specific task (dunning/collections), but there's no evidence of a general-purpose in-product AI assistant users can converse with or delegate arbitrary tasks to. missing for 10: evidence of a general conversational assistant UI, breadth of tasks beyond dunning, independent/hands-on confirmation of the Dunning Agent actually operating in production.
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
- [claimed-docs] “The Dunning Agent reads the account first: twelve months of invoices and payments, the disputes, the provider status.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://getlago.com/docs/guide/ai-agents/mcp-server”
ai-native userOperate the product with natural-language commands
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurly's Compass MCP server lets AI dev tools query Recurly's documentation and API knowledge, which is a step toward AI-native/agentic interaction, but the evidence describes it as a knowledge/docs connector rather than a natural-language interface for actually executing billing operations (e.g., changing subscriptions, issuing credits) end-to-end. Missing for 10: evidence of natural-language command execution for actual account/subscription actions, hands-on proof of the MCP server performing operations (not just doc lookup), and any client-facing chat/NL interface.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Lago documents an official MCP server that gives AI assistants like Claude direct access to billing data, plus specialized AI agents (e.g., Dunning Agent) that read account data and OpenAPI schema exposure for AI agents to invoke billing actions — enabling natural-language operation via connected AI assistants. However, this is mediated through external assistants/MCP rather than a built-in NL command interface, and there's no independent/hands-on evidence of actual NL command execution or the breadth of supported commands. Missing for 10: hands-on/independent verification of NL command execution, a native in-product chat/command interface, and documentation of the full range of commands executable via natural language.
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
- [claimed-docs] “The Dunning Agent reads the account first: twelve months of invoices and payments, the disputes, the provider status.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://getlago.com/docs/guide/ai-agents/mcp-server”
Api quality
ai-native userExplore an interactive API reference with runnable examples
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10Evidence shows client libraries, SDKs, an MCP server for docs/API knowledge, and an llms.txt file, but there is no mention of an interactive API reference with runnable/live-executable examples (e.g., a try-it-now console). Missing for 10: interactive API console, runnable code examples, in-browser execution/testing of API calls.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.recurly.com/llms.txt # Recurly Documentation Documentation > Welcome to the Recurly Documentation …”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Docs confirm a generated command for every endpoint and an OpenAPI 3.1 schema (lago-docs-1, lago-docs-16, lago-probe-3), suggesting a structured, code-snippet-rich API reference, but there is no evidence of an in-browser 'try it out' or runnable execution feature. Missing for 10: explicit interactive 'run this request' UI, hands-on confirmation of executability, and independent corroboration of the reference's interactivity.
- [claimed-docs] “Every endpoint in this reference has a generated command.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
- [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/docs/api-reference/intro.md > ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index…”
ai-native userDownload a machine-readable API spec (OpenAPI or equivalent)
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10The evidence pack shows official client libraries, mobile SDKs, an llms.txt file, and an MCP server, but no mention of a downloadable OpenAPI/Swagger spec or any machine-readable API schema file. Since Recurly is an API-based product, this axis clearly applies, but there is no evidence of the specific capability requested.
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.recurly.com/llms.txt # Recurly Documentation Documentation > Welcome to the Recurly Documentation …”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Lago publishes an OpenAPI 3.1 schema (openapi.json returns 200 with an 'openapi' key) and docs explicitly state it can be used to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose actions to an AI agent. missing for 10: no independent third-party corroboration of the spec's completeness or usage beyond vendor docs/probe.
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
ai-native userTest against a sandbox environment without touching production data
weight 1 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10No evidence pack item mentions a sandbox, test/dev environment, or test API keys for Recurly; documentation covers subscription changes, billing, and MCP tooling but not isolated test environments. Missing for 10: any mention of sandbox/test mode, test credentials, or separation from production data.
Lago's self-hosted Docker setup and the GitHub quick-start script that spins up a 'disposable local organization' for testing suggest a way to try Lago without touching production data, but there is no documented dedicated sandbox/test-mode with separate test API keys as many billing platforms provide. Missing for 10: explicit sandbox/test-mode documentation, test vs. live API key separation, and hands-on confirmation that test data is fully isolated from production billing.
- [github] “It starts the Lago version that matches this checkout, creates a disposable local organization, and prices three illustrative AI requests.”
- [claimed-docs] “Docker is the easiest way to get started with the self-hosted version of Lago.”
ai-native userRely on versioned APIs with a documented deprecation policy
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10The evidence pack covers subscription features, client libraries, and an MCP server, but contains no documentation of API versioning schemes or a deprecation policy. Missing for 10: any mention of API version headers/URLs, changelog, or a documented deprecation/sunset policy.
Lago documents an explicit API versioning policy (v1) specifying that clients should tolerate additive changes like new fields, enums, endpoints, and webhook event types, indicating a stable versioned API contract with deprecation-safe evolution rules, and backs this with a published OpenAPI 3.1 schema. Missing for 10: an explicit deprecation/sunset timeline policy (e.g., how long old versions are supported) and independent/community confirmation of version stability in practice.
- [claimed-docs] “Clients should tolerate additive changes within v1, including new response fields, enum values, endpoints, optional request fields, and webh…”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
Automation depth — how much of the product can run unattendedAutomation depth
How much of the product can run unattended
ai-native userPerform bulk operations across many items at once
weight 2 · round to RecurlyRecurly's docs mention bulk data import/export to populate accounts and analyze records, which implies some bulk operation support, and API client libraries could theoretically be used to script batch changes. However, there is no explicit documentation of a bulk-update/bulk-cancel/bulk-modify API for subscriptions, invoices, or entitlements, nor any AI-native tooling for orchestrating such bulk actions. missing for 10: explicit bulk subscription/invoice update API, bulk operation endpoints or SDK examples, evidence of AI-driven or agentic bulk workflows, independent confirmation of bulk import scale/performance.
- [claimed-docs] “Use it to populate your account, analyze performance and customer behavior, and keep records for compliance.”
- [claimed-docs] “Import customer data to populate accounts and records across your Recurly account.”
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
Lagonone0/10No evidence describes bulk/batch endpoints or batch operations (e.g., bulk invoice creation, bulk customer updates) in Lago's API or UI; documentation only mentions per-endpoint commands and general API access. Missing for 10: any mention of batch/bulk API endpoints, batch job status, or UI batch-select actions.
- [claimed-docs] “Every endpoint in this reference has a generated command.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
ai-native userDefine rules that trigger actions automatically on events
weight 3 · round to LagoRecurly ships built-in automated responses to specific billing events—dunning campaigns triggered by failed payments (up to 50 targeted campaigns) and automatic fallback to backup payment methods—but these are pre-defined behaviors within fixed billing workflows, not a general-purpose rule engine where users define arbitrary event→action logic. Missing for 10: a configurable trigger/condition/action framework (e.g., custom webhooks-driven rules, if-this-then-that automation builder) and evidence of user-defined (not just Recurly-provided) automation logic.
- [claimed-docs] “merchants on Professional and Elite plans can create up to 50 targeted campaigns for different customer segments or plans”
- [claimed-docs] “Involuntary churn happens when customers are lost due to factors outside their intent — expired cards, bank changes, or failed payments. Rec…”
- [claimed-docs] “Let customers designate a backup payment method so service continues automatically if their primary payment fails.”
- [community] “Comparing Stripe and Recurly: It's faster to get going with Stripe (no merchant account required) but Recurly appears to offer more automate…”
Lago documents webhooks that fire on billing events (lago-docs-7) and a dedicated 'Dunning Agent' that reads account state (invoices, payments, disputes) and presumably acts on overdue-payment events (lago-docs-10), which together resemble event-triggered automation. However, there is no documented general-purpose rule/condition engine letting users define arbitrary 'if event X then action Y' logic beyond these specific built-in agents/webhooks. Missing for 10: a configurable rules/conditions UI or API for arbitrary triggers, and evidence of multiple event types beyond dunning/webhooks.
- [claimed-docs] “The second is `HMAC`, which features a shorter payload header and no size restrictions.”
- [claimed-docs] “The Dunning Agent reads the account first: twelve months of invoices and payments, the disputes, the provider status.”
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
ai-native userSchedule recurring jobs or workflows
weight 2 · round to RecurlyRecurly's core product is built around recurring billing cycles that run automatically (subscription renewals, usage-based billing at cycle end, dunning email campaigns), which functions as a domain-specific recurring workflow engine, but it offers no general-purpose job/task scheduler an AI-native user could configure for arbitrary recurring workflows. Missing for 10: a generic scheduling/automation API or cron-like mechanism for arbitrary AI-driven tasks, and any evidence of AI-agent-triggered scheduling beyond built-in billing cycles.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly's usage-based billing model lets you charge customers at the end of each billing cycle based on their actual consumption”
- [claimed-docs] “merchants on Professional and Elite plans can create up to 50 targeted campaigns for different customer segments or plans”
- [claimed-docs] “Involuntary churn happens when customers are lost due to factors outside their intent — expired cards, bank changes, or failed payments. Rec…”
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly bills only the difference during an immediate change when the underlying plan is unchanged.”
Lago's core billing engine inherently runs recurring cycles (monthly/yearly subscription billing) and the Dunning Agent appears to run periodic checks over invoices/payments, which is a recurring automated workflow, but there is no documented feature letting an AI-native user define or schedule arbitrary recurring jobs/workflows via API or agent. missing for 10: explicit job/workflow scheduler, cron-like API, user-configurable recurrence for AI agent tasks beyond built-in billing cycles.
- [claimed-docs] “Yearly: subscription fees are billed on a yearly basis and charges can be billed monthly or annually.”
- [claimed-docs] “The Dunning Agent reads the account first: twelve months of invoices and payments, the disputes, the provider status.”
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
Billing agent access — stories about billing agent access in this arenaBilling agent access
Stories about billing agent access in this arena
Agent operations
ai-native userAn agent can operate my billing — create a subscription, apply a credit, change a plan — through a programmatic surface with scoped permissions
weight 3 · round to LagoRecurly exposes a full REST API and client libraries covering subscription changes, credits, and invoices (recurly-docs-1, -2, -9, -13), which could technically be driven by an agent. However, the only AI-specific surface documented, Recurly Compass MCP, is explicitly a documentation/knowledge connector for AI dev tools, not an operational interface for executing billing actions (recurly-docs-12, recurly-probe-2), and there is no evidence of scoped/restricted API keys or permission models designed for autonomous agent use. Missing for 10: an agent-oriented action interface (e.g., MCP server or agent SDK) that can actually invoke billing operations, and documentation of scoped/least-privilege API credentials for agent access.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly gives you full control over how and when subscription changes take effect. Upgrade or downgrade a plan, adjust quantity or price, ad…”
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly bills only the difference during an immediate change when the underlying plan is unchanged.”
- [claimed-docs] “Credit invoices give every credit its own distinct invoice — separate from charge invoices.”
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Lago exposes a full REST API (every endpoint has a generated command) plus an OpenAPI 3.1 schema explicitly positioned for exposing billing actions to AI agents, and ships a documented MCP server giving AI assistants direct access to billing data, with a working example (Dunning Agent) reading account/invoice data. Subscription assignment and plan upgrade/downgrade are documented API-driven flows, supporting the 'create a subscription, change a plan' part of the story. Missing for 10: no explicit documentation of scoped/permissioned API keys or credit-application endpoints for agents, and no independent hands-on report of an agent actually performing these billing operations end-to-end.
- [claimed-docs] “Every endpoint in this reference has a generated command.”
- [claimed-docs] “Customers have the flexibility to easily upgrade or downgrade their plan at any given moment.”
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
- [claimed-docs] “The Dunning Agent reads the account first: twelve months of invoices and payments, the disputes, the provider status.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://getlago.com/docs/guide/ai-agents/mcp-server”
Agent queries
ai-native userAn agent can answer questions about my billing state — MRR, delinquent accounts, upcoming renewals, a customer's invoices — by querying the platform directly
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurly exposes a REST API and official client libraries that could let an agent fetch account/invoice/subscription data, and entitlements are described as checkable in real time via the API. However, the only AI-agent integration evidenced (Compass MCP) is explicitly scoped to documentation and API knowledge, not live billing-state queries, and there is no evidence of dedicated endpoints/reports for MRR, delinquent-account lists, or renewal forecasts that an agent could query directly. missing for 10: evidence of an MCP or agent-facing endpoint returning MRR/delinquency/renewal data, documentation of a reporting/analytics API for these metrics, independent confirmation of agent-driven billing queries working in practice.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly Compass MCP connects your AI development tools directly to Recurly's documentation and API knowledge.”
- [claimed-docs] “Entitlements can be applied across platforms (web, mobile, and app stores) and checked in real time via the Recurly API.”
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
- [claimed-docs] “Modify invoice details post-issuance — including account notes, due dates, PO numbers, customer notes, and terms — to keep records accurate.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.recurly.com/recurly-subscriptions/docs/compass-public-mcp-server”
Lago ships an official MCP server explicitly described as giving AI assistants 'direct access to Lago's billing data' (lago-docs-9, lago-probe-4), plus a documented OpenAPI schema explicitly positioned for 'exposing billing actions to an AI agent' (lago-docs-16), and a Dunning Agent example that reads a customer's invoices, payments and disputes (lago-docs-10) — directly matching the story of an agent querying billing state like delinquency and invoices. Missing for 10: explicit worked examples/queries for MRR aggregation and upcoming-renewal lookups via the MCP server, and independent (non-vendor) confirmation that these agent queries work in practice.
- [claimed-docs] “provides AI assistants (like Claude) with direct access to Lago’s billing data.”
- [claimed-docs] “The Dunning Agent reads the account first: twelve months of invoices and payments, the disputes, the provider status.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://getlago.com/docs/guide/ai-agents/mcp-server”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
Billing math — stories about billing math in this arenaBilling math
Stories about billing math in this arena
Billing cycles
ops userControl billing anchors and cycles — calendar vs anniversary billing, alignment across a customer's subscriptions, custom invoice dates
weight 2 · round to RecurlyEvidence only shows post-issuance invoice detail edits (due dates, PO numbers, terms) via recurly-docs-10, which loosely touches 'custom invoice dates' but doesn't address billing anchor/cycle configuration. No documentation covers calendar-vs-anniversary billing modes or aligning billing cycles across a customer's multiple subscriptions. Missing for 10: explicit billing anchor/cycle-start configuration, calendar vs anniversary billing toggle, cross-subscription date alignment tooling, and any independent/hands-on confirmation of these mechanics.
- [claimed-docs] “Modify invoice details post-issuance — including account notes, due dates, PO numbers, customer notes, and terms — to keep records accurate.”
Lagonone0/10The evidence pack shows general plan/subscription docs (yearly billing, upgrades/downgrades) but never addresses calendar vs anniversary billing anchors, cross-subscription date alignment, or custom invoice date overrides — the specific billing-math controls this story asks about.
- [claimed-docs] “Yearly: subscription fees are billed on a yearly basis and charges can be billed monthly or annually.”
- [claimed-docs] “In the “Overview” tab, click “Add a plan” on the right”
- [claimed-docs] “Customers have the flexibility to easily upgrade or downgrade their plan at any given moment.”
Proration
finance leadMid-cycle upgrades and downgrades are prorated with documented, auditable math — credits, partial periods, and invoice line items that reconcile to the penny
weight 3 · round to RecurlyRecurly's docs confirm mid-cycle changes are billed as prorated differences and that credits get their own separate, dedicated invoices, plus invoices can be amended post-issuance for record accuracy — supporting the core proration/credit reconciliation need. However, there's no documented breakdown of the proration math formula, no explicit audit trail feature, and no evidence (first-party or independent) that invoice reconciliation is verified to the penny in practice. Missing for 10: detailed proration calculation documentation, explicit audit-log/traceability feature, and independent verification of penny-accurate reconciliation.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly bills only the difference during an immediate change when the underlying plan is unchanged.”
- [claimed-docs] “Credit invoices give every credit its own distinct invoice — separate from charge invoices.”
- [claimed-docs] “Modify invoice details post-issuance — including account notes, due dates, PO numbers, customer notes, and terms — to keep records accurate.”
Lago documents that customers can upgrade/downgrade plans at any time (lago-docs-4) and has dedicated subscription/plan docs, implying some proration handling, but no evidence shows documented proration formulas, credit line-item detail, or penny-level invoice reconciliation. A community question about upgrade/downgrade tracking (lago-comm-3) goes unanswered in the evidence pack. Missing for 10: explicit proration algorithm documentation, sample invoice line items showing credits/partial periods, and any audit or reconciliation guarantee.
- [claimed-docs] “Customers have the flexibility to easily upgrade or downgrade their plan at any given moment.”
- [claimed-docs] “In the “Overview” tab, click “Add a plan” on the right”
- [community] “User describes building an internal billing tool after bad experiences with Recurly and ChargeBee for B2B/B2E usage-based billing, discounts…”
Dunning recovery — stories about dunning recovery in this arenaDunning recovery
Stories about dunning recovery in this arena
Card recovery
ops userExpiring or replaced cards update themselves — network account updater, backup payment methods, and hosted update-payment pages
weight 2 · round to RecurlyDocs confirm backup payment methods and general 'tools to proactively catch and resolve' involuntary churn from expired cards/failed payments, but the evidence pack never explicitly names or documents a network account updater feature or hosted update-payment pages. missing for 10: explicit documentation of account updater integration, explicit hosted update-payment page feature, and any hands-on confirmation these self-heal expiring cards.
- [claimed-docs] “Involuntary churn happens when customers are lost due to factors outside their intent — expired cards, bank changes, or failed payments. Rec…”
- [claimed-docs] “Let customers designate a backup payment method so service continues automatically if their primary payment fails.”
Dunning comms
ops userConfigure automated dunning sequences — branded emails, in-app banners, grace periods, and final-state rules like cancel vs unpaid
weight 2 · round to RecurlyDocs confirm dunning campaigns (up to 50 targeted campaigns) and proactive involuntary-churn tools like backup payment methods, and community evidence corroborates automated dunning emails as a differentiator vs competitors. However, there's no documentation of branded email customization, in-app banners, configurable grace periods, or final-state rules distinguishing cancel vs unpaid outcomes. missing for 10: branded email templates/customization, in-app banner support, grace period configuration, and cancel-vs-unpaid final-state rule settings.
- [claimed-docs] “merchants on Professional and Elite plans can create up to 50 targeted campaigns for different customer segments or plans”
- [claimed-docs] “Involuntary churn happens when customers are lost due to factors outside their intent — expired cards, bank changes, or failed payments. Rec…”
- [claimed-docs] “Let customers designate a backup payment method so service continues automatically if their primary payment fails.”
- [community] “Comparing Stripe and Recurly: It's faster to get going with Stripe (no merchant account required) but Recurly appears to offer more automate…”
- [community] “Chargify finally has statements. Recurly has a large emphasis on making sure your customers are retained -- so much so that they added their…”
Lago documents dunning-adjacent capabilities: a 'cash-collection' feature to spot overdue/unpaid invoices via filters (lago-docs-13) and a 'Dunning Agent' that reads invoices, payments, disputes, and provider status (lago-docs-10). However, there is no evidence of configurable branded emails, in-app banners, grace periods, or explicit cancel-vs-unpaid final-state rules. Missing for 10: branded email templates, in-app banner UI, grace period configuration, explicit final-state (cancel/unpaid) rule settings, and independent confirmation of the dunning workflow in practice.
- [claimed-docs] “Spot overdue, partially paid or unpaid invoices with filters to never lose track of what you’re owed.”
- [claimed-docs] “The Dunning Agent reads the account first: twelve months of invoices and payments, the disputes, the provider status.”
Smart retries
finance leadFailed renewal payments are retried automatically on an ML- or schedule-optimized cadence that measurably recovers involuntary churn
weight 3 · round to RecurlyRecurly documents dunning management and involuntary-churn tools like targeted campaigns and backup payment methods, and community commentary notes Recurly's automated retention/dunning emails as a differentiator, but there is no evidence of ML-optimized or schedule-optimized retry cadence logic, nor any quantified recovery-rate/churn-reduction metrics. missing for 10: documentation of the actual retry scheduling/ML logic behind payment retries, evidence of adaptive or optimized cadence (vs simple campaign rules), and third-party or first-party data on measurable involuntary churn recovery.
- [claimed-docs] “merchants on Professional and Elite plans can create up to 50 targeted campaigns for different customer segments or plans”
- [claimed-docs] “Involuntary churn happens when customers are lost due to factors outside their intent — expired cards, bank changes, or failed payments. Rec…”
- [claimed-docs] “Let customers designate a backup payment method so service continues automatically if their primary payment fails.”
- [community] “Comparing Stripe and Recurly: It's faster to get going with Stripe (no merchant account required) but Recurly appears to offer more automate…”
- [community] “Chargify finally has statements. Recurly has a large emphasis on making sure your customers are retained -- so much so that they added their…”
Lago documents cash-collection tooling to flag overdue/unpaid invoices and an AI 'Dunning Agent' that reads account history (invoices, payments, disputes, provider status), implying some automated dunning capability, but there is no documented ML- or schedule-optimized retry cadence, no explicit retry logic, and no metrics on churn recovery. Missing for 10: explicit description of automated retry scheduling/cadence optimization, evidence of ML-driven timing, and quantified recovery/churn-reduction outcomes.
- [claimed-docs] “The Dunning Agent reads the account first: twelve months of invoices and payments, the disputes, the provider status.”
- [claimed-docs] “Spot overdue, partially paid or unpaid invoices with filters to never lose track of what you’re owed.”
Entitlements — stories about entitlements in this arenaEntitlements
Stories about entitlements in this arena
Entitlement checks
developerFeatures and limits are modeled as entitlements attached to plans, and my application can check a customer's entitlements at runtime via API or SDK
weight 3 · round to RecurlyRecurly's docs explicitly describe an entitlements feature that can be checked in real time via the Recurly API across platforms, matching the core of the story. Missing for 10: detailed documentation of how entitlements are attached to specific plans, explicit SDK-level (not just API) entitlement-check examples, and independent/hands-on confirmation of this specific feature.
- [claimed-docs] “Entitlements can be applied across platforms (web, mobile, and app stores) and checked in real time via the Recurly API.”
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
Lago has a dedicated entitlements platform page combining billing and feature flags, confirming the concept exists, but the evidence pack contains no detail on how entitlements are attached to plans nor concrete API/SDK examples for runtime entitlement checks. missing for 10: API reference for entitlement endpoints, SDK code samples for checking a customer's entitlements at runtime, plan-to-entitlement modeling details.
- [claimed-docs] “Combine billing and feature flags to avoid bugs and dependencies, reduce complexity and lower and engineering overhead.”
Plan versioning
ops userChange pricing without breaking existing subscribers — versioned plans, grandfathering, and bulk migration tools for moving cohorts to new prices
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10Docs only describe changing an individual subscription's plan/price/add-ons (recurly-docs-1, recurly-docs-2); there is no mention of versioned plan definitions, grandfathering existing subscribers on old pricing, or bulk/cohort migration tooling for moving groups of subscribers to new pricing.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly gives you full control over how and when subscription changes take effect. Upgrade or downgrade a plan, adjust quantity or price, ad…”
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly bills only the difference during an immediate change when the underlying plan is unchanged.”
Docs show basic plan/subscription management (assign plan, upgrade/downgrade) but no explicit mention of plan versioning, grandfathering existing subscribers, or bulk cohort migration tools. missing for 10: explicit versioned-plan mechanism, grandfathering documentation, bulk/cohort migration tooling or API endpoints.
- [claimed-docs] “In the “Overview” tab, click “Add a plan” on the right”
- [claimed-docs] “Customers have the flexibility to easily upgrade or downgrade their plan at any given moment.”
- [claimed-docs] “Yearly: subscription fees are billed on a yearly basis and charges can be billed monthly or annually.”
Invoicing tax — stories about invoicing tax in this arenaInvoicing tax
Stories about invoicing tax in this arena
Invoices
ops userThe platform generates compliant invoices, credit notes, and receipts — sequential numbering, custom fields, memos — delivered to customers automatically
weight 2 · round to RecurlyDocs confirm invoice modification (notes, due dates, PO numbers, terms), separate credit invoices, and account/record-keeping features, implying automated invoice generation and delivery, but there is no explicit evidence of sequential/compliant numbering rules, custom field configuration on invoices, memo fields, or receipt generation/delivery workflows. missing for 10: explicit documentation of sequential invoice numbering compliance, custom fields on invoices, memo support, automatic receipt generation/delivery, and independent confirmation of these features working as described.
- [claimed-docs] “Credit invoices give every credit its own distinct invoice — separate from charge invoices.”
- [claimed-docs] “Modify invoice details post-issuance — including account notes, due dates, PO numbers, customer notes, and terms — to keep records accurate.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use it to populate your account, analyze performance and customer behavior, and keep records for compliance.”
Lago's docs confirm core invoicing functionality (downloadable invoices, customizable invoice templates) and cash-collection tracking of overdue invoices, showing invoicing is a first-class feature, but the evidence pack contains no mention of credit notes, receipts, sequential numbering, custom fields, or memos, nor confirmation of fully automated delivery to customers. missing for 10: credit note support, receipt generation, sequential invoice numbering, custom fields/memos on invoices, automatic delivery mechanism confirmation.
- [claimed-docs] “You can download invoices or use the invoice object to create your own invoice template.”
- [claimed-docs] “Spot overdue, partially paid or unpaid invoices with filters to never lose track of what you’re owed.”
Multi currency
finance leadBill customers in their local currency with per-currency price points and consolidated reporting in my home currency
weight 2 · round drawnRecurlynone0/10None of the evidence items mention multi-currency pricing, per-currency price points, or consolidated home-currency reporting — the pack covers subscription changes, usage billing, dunning, entitlements, invoices, and general community commentary, none of which address currency handling. This is a fair capability to expect from a billing platform, so absence of evidence yields 'none' rather than 'na'.
Lagonone0/10No evidence in the pack addresses multi-currency billing, per-currency price points, or consolidated home-currency reporting; docs cover plans, invoicing, dunning, and revenue analytics but never mention currency handling or FX consolidation. Missing for 10: any documentation of multi-currency price points, currency conversion/consolidation logic, and reporting rollups in a base currency.
Tax
finance leadSales tax, VAT, and GST are calculated on every invoice — natively or through a first-class tax integration — with the right registrations and rates
weight 2 · round drawnRecurlynone0/10The evidence pack contains no mention of tax calculation, VAT/GST handling, tax registrations, or any first-party or third-party tax integration (e.g., Avalara, TaxJar) — invoicing/credit/dunning features are covered but tax compliance is entirely absent. missing for 10: any documentation of sales tax/VAT/GST calculation, tax registration management, or tax engine integration.
Lagonone0/10No evidence pack item mentions tax calculation, VAT/GST/sales tax handling, tax registrations, tax rates, or integrations with tax engines (e.g., Avalara, Stripe Tax, TaxJar). The docs cover invoicing, plans, subscriptions, and dunning but never address tax compliance. Missing for 10: any mention of native tax calculation, tax rate/registration management, or a first-class tax-engine integration.
Migration portability — stories about migration portability in this arenaMigration portability
Stories about migration portability in this arena
Export
finance leadExport every subscription, invoice, and usage record — and port stored payment methods out to another provider — if I choose to leave
weight 2 · round to RecurlyRecurly docs mention a general 'Data Imports and Exports' feature for populating accounts and keeping compliance records, and a community comment specifically praises Recurly's gateway for supporting 'credit card portability' to another provider. However, there is no vendor documentation detailing bulk export of subscriptions, invoices, or usage records, nor an official description of the payment-method portability mechanism (it's only referenced anecdotally by a user, not documented by Recurly). Missing for 10: explicit docs on invoice/usage-record export formats and scope, official documentation of stored payment-method portability/migration tooling, and any independent verification that a full data export actually contains all subscription/invoice/usage history.
- [claimed-docs] “Use it to populate your account, analyze performance and customer behavior, and keep records for compliance.”
- [claimed-docs] “Import customer data to populate accounts and records across your Recurly account.”
- [community] “I am in the process of integrating Recurly into my existing business... I want all the subscription management features Recurly provides. Fu…”
Lago's API/OpenAPI schema and CSV export for analytics (lago-docs-15, lago-docs-16, lago-docs-1) mean a finance lead could theoretically pull subscription, invoice, and usage data out via API, and self-hosting (lago-docs-11) avoids lock-in of infrastructure. However, there is no documented bulk-export or migration tool, no explicit invoice/subscription/usage-record export workflow, and payment methods are held by external providers (Stripe etc.) rather than Lago itself, so 'porting stored payment methods' isn't addressed at all. Missing for 10: dedicated data-export/migration documentation, explicit payment-method portability mechanism, and any hands-on evidence of a successful migration off Lago.
- [claimed-docs] “Build custom dashboards per customer, filter any way you want and export to CSV.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [claimed-docs] “Every endpoint in this reference has a generated command.”
- [claimed-docs] “You can download invoices or use the invoice object to create your own invoice template.”
- [claimed-docs] “Docker is the easiest way to get started with the self-hosted version of Lago.”
Import
ops userMigrate live subscriptions in from a spreadsheet or a competing platform — including PCI-compliant card data transfer — without customers noticing
weight 3 · round to RecurlyRecurly's docs mention generic data import/export tools (recurly-docs-11, recurly-docs-15) and a community comment notes Recurly's gateway offers 'credit card portability' (recurly-comm-7), suggesting some support for migrating billing data and card credentials. However, there is no documentation of a structured migration workflow, PCI-compliant card tokenization/transfer process, or assurance that live subscriptions migrate without customer disruption. missing for 10: explicit migration/onboarding documentation, PCI-compliant card data transfer mechanics, evidence of seamless customer experience during migration.
- [claimed-docs] “Use it to populate your account, analyze performance and customer behavior, and keep records for compliance.”
- [claimed-docs] “Import customer data to populate accounts and records across your Recurly account.”
- [community] “I am in the process of integrating Recurly into my existing business... I want all the subscription management features Recurly provides. Fu…”
Lagonone0/10No evidence in the pack describes any migration tooling, bulk-import from spreadsheets, or PCI-compliant card-data transfer capability; the API/docs cover plan assignment and event ingestion but nothing about importing live subscriptions from another platform. Community comments even suggest Lago does not itself handle payment/PCI processing (lago-comm-8), reinforcing the absence of this capability.
- [community] “"If I still have to pay the processing fees, what's the advantage here? Having to maintain my own payments stack (and PCI compliance) sounds…”
Openness — open source, data portability, and self-hosting storiesOpenness
Open source, data portability, and self-hosting stories
ai-native userDo everything through the API that I can do in the UI
weight 2 · round to LagoDocs show broad API coverage of core subscription, invoicing, entitlements, and data import/export features (recurly-docs-1,8,10,11) alongside official client libraries (recurly-docs-13), suggesting most UI actions are API-accessible. However, there is no explicit statement of full UI/API parity, and some UI-only features like dunning campaign configuration (recurly-docs-5) aren't confirmed as API-manageable. Missing for 10: an explicit parity guarantee or comprehensive API reference mapping every UI action, and independent confirmation that all UI-configurable settings (e.g., dunning campaigns) are exposed via API.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly gives you full control over how and when subscription changes take effect. Upgrade or downgrade a plan, adjust quantity or price, ad…”
- [claimed-docs] “Entitlements can be applied across platforms (web, mobile, and app stores) and checked in real time via the Recurly API.”
- [claimed-docs] “Modify invoice details post-issuance — including account notes, due dates, PO numbers, customer notes, and terms — to keep records accurate.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use it to populate your account, analyze performance and customer behavior, and keep records for compliance.”
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
- [claimed-docs] “merchants on Professional and Elite plans can create up to 50 targeted campaigns for different customer segments or plans”
Lago's docs show an API-first design: every endpoint has a generated CLI/code sample (lago-docs-1), a full OpenAPI 3.1 schema is available (lago-docs-16, lago-probe-3), and specific UI actions like usage-charge updates are explicitly available via both API and no-code UI (lago-docs-14). This implies strong API/UI parity but there is no explicit vendor claim or independent audit confirming 100% parity across every UI workflow (e.g., dunning, revenue analytics dashboards). missing for 10: an explicit 'everything in the UI is available via API' statement, and independent/community confirmation of full parity across all UI features.
- [claimed-docs] “Every endpoint in this reference has a generated command.”
- [claimed-docs] “Both non-engineers and engineers can update usage charges via API or Lago’s no-code UI.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
ai-native userExport all of my data in open formats and leave
weight 3 · round to LagoRecurly documents a data-imports-and-exports feature for populating accounts and keeping records, and community mentions note credit-card portability, suggesting some data can be extracted, but there is no evidence of a comprehensive, open-format (CSV/JSON) full-account export or an official data-portability/exit process. missing for 10: explicit open-format export documentation, full account data export scope, and confirmation of easy migration/exit workflow.
- [claimed-docs] “Use it to populate your account, analyze performance and customer behavior, and keep records for compliance.”
- [claimed-docs] “Import customer data to populate accounts and records across your Recurly account.”
- [community] “I am in the process of integrating Recurly into my existing business... I want all the subscription management features Recurly provides. Fu…”
Lago's open-source/self-hosted nature (Docker deployment), open API (OpenAPI 3.1 schema, full REST reference), and CSV export of analytics/invoices give users real data-portability levers, and self-hosting means the underlying database is always in the user's own control. However there is no documented single 'export all account data' or account-closure/migration feature — only piecemeal exports (invoices, revenue analytics CSV, API access to individual objects). Missing for 10: a dedicated full-account data export/backup tool, explicit data-portability/migration documentation, and independent confirmation of a clean 'leave' workflow.
- [claimed-docs] “Docker is the easiest way to get started with the self-hosted version of Lago.”
- [claimed-docs] “You can download invoices or use the invoice object to create your own invoice template.”
- [claimed-docs] “Build custom dashboards per customer, filter any way you want and export to CSV.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
ai-native userRead the product's source under an open license
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)
Lago's docs and GitHub explicitly describe it as an open-source billing platform with a public source repository (getlago/lago), and the llms.txt probe confirms this framing, satisfying the 'read source under open license' story. Missing for 10: explicit citation of the specific license name/file (e.g., AGPL) and independent verification of license terms beyond the 'open-source' label.
ai-native userSelf-host the core product
weight 3 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)
Docs explicitly cover self-hosting via Docker with a dedicated guide, and community comments confirm self-hosting is a real, used option ('self-hosting is not an issue', 'a self-hosted option fits our culture'). Missing for 10: independent hands-on report of running the full self-hosted stack in production, and more detail on self-hosted feature parity/limitations vs cloud.
- [claimed-docs] “Docker is the easiest way to get started with the self-hosted version of Lago.”
- [community] “"This looks great... Stripe is awesome but a self-hosted option fits our culture and philosophy a lot better. Will give it a blast when i ge…”
- [community] “"Looks very interesting. We are small shop and self-hosting is not an issue. This neatly fits a requirement we've had for quite some time."”
Privacy posture — data-handling and privacy storiesPrivacy posture
Data-handling and privacy stories
ai-native userChoose where my data is stored (region/residency)
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10No evidence in the pack mentions data residency, regional storage options, or geographic data control for Recurly; this is a fair axis for a SaaS billing platform handling customer/payment data, but absence of evidence means 'none'.
Lago's self-hosted Docker deployment (lago-docs-11) implicitly lets a user control where their data resides by choosing their own infrastructure/region, but there is no explicit documentation of a region-selection feature, data-residency guarantees, or compliance certifications for the managed/cloud offering. missing for 10: explicit data-residency/region-selection feature docs, compliance certifications (e.g., GDPR/SOC2 region controls), managed-cloud region options.
- [claimed-docs] “Docker is the easiest way to get started with the self-hosted version of Lago.”
ai-native userControl data retention and deletion
weight 2 · round drawnRecurlynone0/10Evidence covers subscription management, billing, invoicing, imports/exports and an MCP docs connector, but nothing addresses data retention policies, deletion requests, or privacy/GDPR-style controls for AI-native users. missing for 10: data retention policy documentation, data deletion/right-to-erasure mechanisms, privacy compliance controls (GDPR/CCPA), evidence of user-initiated data deletion API or workflow.
Lagonone0/10No evidence in the pack addresses data retention policies, deletion of customer/billing data, or GDPR-style controls; Lago's docs focus on billing, invoicing, and AI agent features but never mention data retention/deletion controls. Missing for 10: documentation on data retention windows, customer data deletion/export mechanisms, and any privacy/GDPR compliance controls.
Revenue recognition — stories about revenue recognition in this arenaRevenue recognition
Stories about revenue recognition in this arena
Analytics
founderI get MRR, churn, cohort retention, and LTV analytics computed from the billing source of truth, not a bolted-on BI export
weight 2 · round drawnRecurlynone0/10The evidence pack covers subscription changes, dunning, entitlements, invoicing, and data import/export, but contains no mention of MRR, churn, cohort retention, or LTV analytics/reporting dashboards computed from billing data. Missing for 10: any documentation of built-in revenue/retention analytics, cohort or LTV reporting, or dashboards distinct from raw data export.
- [claimed-docs] “Use it to populate your account, analyze performance and customer behavior, and keep records for compliance.”
- [claimed-docs] “Import customer data to populate accounts and records across your Recurly account.”
Lagonone0/10Lago's docs mention a generic 'revenue-analytics' page with custom dashboards, filters, and CSV export (lago-docs-15), which is closer to the bolted-on BI export the story explicitly wants to avoid, not native MRR/churn/cohort-retention/LTV computation. No evidence pack item shows Lago computing these specific metrics natively from billing data, and a community question in lago-comm-3 explicitly asks whether Lago handles revenue recognition, left unanswered.
- [claimed-docs] “Build custom dashboards per customer, filter any way you want and export to CSV.”
- [community] “User describes building an internal billing tool after bad experiences with Recurly and ChargeBee for B2B/B2E usage-based billing, discounts…”
Gl sync
finance leadInvoices, payments, and recognition entries sync to my general ledger or ERP — QuickBooks, Xero, NetSuite — so the close doesn't need CSV surgery
weight 2 · round drawnRecurlynone0/10The evidence pack shows generic data import/export capability but no mention of specific GL/ERP integrations (QuickBooks, Xero, NetSuite) or revenue recognition sync. Missing for 10: any documentation of accounting/ERP connectors, revenue recognition automation, or close-process integration.
- [claimed-docs] “Use it to populate your account, analyze performance and customer behavior, and keep records for compliance.”
- [claimed-docs] “Import customer data to populate accounts and records across your Recurly account.”
Lagonone0/10The evidence pack shows Lago's API, webhooks, invoicing, and OpenAPI schema, but there is no mention of any native or partner integration with QuickBooks, Xero, or NetSuite, nor any revenue-recognition export/sync to a GL/ERP system. Finance-lead close automation is a fair axis for a billing platform, but nothing in the pack demonstrates it.
Revrec reports
finance leadRevenue is recognized on an ASC 606 / IFRS 15 basis — deferred revenue schedules and audit-ready recognition reports straight from billing data
weight 3 · round drawnRecurlynone0/10Evidence covers subscriptions, invoicing, dunning, entitlements, and data import/export for general compliance, but nothing addresses ASC 606/IFRS 15 deferred revenue schedules or audit-ready recognition reporting specifically. Absence of evidence for this applicable billing-platform capability means it can't be credited as delivered.
Lagonone0/10No evidence describes ASC 606/IFRS 15 deferred revenue schedules or audit-ready recognition reports; the closest material (revenue-analytics dashboards/CSV export) is generic reporting, not recognition accounting. A community comment even explicitly asks whether Lago handles revenue recognition, with no documented answer.
- [claimed-docs] “Build custom dashboards per customer, filter any way you want and export to CSV.”
- [community] “User describes building an internal billing tool after bad experiences with Recurly and ChargeBee for B2B/B2E usage-based billing, discounts…”
Subscription lifecycle — stories about subscription lifecycle in this arenaSubscription lifecycle
Stories about subscription lifecycle in this arena
Lifecycle api
developerCreate, update, pause, and cancel subscriptions through a documented API — the full lifecycle without touching a dashboard
weight 3 · round drawnDocs confirm a documented API for changing subscriptions (upgrade/downgrade, quantity/price, add-ons) with official client libraries in 7 languages, supporting programmatic subscription management. However, the evidence never explicitly documents 'create' or 'pause'/'cancel' endpoints—only mid-cycle change operations are detailed, so full lifecycle coverage is inferred rather than shown directly. Missing for 10: explicit documentation of subscription creation and cancellation/pause API calls, and any hands-on developer confirmation of the full lifecycle working end-to-end via API alone.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly gives you full control over how and when subscription changes take effect. Upgrade or downgrade a plan, adjust quantity or price, ad…”
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly bills only the difference during an immediate change when the underlying plan is unchanged.”
- [claimed-docs] “Official Client Libraries ### Ruby ... ### Node.js ... ### Python ... ### Dotnet ... ### Java ... ### PHP ... ### Go”
Lago's docs cover API-driven subscription creation (assign-plan), upgrades/downgrades, and a full OpenAPI 3.1 schema with generated commands per endpoint, supporting a documented API lifecycle. However, the evidence pack never explicitly documents pause or cancel subscription endpoints, and most subscription guides (e.g., assign-plan) describe dashboard clicks rather than pure API-only flows. Missing for 10: explicit pause/cancel endpoint documentation, and hands-on/independent confirmation that the entire lifecycle can be done via API without the dashboard.
- [claimed-docs] “Every endpoint in this reference has a generated command.”
- [claimed-docs] “In the “Overview” tab, click “Add a plan” on the right”
- [claimed-docs] “Customers have the flexibility to easily upgrade or downgrade their plan at any given moment.”
- [claimed-docs] “Use Lago's OpenAPI 3.1 schema to generate clients, inspect typed operations, or expose billing actions to an AI agent.”
- [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
Lifecycle events
developerEvery subscription state change — renewal, upgrade, payment failure, cancellation — emits a webhook or event my systems can act on reliably
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10The evidence pack contains no documentation of Recurly's webhook or event system for subscription lifecycle changes (renewal, upgrade, payment failure, cancellation). The only indirect mention is a community comment noting dunning emails work 'without needing to implement webhooks,' which implies webhooks exist as an option but provides no detail on reliability, event types, or delivery guarantees.
- [community] “Comparing Stripe and Recurly: It's faster to get going with Stripe (no merchant account required) but Recurly appears to offer more automate…”
Lago documents a webhook system with signing (HMAC) and explicitly treats 'webhook event types' as a versioned API surface, implying granular event types exist, but the evidence never enumerates specific subscription lifecycle events (renewal, upgrade, payment failure, cancellation) or demonstrates delivery reliability guarantees like retries/idempotency for webhooks specifically. missing for 10: explicit list/documentation of subscription lifecycle event types, evidence of webhook delivery reliability (retries, dead-letter, idempotency) beyond event-ingestion dedup which is a different feature.
- [claimed-docs] “The second is `HMAC`, which features a shorter payload header and no size restrictions.”
- [claimed-docs] “Clients should tolerate additive changes within v1, including new response fields, enum values, endpoints, optional request fields, and webh…”
Self serve
founderMy customers can upgrade, downgrade, or cancel themselves through a hosted portal or embeddable components, without a support ticket
weight 2 · round to RecurlyDocs confirm customers can change plans (upgrade/downgrade, add-ons, proration) via Recurly's subscription APIs, implying self-service capability, but no direct evidence of a hosted customer portal or embeddable UI components for self-cancel/upgrade, nor explicit mention of eliminating support tickets. missing for 10: explicit hosted portal documentation, embeddable component/widget evidence, self-service cancellation flow.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly gives you full control over how and when subscription changes take effect. Upgrade or downgrade a plan, adjust quantity or price, ad…”
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly bills only the difference during an immediate change when the underlying plan is unchanged.”
Lagonone0/10Evidence confirms upgrade/downgrade functionality exists (lago-docs-4, lago-docs-3) but only via API or Lago's internal admin UI — there is no mention anywhere in the pack of a customer-facing hosted portal or embeddable self-serve components that end customers could use directly. Community comments even question whether Lago handles full self-serve lifecycle (lago-comm-3), and nothing confirms a portal exists.
- [claimed-docs] “Customers have the flexibility to easily upgrade or downgrade their plan at any given moment.”
- [claimed-docs] “In the “Overview” tab, click “Add a plan” on the right”
- [community] “User describes building an internal billing tool after bad experiences with Recurly and ChargeBee for B2B/B2E usage-based billing, discounts…”
Trials promos
ops userRun free trials, coupons, and promotion codes with automatic conversion to paid — including trial-end notifications required by card-network rules
weight 2 · round drawnRecurlynone0/10The evidence pack contains no documentation of free trials, coupons/promotion codes, automatic trial-to-paid conversion, or card-network-mandated trial-end notifications. Related dunning/involuntary-churn features are covered, but none address trial or coupon lifecycle specifically. missing for 10: docs on free trial setup, coupon/promo code creation, automatic trial conversion, and trial-end notification compliance.
Lagonone0/10No evidence pack items mention free trials, coupons, promotion codes, automatic trial-to-paid conversion, or trial-end notifications required by card-network rules; evidence covers plans, subscriptions, invoicing, webhooks, and AI agents but not this trial/coupon lifecycle. missing for 10: docs on free trials, coupons/promo codes, automatic conversion to paid, and trial-end notification compliance.
Usage metering — stories about usage metering in this arenaUsage metering
Stories about usage metering in this arena
Event ingestion
developerStream high-volume usage events — API calls, tokens, compute-seconds — into a metering pipeline with idempotent ingestion and backdating support
weight 3 · round to LagoRecurly documents usage-based billing where usage-based add-ons are reported and billed at the end of a cycle (recurly-docs-3, recurly-docs-4), showing basic support for metering usage into billing, but there is no evidence of a high-volume streaming ingestion API, idempotency keys/idempotent ingestion, or explicit backdating support for usage events. Missing for 10: evidence of a streaming/bulk usage ingestion endpoint, documented idempotency guarantees for usage events, and backdating/timestamp-adjustment support for late-arriving usage records.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly's usage-based billing model lets you charge customers at the end of each billing cycle based on their actual consumption”
- [claimed-docs] “Measured units describe the usage tracked by a usage-based add-on and enable consistent reporting across multiple add-ons and plans.”
Lago's docs confirm idempotent event ingestion (dedup on repeated event IDs) and a usage-metering pipeline supporting API-driven event updates, which covers the core ingestion/idempotency claims. However, there is no explicit evidence of backdating support (e.g., specifying a past timestamp for events) or of high-volume streaming architecture/throughput guarantees for API calls, tokens, or compute-seconds use cases. missing for 10: explicit backdating/timestamp-override documentation, evidence of high-volume/streaming ingestion architecture or throughput benchmarks, independent verification of dedup behavior at scale.
- [claimed-docs] “Lago uses it for deduplication: if the same event arrives twice, it is billed once.”
- [claimed-docs] “Both non-engineers and engineers can update usage charges via API or Lago’s no-code UI.”
Pricing models
finance leadPrice with tiered, volume, graduated, per-unit, and hybrid subscription-plus-usage models — including credits, commitments, and overage — without custom code
weight 3 · round drawnRecurly's docs confirm usage-based billing with measured units and flexible subscription/add-on changes (recurly-docs-1, recurly-docs-3, recurly-docs-4), which supports basic per-unit and subscription-plus-usage hybrid billing without code. However, the evidence never explicitly documents tiered, volume, or graduated pricing structures, nor named 'commitment' or 'overage' billing mechanics as configurable models. missing for 10: explicit tiered/volume/graduated pricing tier configuration docs, explicit commitment and overage billing mechanics, independent confirmation these complex pricing combos work without custom code.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly gives you full control over how and when subscription changes take effect. Upgrade or downgrade a plan, adjust quantity or price, ad…”
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly's usage-based billing model lets you charge customers at the end of each billing cycle based on their actual consumption”
- [claimed-docs] “Measured units describe the usage tracked by a usage-based add-on and enable consistent reporting across multiple add-ons and plans.”
- [claimed-docs] “Credit invoices give every credit its own distinct invoice — separate from charge invoices.”
Lago's own positioning ('usage-based, subscription-based, and hybrid pricing models') and the plan-model/usage-metering docs confirm broad subscription+usage flexibility, and community reviews praise it for handling complex billing without custom code, but the evidence pack never explicitly documents tiered, volume, graduated, or per-unit charge models, nor credits, commitments, or overage handling as distinct configurable features. missing for 10: explicit docs on tiered/volume/graduated/per-unit charge model configuration, credits and commitment mechanics, overage billing rules, and independent confirmation these work without custom code.
- [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://getlago.com/llms.txt # Lago > Lago is the open-source billing platform for usage-based, subscription-ba…”
- [claimed-docs] “Yearly: subscription fees are billed on a yearly basis and charges can be billed monthly or annually.”
- [claimed-docs] “Both non-engineers and engineers can update usage charges via API or Lago’s no-code UI.”
- [claimed-docs] “Spot overdue, partially paid or unpaid invoices with filters to never lose track of what you’re owed.”
- [community] “"We decided to use Lago with our SaaS. Billing is super complicated and Lago handles everything we need out of the box. Building this stuff …”
- [community] “"Lago is awesome. We'll likely use Lago at my startup (metlo) when we implement full self-serve usage-based billing."”
Usage visibility
ops userCustomers and my team can see current-cycle usage and accrued cost in real time, with thresholds and alerts before an invoice surprises anyone
weight 2 · round to LagoRecurlynone0/10Recurly's docs mention usage-based billing that charges at the end of the billing cycle and 'measured units' for reporting, but there is no evidence of real-time current-cycle usage/cost dashboards, customer-facing usage views, or threshold/alert mechanisms to warn before an invoice is generated.
- [claimed-docs] “Recurly's usage-based billing model lets you charge customers at the end of each billing cycle based on their actual consumption”
- [claimed-docs] “Measured units describe the usage tracked by a usage-based add-on and enable consistent reporting across multiple add-ons and plans.”
Lago documents usage-metering and customer-facing analytics dashboards (lago-docs-14, lago-docs-15) and webhooks for event notifications (lago-docs-7), which could support real-time usage visibility, but there is no explicit documentation of configurable usage thresholds or proactive alerting before invoice generation. missing for 10: explicit threshold/alert configuration feature, evidence of real-time cost accrual view distinct from dashboards, confirmation that customers (not just ops) see live usage/cost.
- [claimed-docs] “Both non-engineers and engineers can update usage charges via API or Lago’s no-code UI.”
- [claimed-docs] “Build custom dashboards per customer, filter any way you want and export to CSV.”
- [claimed-docs] “The second is `HMAC`, which features a shorter payload header and no size restrictions.”
Not comparable on these axes
ai-native userVersion, review, and roll back my automations
weight 1 · not comparableRecurlynone0/10No evidence of version control, review workflows, or rollback for automations/workflows in Recurly; the docs cover subscription/billing config changes, dunning campaigns, and an MCP server for documentation access, but none describe versioning, audit/review, or rollback of automations themselves.
ai-native userPrevent my data from being used to train AI models
weight 3 · not comparableRecurlyn/aRecurly is a subscription billing/payments platform, not an AI model or AI product that trains on user data; the axis of preventing data use for AI training does not apply to its category.
Lagonone0/10Lago is a billing platform; evidence covers billing, invoicing, self-hosting, and AI agent integrations (MCP server, dunning agent) but nowhere addresses data-use-for-AI-training opt-outs or privacy controls over model training. Missing for 10: any privacy policy statement, opt-out mechanism, or data-training exclusion clause.
ai-native userOpt out of telemetry and usage tracking
weight 2 · not comparableRecurlyn/aRecurly is a subscription billing platform, not an AI agent/tool whose telemetry or usage-tracking opt-out would be a meaningful axis for AI-native users; this consumer-privacy-style story doesn't map to its product category.
Lagonone0/10No evidence in the pack addresses telemetry, usage tracking, or opt-out settings for Lago itself (self-hosted or cloud). The docs cover billing features, AI agents, and self-hosting setup, but nothing about product analytics/telemetry collection or a way to disable it. Missing for 10: any mention of telemetry collection, an opt-out flag/config, or privacy documentation addressing data sent back to Lago.