Finix vs Tilled

Agent access

1. ai-native userPoint an agent at llms.txt or agent-oriented docs

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix✓fullprobed9/10

   Finix has a confirmed llms.txt endpoint returning HTTP 200 with a description of the docs, plus documented agent-oriented resources including an official MCP server for AI agents to query the API. This directly satisfies the story of pointing an agent at llms.txt or agent-oriented docs. Missing for 10: independent/community corroboration of actual agent usage against llms.txt or MCP server in practice.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.finix.com/llms.txt # Finix Docs > Explore our documentation, guides, and APIs to start building yo…”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.finix.com/additional-resources/developers/mcp-server”
   • [claimed-docs] “Ask an AI agent questions about the Finix API to get accurate, current answers.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   No evidence of an llms.txt file, agent-oriented documentation, or any mention of AI agent-friendly docs; the evidence pack only shows standard developer documentation for payments/onboarding.

   ⚑ flag

2. ai-native userRun the product headlessly / in CI for automation

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   Finix is a payments infrastructure API with developer docs, sandbox environments, and an MCP server for querying API docs, but there is no evidence of a CLI, SDK automation tool, or headless mode designed for CI/automation pipelines. missing for 10: CLI tool, CI/CD integration examples, headless automation documentation, evidence of running Finix operations in scripted/automated pipelines.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The 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.)

   ⚑ flag

3. ai-native userConnect an agent via an official MCP server

   weight 3 · round to Finix
   Finix✓fullprobed7/10

   Finix documents an official MCP server allowing AI agents to query the Finix API for accurate answers, confirmed by both docs and a probe hit on the dedicated mcp-server page. Missing for 10: no independent/hands-on corroboration of the MCP server working, and no detail on setup, transport, or tool coverage beyond the brief description.

   • [claimed-docs] “Ask an AI agent questions about the Finix API to get accurate, current answers.”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.finix.com/additional-resources/developers/mcp-server”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The 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.)

   ⚑ flag

4. ai-native userUse an official CLI

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   No evidence of an official CLI tool; Finix's docs cover APIs, Dashboard, and an MCP server but nothing about a command-line interface for developers.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The 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.)

   ⚑ flag

5. ai-native userDrive the product through a documented public API

   weight 3 · round to Finix
   Finix✓fullprobed8/10

   Finix provides extensive documented public APIs for onboarding, payouts, disputes, subscriptions, and webhooks, plus a sandbox environment and an llms.txt discovery file for AI agents, showing clear support for programmatic/API-driven use. missing for 10: independent third-party hands-on confirmation of API usability, and more detail on API completeness/versioning beyond docs listing.

   • [claimed-docs] “With Finix, you can easily onboard your sellers to start processing their payments and payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Finix's APIs to build your own custom onboarding experience for your sellers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks let you receive notifications programmatically when your API resources are created or updated.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Finix provides separate Sandbox and Live accounts, along with the corresponding API credentials to access the Finix API.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.finix.com/llms.txt # Finix Docs > Explore our documentation, guides, and APIs to start building yo…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed7/10

   Tilled documents a public API with API keys, a quick-start guide, sandbox/test environment, and webhooks for event-driven use, indicating the product can be driven programmatically (tilled-docs-1, tilled-docs-2, tilled-docs-3, tilled-docs-4). However, the evidence pack lacks a full API reference/spec, SDK details, or independent developer corroboration of building an integration end-to-end. Missing for 10: comprehensive API reference/OpenAPI docs, SDK examples, and third-party/hands-on confirmation of programmatic control.

   • [claimed-docs] “API keys are required to access API. To generate API keys through the Dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Check out everything Tilled has to offer and get a little test-happy in our sandbox environment.”
   • [claimed-docs] “To simulate a decline, pass-through the respective amount when Creating a Payment Intent”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks provide real-time notifications to your application about events occurring on platform.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

6. ai-native userIssue scoped/least-privilege API credentials for an agent

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   Finix docs mention separate Sandbox/Live API credentials but give no evidence of scoped or least-privilege credential issuance (e.g., role-based keys, permission scopes) for agent use cases; the MCP server doc is about querying API docs, not credential scoping.

   • [claimed-docs] “Finix provides separate Sandbox and Live accounts, along with the corresponding API credentials to access the Finix API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Ask an AI agent questions about the Finix API to get accurate, current answers.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   Evidence only shows basic API key generation for platform access; there is no mention of scoped, least-privilege, or role-restricted credentials suitable for delegating to an AI agent.

   • [claimed-docs] “API keys are required to access API. To generate API keys through the Dashboard”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

7. ai-native userBuild against official SDKs

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   The evidence pack repeatedly references Finix's APIs, dashboard, and an MCP server for AI agents to query documentation, but never mentions official SDKs (e.g., Python, Node, Java client libraries) for developers to build against. Missing for 10: any mention of official SDKs, supported languages, or SDK documentation/repos.

   • [claimed-docs] “With Finix, you can easily onboard your sellers to start processing their payments and payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Finix's APIs to build your own custom onboarding experience for your sellers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Ask an AI agent questions about the Finix API to get accurate, current answers.”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.finix.com/additional-resources/developers/mcp-server”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers API keys, sandbox testing, webhooks, merchant onboarding, and dashboard features, but contains no mention of official SDKs (e.g., language-specific libraries like Python, Node.js, Java) for developers to build against.

   ⚑ flag

8. ai-native userSubscribe to events via webhooks

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix✓fullclaimed7/10

   Finix has documented webhook support for programmatic notifications when API resources are created/updated, matching the core subscribe-to-events story. missing for 10: no detail on payload schema/signature verification, no independent/hands-on corroboration of webhook reliability, and no explicit AI-agent-specific webhook consumption examples.

   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks let you receive notifications programmatically when your API resources are created or updated.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed5/10

   Tilled documents webhooks that provide real-time event notifications, confirming basic webhook subscription support, but there is no evidence of event type filtering, subscription management API, signature verification, or retry/delivery configuration details. missing for 10: documented list of subscribable event types, webhook management/configuration API, signature verification details, independent/hands-on confirmation.

   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks provide real-time notifications to your application about events occurring on platform.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Agentic features

1. ai-native userSet up automations that run autonomously in the background

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   The 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.)

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The 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.)

   ⚑ flag

2. ai-native userOperate the product with natural-language commands

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialprobed5/10

   Finix documents an official MCP server that lets an AI agent 'ask questions about the Finix API to get accurate, current answers' (finix-docs-21, finix-probe-2), showing some agentic/natural-language interface exists, but the evidence describes it as a Q&A/documentation lookup tool rather than a way to actually issue commands (e.g., create payouts, onboard sellers) via natural language. Missing for 10: evidence that natural-language commands can trigger real API actions (payouts, onboarding, disputes) rather than just answer questions, and any independent confirmation of this working end-to-end.

   • [claimed-docs] “Ask an AI agent questions about the Finix API to get accurate, current answers.”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.finix.com/additional-resources/developers/mcp-server”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The 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.)

   ⚑ flag

Api quality

1. ai-native userExplore an interactive API reference with runnable examples

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   Evidence shows Finix has documentation, sandbox/live environments, and an MCP server, but nothing describes an interactive API reference with runnable/executable examples (e.g., no mention of embedded code sandboxes, 'try it' consoles, or in-docs request execution). Missing for 10: evidence of an interactive/runnable API reference tool, any 'try it' console feature, or runnable code snippets in docs.

   • [claimed-docs] “Finix provides separate Sandbox and Live accounts, along with the corresponding API credentials to access the Finix API.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.finix.com/llms.txt # Finix Docs > Explore our documentation, guides, and APIs to start building yo…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   Evidence shows standard docs (quick-start, webhooks, testing, onboarding) but no mention of an interactive API reference or runnable code examples/sandbox console embedded in docs.

   ⚑ flag

2. ai-native userDownload a machine-readable API spec (OpenAPI or equivalent)

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   No evidence of a downloadable OpenAPI spec or machine-readable API schema; docs mention guides, an llms.txt file, and an MCP server, but nothing about an OpenAPI/Swagger spec download.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   No evidence pack item mentions an OpenAPI spec, Swagger file, or any downloadable machine-readable API specification; docs only describe API concepts and dashboard features.

   ⚑ flag

3. ai-native userTest against a sandbox environment without touching production data

   weight 1 · round to Finix
   Finix✓fullclaimed8/10

   Finix explicitly documents separate Sandbox and Live accounts with distinct API credentials, and a dedicated test environment that simulates live payments (test cards, fee schemas, payout schedules) without touching production data. missing for 10: independent/hands-on confirmation from a developer using the sandbox, and explicit detail on data isolation guarantees between sandbox and production.

   • [claimed-docs] “Finix provides separate Sandbox and Live accounts, along with the corresponding API credentials to access the Finix API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Finix’s test environment allows you to simulate a live payments experience. Test card payments, configure fees schemas, set payout schedules…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled✓fullclaimed7/10

   Tilled explicitly offers a sandbox environment for testing, including simulating declines and mock card-present/terminal testing, without touching production data. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on corroboration beyond vendor docs, and no explicit mention of automated/agentic test workflows or CI integration.

   • [claimed-docs] “Check out everything Tilled has to offer and get a little test-happy in our sandbox environment.”
   • [claimed-docs] “To simulate a decline, pass-through the respective amount when Creating a Payment Intent”
   • [claimed-docs] “A mock card present provider, which allows for terminal creation and testing”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

4. ai-native userRely on versioned APIs with a documented deprecation policy

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   No evidence pack item mentions API versioning scheme or a documented deprecation policy; docs cover product features, sandbox/live environments, webhooks, and an MCP server but nothing about version lifecycle or deprecation commitments.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   No evidence pack items mention API versioning, version numbers, or a deprecation policy for Tilled's API; documentation covers keys, webhooks, onboarding, and dashboard features but not lifecycle/versioning practices.

   ⚑ flag

1. ai-native userPerform bulk operations across many items at once

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   Finix's evidence covers payments/payouts/onboarding APIs and an MCP server for querying API docs, but there is no mention of bulk operations, batch endpoints, or multi-item processing capabilities for AI-native automation.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   Tilled's evidence pack covers payments API, onboarding, disputes, payouts, and webhooks, but there is no mention of bulk/batch operations across many items (e.g., bulk payment creation, bulk merchant updates, batch API endpoints for multiple resources at once). The only 'batch' reference concerns settlement batch closing for a single store's transactions, not bulk operations across many items.

   ⚑ flag

2. ai-native userDefine rules that trigger actions automatically on events

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   Finix offers webhooks to receive event notifications, but there is no evidence of a rules engine or automation layer that lets users define conditional triggers/actions on those events—webhooks only push data, requiring external logic to act on it.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   Tilled offers webhooks for event notifications (tilled-docs-4) but there is no evidence of a rules engine or conditional trigger system that lets users define automated actions based on those events.

   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks provide real-time notifications to your application about events occurring on platform.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userSchedule recurring jobs or workflows

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed4/10

   Finix documents recurring billing via Subscriptions and configurable payout schedules in its test environment, which are forms of recurring financial jobs, but there is no evidence of a general-purpose workflow/automation scheduler, cron-like triggers, or AI-agent-driven recurring task orchestration beyond these payment-specific features. Missing for 10: generic recurring workflow/automation engine, scheduling API beyond payouts/subscriptions, AI-agent orchestration of recurring tasks.

   • [claimed-docs] “Bill your customers and buyers using Finix's Subscriptions.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Finix’s test environment allows you to simulate a live payments experience. Test card payments, configure fees schemas, set payout schedules…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Payouts to send funds directly to a recipient's bank account or card in real-time.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The 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.)

   ⚑ flag

Embedded components

1. developerSeller-facing surfaces are embeddable — white-label components or APIs for balances, payouts, and transaction history that live inside my product under my brand

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix~partialclaimed6/10

   Finix documents APIs to build custom onboarding, payout, and dispute experiences under the platform's own brand (finix-docs-9, finix-docs-10, finix-docs-12, finix-docs-17) plus dashboard-based reporting (finix-docs-24), suggesting sellers' financial data/actions can be surfaced via API in a host product. However, there is no explicit mention of pre-built white-label UI components/widgets (e.g., embeddable balance or transaction-history widgets) — only APIs and Finix's own hosted Dashboard/forms are described. missing for 10: explicit embeddable/white-label UI component library for balances/transaction history, evidence of branding customization on hosted components, independent confirmation of embedding experience.

   • [claimed-docs] “With Finix, you can easily onboard your sellers to start processing their payments and payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Finix's APIs to build your own custom onboarding experience for your sellers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Monitor and act on Disputes through the Finix Dashboard or API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “From transactions to disputes and fees, more than 10 report types are automated and available in your personal dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Save time onboarding sellers by using our Onboarding Forms.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed6/10

   Tilled explicitly offers white-labeling of API, onboarding, and reporting console under a partner's own domain, and documents building custom UIs on top of its API (payouts, disputes, subscriptions data are accessible via Dashboard/API). This supports embeddable seller-facing surfaces but the evidence doesn't detail specific pre-built components for balances/transaction history or give independent proof of embedding fidelity. Missing for 10: dedicated embeddable balance/transaction-history widget docs, explicit component-level white-label UI examples, and independent/hands-on confirmation of the white-label experience.

   • [claimed-docs] “Enterprise partners have the ability to host their API, merchant onboarding, and reporting console experiences on a domain that reflects the…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Customize and build your own UI”
   • [claimed-docs] “To view a merchant’s payout speed in the Dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Merchants can manage disputes through the Dashboard.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Merchants and ISVs can now view and manage all of their subscriptions within their Dashboard.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Omnichannel

1. founder with offline sellersIn-person works on the same stack — terminals or tap-to-pay SDKs that settle into the same seller balances and reporting as online payments

   weight 2 · round to Tilled
   Finix—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers Finix's online payments, payouts, onboarding, disputes, and reporting APIs, but there is no mention of in-person/card-present capabilities such as terminals, tap-to-pay SDKs, or POS hardware integrations that settle into the same seller balances as online payments. Without any documentation of card-present/terminal support, this applicable capability is unevidenced.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed5/10

   Tilled docs mention card-present terminal creation/testing and batch closing so in-person transactions settle at shift end, implying integration with the same merchant account, but there's no explicit tap-to-pay SDK or documentation showing unified balance/reporting dashboards combining online and in-person payments. Missing for 10: tap-to-pay SDK details, explicit unified reporting/balance evidence combining online and card-present transactions, and independent corroboration of terminal hardware support.

   • [claimed-docs] “By closing a batch via API, a store can ensure their transactions are settled at time of close or end of shift”
   • [claimed-docs] “A mock card present provider, which allows for terminal creation and testing”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Seller reporting

1. ops userSellers can self-serve their money questions — per-seller statements, payout reconciliation reports, and exports that let their bookkeeper close the month without contacting me

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed4/10

   Finix documents a Payouts Dashboard and >10 automated report types (transactions, disputes, fees) plus seller-payout management tools, which could support reconciliation and reporting, but there's no explicit evidence of a seller-facing self-serve statement/export portal that sellers or their bookkeepers can access directly without going through the platform's ops team. Missing for 10: seller-facing self-serve statement/export UI, explicit reconciliation report for bookkeeper close-out, and any confirmation that sellers (not just the platform) can pull these reports themselves.

   • [claimed-docs] “Learn how to manage your payout activity using the Payouts Dashboard.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “From transactions to disputes and fees, more than 10 report types are automated and available in your personal dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “With Finix, you can easily onboard your sellers to start processing their payments and payouts.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed3/10

   Tilled's docs show merchants can view payout speed in a Dashboard (tilled-docs-10) and enterprise partners can white-label a 'reporting console' (tilled-docs-14), suggesting some self-serve payout visibility, but there is no evidence of per-seller statements, payout reconciliation reports, or bookkeeper-ready exports. missing for 10: per-seller statement generation, payout reconciliation report format/detail, CSV/export functionality for bookkeepers.

   • [claimed-docs] “To view a merchant’s payout speed in the Dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Enterprise partners have the ability to host their API, merchant onboarding, and reporting console experiences on a domain that reflects the…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Holds release

1. developerFunds can wait — hold seller funds in a balance until delivery or dispute windows pass, release on my schedule or trigger, with the escrow-like mechanics and their limits documented

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed5/10

   Finix documents controlling seller payouts on your own schedule via Dashboard or API and topping up/holding a platform balance before disbursing funds (finix-docs-12, finix-docs-13, finix-docs-15), which supports delaying seller payouts, and it has dispute-handling workflows (finix-docs-17, finix-docs-18). But there is no dedicated 'escrow' feature description — no documented hold-until-delivery mechanism, dispute-window-linked release triggers, or stated limits on how long funds can be held. Missing for 10: explicit escrow/hold-fund mechanics tied to delivery or dispute windows, documented release triggers/automation, and stated limits or edge cases of such holds.

   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Payouts to send funds directly to a recipient's bank account or card in real-time.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Top up your Finix balance with ACH or wire transfers before sending payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Monitor and act on Disputes through the Finix Dashboard or API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Upload evidence and submit a response to challenge a Dispute.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The 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.)

   ⚑ flag

Negative balances

1. finance leadRefunds and chargebacks that exceed a seller's balance are recoverable — automatic debits against future earnings or their bank account, with the liability order documented

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   Evidence covers disputes monitoring/response, payouts, and balance top-ups, but nothing describes automatic debiting of a seller's future earnings or bank account to recover chargeback/refund losses, nor any documented liability waterfall/order. missing for 10: documentation of automatic negative-balance recovery, debit reversal against future payouts or linked bank account, and liability order documentation.

   • [claimed-docs] “Monitor and act on Disputes through the Finix Dashboard or API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Upload evidence and submit a response to challenge a Dispute.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Payouts to send funds directly to a recipient's bank account or card in real-time.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Top up your Finix balance with ACH or wire transfers before sending payouts.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   Evidence only mentions that merchants can 'manage disputes' through the Dashboard, with no documentation of negative balance recovery, automatic debits against future earnings, bank account debits, or liability ordering for refunds/chargebacks exceeding balance.

   • [claimed-docs] “Merchants can manage disputes through the Dashboard.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Splits

1. developerSplit one charge among any set of parties — route funds to multiple sellers, take my cut, and reverse or adjust the split later, all as first-class API objects

   weight 3 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed5/10

   Finix's platform-payments docs show sellers can be onboarded and paid out, and platforms can 'monetize' payments and customize fees, which implies a split between seller and platform, but no evidence describes a first-class 'split' object spanning multiple sellers on one charge, nor mechanisms to reverse or adjust splits after the fact. missing for 10: explicit multi-party split/transfer API object, ability to route one charge to several sellers simultaneously, and reversal/adjustment of splits post-charge.

   • [claimed-docs] “With Finix, you can easily onboard your sellers to start processing their payments and payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Finix allows you to easily monetize your payments. We offer out of the box customizability, efficiency, and revenue growth tools.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Some of the fee customizations available are: International charges, Transaction volume discounts, Applying fees per payment method, Acceler…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers merchant onboarding, pricing templates, payouts, disputes, and webhooks, but nothing describes splitting a single charge across multiple parties, taking a platform cut, or reversing/adjusting such splits as API objects. Tilled's evidence centers on single-merchant payment processing and ISV platform fee/pricing templates, not multi-party charge splitting. Missing for 10: any mention of split payments, multi-party charge routing, application fees, or transfer/reversal objects for splits.

   • [claimed-docs] “Merchant pricing is managed using pricing templates, which serve as a repository of pricing information for a specific payment method.”
   • [claimed-docs] “To view a merchant’s payout speed in the Dashboard”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Dispute handling

1. ops userDisputes are managed per seller — chargebacks land against the right sub-merchant, evidence is submitted via API or dashboard, and outcomes flow back into seller balances automatically

   weight 3 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed5/10

   Finix documents general dispute management (monitor/act via Dashboard or API, upload evidence, submit response) and separately documents platform/seller-based architecture (onboarding sellers, seller payouts, sub-merchant balances), implying disputes could be tied to sub-merchants, but no docs explicitly confirm chargebacks are routed per-seller or that outcomes automatically adjust seller balances. missing for 10: explicit documentation of chargebacks landing against the correct sub-merchant, and automatic balance reconciliation after dispute resolution.

   • [claimed-docs] “Monitor and act on Disputes through the Finix Dashboard or API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Upload evidence and submit a response to challenge a Dispute.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “With Finix, you can easily onboard your sellers to start processing their payments and payouts.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed3/10

   Only one doc snippet confirms merchants can manage disputes via the Dashboard, implying per-merchant (sub-merchant) dispute handling, but there's no evidence of API-based evidence submission, explicit chargeback routing logic, or automatic reconciliation of outcomes into seller balances. missing for 10: API-based dispute evidence submission, explicit per-seller chargeback routing details, automatic balance reconciliation after dispute outcome.

   • [claimed-docs] “Merchants can manage disputes through the Dashboard.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Portfolio risk

1. ops userWatch risk across my seller portfolio — fraud and credit-risk signals per sub-merchant, alerts on anomalous sellers, and tools to pause payouts or offboard bad actors

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed4/10

   Finix documents dispute monitoring/response tools, payout dashboards, and automated reports covering transactions/disputes/fees, which partially support portfolio oversight and dispute handling. However there is no evidence of fraud or credit-risk scoring per sub-merchant, anomaly alerts on sellers, or explicit tools to pause payouts or offboard bad actors. missing for 10: fraud/credit-risk signal scoring per sub-merchant, anomaly detection alerts, explicit payout-pause/offboarding controls, independent validation of these risk tools.

   • [claimed-docs] “Monitor and act on Disputes through the Finix Dashboard or API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Upload evidence and submit a response to challenge a Dispute.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Dispute Management Tools”
   • [claimed-docs] “From transactions to disputes and fees, more than 10 report types are automated and available in your personal dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Learn how to manage your payout activity using the Payouts Dashboard.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers onboarding, payouts, disputes management, webhooks, and API testing, but contains no mention of fraud/credit-risk scoring per sub-merchant, anomaly alerts, or tools to pause payouts/offboard risky sellers.

   ⚑ flag

Cross border

1. finance leadInternational sellers get paid properly — local-currency payouts, documented FX handling, and settlement to local bank rails rather than expensive wires

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   Finix's documented payouts focus on US rails (ACH, wire, card, real-time bank payouts) and its only international-related mention is a fee customization for 'International charges' (finix-docs-25), not multi-currency payout support, FX handling, or local settlement rails. No evidence describes local-currency payouts to international sellers or settlement via local bank networks.

   • [claimed-docs] “Use Payouts to send funds directly to a recipient's bank account or card in real-time.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Top up your Finix balance with ACH or wire transfers before sending payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Some of the fee customizations available are: International charges, Transaction volume discounts, Applying fees per payment method, Acceler…”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers merchant onboarding, payouts speed settings, disputes, and dashboard features, but contains no mention of international sellers, multi-currency support, FX handling, or local bank rail settlement outside the US. Tilled appears to be a US-focused payment facilitator platform with no documented cross-border/local-currency payout capability.

   ⚑ flag

Payout schedules

1. ops userPayouts run on the schedule each seller needs — daily, weekly, monthly, or manual, plus instant payouts to cards or real-time rails where supported, configurable per seller

   weight 3 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed6/10

   Finix docs confirm real-time payouts to bank accounts or cards, payout links, top-up via ACH/wire, and a test environment where you can 'set payout schedules,' plus per-seller payout management via Dashboard or API. However, there's no explicit documentation of configurable daily/weekly/monthly/manual cadence options per seller or instant-payout-to-real-time-rails distinctions beyond cards. missing for 10: explicit per-seller schedule configuration UI/API (daily/weekly/monthly/manual options), documentation of real-time rail support beyond cards, and independent/hands-on confirmation of scheduling flexibility.

   • [claimed-docs] “Make a payout to a recipient's credit or debit card.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Payouts to send funds directly to a recipient's bank account or card in real-time.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Top up your Finix balance with ACH or wire transfers before sending payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Finix’s test environment allows you to simulate a live payments experience. Test card payments, configure fees schemas, set payout schedules…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed3/10

   Only one thin reference confirms that Tilled lets ops view a merchant's 'payout speed' in the Dashboard, implying some per-merchant payout timing configuration, but there is no documentation of specific schedule options (daily/weekly/monthly/manual) or instant payouts to cards/real-time rails. Missing for 10: explicit schedule types (daily/weekly/monthly/manual), instant payout to card support, real-time rails support, and confirmation that these are configurable per seller.

   • [claimed-docs] “To view a merchant’s payout speed in the Dashboard”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

1. ai-native userDo everything through the API that I can do in the UI

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed6/10

   Docs repeatedly note dual access via 'Dashboard or API' for payouts, seller payouts, disputes, and onboarding (finix-docs-6,7,8,12,17), indicating most core operations are API-accessible, and a Sandbox/Live environment plus webhooks support programmatic workflows (finix-docs-19,20). However, some UI-only surfaces like reporting/dashboard analytics and pricing/fee customization tools are described only in dashboard terms (finix-docs-22,24,25) without explicit API parity confirmation. Missing for 10: explicit API equivalents for dashboard reporting/analytics and fee-customization UI, and independent/hands-on confirmation that no UI action is API-inaccessible.

   • [claimed-docs] “Learn how to onboard your sellers with Finix's APIs.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Make a payout to a recipient's credit or debit card.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Learn how to create payout links on the Finix Dashboard and via API”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Monitor and act on Disputes through the Finix Dashboard or API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks let you receive notifications programmatically when your API resources are created or updated.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Finix provides separate Sandbox and Live accounts, along with the corresponding API credentials to access the Finix API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Dispute Management Tools”
   • [claimed-docs] “From transactions to disputes and fees, more than 10 report types are automated and available in your personal dashboard”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed4/10

   Tilled offers API access for core payment operations (payments, webhooks, batches, testing) but several UI-only functions like dispute management and payout speed viewing are explicitly documented as Dashboard-only, and merchant onboarding has a no-code Dashboard option alongside API options, suggesting UI and API are not fully at parity. missing for 10: evidence that disputes, payout configuration, and subscription management can be fully performed via API rather than only through the Dashboard, plus independent confirmation of full API/UI parity.

   • [claimed-docs] “To view a merchant’s payout speed in the Dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Merchants can manage disputes through the Dashboard.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Merchants and ISVs can now view and manage all of their subscriptions within their Dashboard.”
   • [claimed-docs] “No-code option for software platforms to onboard a merchant.”
   • [claimed-docs] “By closing a batch via API, a store can ensure their transactions are settled at time of close or end of shift”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userExport all of my data in open formats and leave

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   No evidence describes an ability to export all account/transaction data in open formats or facilitate leaving the platform; only dashboard reporting features are mentioned, not full data export/portability. Missing for 10: documented bulk data export, open format guarantees (CSV/JSON), or data portability/exit tooling.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   Tilled is a payments/merchant onboarding platform and the evidence pack contains no mention of bulk data export, open data formats, or data portability features for users to leave with their data. This is a plausible axis for a SaaS platform holding merchant/transaction data, but no evidence supports it.

   ⚑ flag

Graduation path

1. founderThere's a path up the stack — start on the managed model and graduate toward registered payment facilitation with more economics and control, without replatforming

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   Evidence shows Finix's platform-payments features (seller onboarding, payouts, monetization, disputes) but nowhere describes a staged path from a managed/PayFac-as-a-service model to full registered payment facilitation, nor any assurance that such a transition avoids replatforming. This specific payfac-liability graduation story is unaddressed in the pack.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers Tilled's managed PayFac features (onboarding, pricing templates, webhooks, dashboards, white-labeling) but contains no mention of a graduation path toward registered payment facilitation, economics changes, or control transitions without replatforming. Missing for 10: any documentation of a registered-PayFac upgrade path, economics/revenue-share changes at that tier, or migration mechanics that avoid replatforming.

   ⚑ flag

Responsibility split

1. ops userThe responsibility split is explicit — who owns KYC/AML, card-network compliance, fraud losses, and seller misconduct between me and the provider, in the docs rather than the contract's fine print

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   Evidence pack shows only feature-level docs (onboarding, payouts, disputes, tokenization) with no explicit documentation splitting liability for KYC/AML, card-network compliance, fraud losses, or seller misconduct between Finix and the platform/ops user. Community items are unrelated commentary about branding/positioning, not liability allocation.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   The evidence pack contains only integration, onboarding, testing, and dashboard feature docs; none of it addresses an explicit documented split of liability for KYC/AML, card-network compliance, fraud losses, or seller misconduct between Tilled and the platform.

   ⚑ flag

Tax forms

1. finance leadSeller tax reporting is handled — 1099-K thresholds tracked, forms generated, delivered, and filed, with the data corrections workflow documented

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack mentions 1099-K thresholds, tax form generation/filing, delivery to sellers, or any data-correction workflow for tax reporting; coverage is limited to payouts, onboarding, disputes, and reporting on transactions/fees.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   No evidence anywhere in the pack mentions 1099-K threshold tracking, tax form generation, delivery, filing, or a data-corrections workflow; the pack covers onboarding, payments, payouts, disputes, and dashboards but is silent on tax reporting entirely.

   ⚑ flag

Agent money ops

1. ai-native userAn agent can work the money side — read balances and payouts, investigate a seller's missing payout, draft dispute evidence — against documented, agent-usable surfaces

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialprobed6/10

   Finix documents API/dashboard surfaces for reading payouts, diagnosing failed payouts, and uploading dispute evidence (finix-docs-7,12,13,16,17,18), and it ships an official MCP server so agents can query API documentation (finix-docs-21, finix-probe-2). However, the MCP server is explicitly for answering questions about the API, not for performing agent actions like reading live balances or drafting/submitting dispute evidence directly — that still requires building against the REST API. Missing for 10: evidence of an agent actually executing balance/payout reads or dispute-evidence actions via the MCP server or an agent SDK, and independent/hands-on confirmation of agent usability.

   • [claimed-docs] “Make a payout to a recipient's credit or debit card.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Payouts to send funds directly to a recipient's bank account or card in real-time.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Diagnose and resolve payouts that fail before funds reach the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Monitor and act on Disputes through the Finix Dashboard or API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Upload evidence and submit a response to challenge a Dispute.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Ask an AI agent questions about the Finix API to get accurate, current answers.”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.finix.com/additional-resources/developers/mcp-server”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed3/10

   Docs confirm a general API with keys and webhooks for real-time events, and payout speed/dispute management are documented, but they are explicitly described as Dashboard-based features rather than agent-callable API endpoints for reading balances, investigating payouts, or drafting dispute evidence. Missing for 10: explicit API endpoints/schemas for balances, payout investigation, and dispute evidence submission usable by an autonomous agent, plus any agent/automation-specific tooling or examples.

   • [claimed-docs] “To view a merchant’s payout speed in the Dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Merchants can manage disputes through the Dashboard.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks provide real-time notifications to your application about events occurring on platform.”
   • [claimed-docs] “API keys are required to access API. To generate API keys through the Dashboard”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Agent onboarding

1. ai-native userAn agent can run seller operations — create accounts, drive onboarding to completion, and answer requirements-due states through the API or an MCP surface with scoped credentials

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Finix~partialprobed4/10

   Finix has API-based seller onboarding (create accounts, onboarding forms, API onboarding flows) and an official MCP server for the docs/API, but the MCP server is documented as a Q&A assistant ('ask an AI agent questions about the Finix API') rather than an actionable surface for agents to create accounts, drive onboarding, or query/answer requirements-due states. No evidence of scoped credentials for agent-driven actions or of onboarding-status/requirements-due endpoints being exposed via MCP. missing for 10: evidence that the MCP server supports actionable operations (account creation, onboarding progression) rather than just Q&A, documentation of requirements-due/onboarding-status API endpoints, and evidence of scoped/agent-specific credentialing.

   • [claimed-docs] “Learn how to onboard your sellers with Finix's APIs.”
   • [claimed-docs] “With Finix, you can easily onboard your sellers to start processing their payments and payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Finix's APIs to build your own custom onboarding experience for your sellers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Ask an AI agent questions about the Finix API to get accurate, current answers.”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.finix.com/additional-resources/developers/mcp-server”
   • [claimed-docs] “Finix provides separate Sandbox and Live accounts, along with the corresponding API credentials to access the Finix API.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed4/10

   Tilled's docs show API-driven merchant onboarding (create, pre-fill, and edit applications in `created`/`started` status) and dashboard progress tracking of onboarding steps, which supports part of the 'agent drives onboarding' story. However, there is no evidence of an MCP surface, no mention of scoped/restricted API credentials for agent use, and no explicit handling of 'requirements-due' states via API. missing for 10: MCP server/tool surface, scoped credential model for agents, explicit requirements-due state API.

   • [claimed-docs] “No-code option for software platforms to onboard a merchant.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Merchant applications with the `created` or `started` status can be pre-filled and edited on behalf of the merchant.”
   • [claimed-docs] “ISVs can see their progress item by item - creating API keys, submitting a merchant application, collecting a first payment, and more - righ…”
   • [claimed-docs] “API keys are required to access API. To generate API keys through the Dashboard”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Agentic commerce

1. developerThe platform is ready for agent buyers — documented support for agent-initiated checkout on marketplace transactions (agentic-commerce protocols, delegated payment credentials) that works with split funds flows

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   No evidence of agent-initiated checkout support, agentic-commerce protocols, or delegated payment credentials tied to marketplace split-funds flows; docs only cover standard onboarding, payouts, disputes, and an MCP server for asking questions about the API, not enabling agent-driven purchases.

   • [claimed-docs] “Ask an AI agent questions about the Finix API to get accurate, current answers.”
   • [probe] “official MCP server documented at https://docs.finix.com/additional-resources/developers/mcp-server”
   • [claimed-docs] “With Finix, you can easily onboard your sellers to start processing their payments and payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   No evidence of agentic-commerce protocol support, delegated payment credentials, or agent-initiated checkout anywhere in the pack; documentation covers standard payment platform features (API keys, webhooks, merchant onboarding, payouts) with no mention of AI agent buyers or agent checkout flows.

   ⚑ flag

Funds custody

1. finance leadPlatform funds have a home — clarity on where in-flight and held funds sit, whether balances earn yield, and how money is segregated from the provider's own accounts

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers payouts, onboarding, disputes, and dashboard reporting, but contains no mention of where held/in-flight funds are custodied, whether balances earn yield, or how platform funds are segregated from Finix's own accounts — a standard and expected disclosure for a payments/platform-ledger product. missing for 10: any documentation of fund custody/segregation structure, statements on yield/interest on held balances, and disclosure of banking partner or FBO account arrangements.

   • [claimed-docs] “Top up your Finix balance with ACH or wire transfers before sending payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Payouts to send funds directly to a recipient's bank account or card in real-time.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   No evidence pack items address fund segregation, custody of in-flight/held balances, yield on balances, or safeguarding from provider's own accounts; documentation covers API keys, payouts speed, disputes, and onboarding only. missing for 10: any mention of fund segregation/custody model, held-balance yield policy, or safeguarding disclosures.

   ⚑ flag

Ledger visibility

1. finance leadThe platform's money is legible — balances by seller and by my own fee accounts, every movement traceable from charge through split to payout, reconcilable to the penny

   weight 3 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed6/10

   Finix provides fee/monetization tooling, a Payouts Dashboard, 10+ automated report types (transactions, disputes, fees), sandbox/live environments and webhooks for tracking resource state changes, which together support financial visibility and reconciliation workflows. However, there is no explicit documentation of a unified ledger view showing per-seller balances alongside platform fee-account balances, or a single traceable charge→split→payout audit trail guaranteed to reconcile to the penny. Missing for 10: dedicated seller-balance/fee-account balance dashboard, explicit charge-to-payout traceability/audit-trail documentation, penny-level reconciliation guarantees or tooling.

   • [claimed-docs] “Learn how to manage your payout activity using the Payouts Dashboard.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Top up your Finix balance with ACH or wire transfers before sending payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks let you receive notifications programmatically when your API resources are created or updated.”
   • [claimed-docs] “From transactions to disputes and fees, more than 10 report types are automated and available in your personal dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Some of the fee customizations available are: International charges, Transaction volume discounts, Applying fees per payment method, Acceler…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Finix’s test environment allows you to simulate a live payments experience. Test card payments, configure fees schemas, set payout schedules…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed4/10

   Docs show payout speed settings, merchant pricing templates, and dispute management, implying some money-tracking infrastructure, but there is no explicit documentation of per-seller balance views, platform fee account tracking, or charge-to-split-to-payout traceability/reconciliation. Missing for 10: explicit balance-by-seller/fee-account reporting, transaction-level traceability from charge through split to payout, and reconciliation tooling or statements.

   • [claimed-docs] “Merchant pricing is managed using pricing templates, which serve as a repository of pricing information for a specific payment method.”
   • [claimed-docs] “To view a merchant’s payout speed in the Dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Merchants can manage disputes through the Dashboard.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Recon exports

1. developerReconciliation is automatable — settlement and balance reports per seller and rolled up, delivered as files or APIs my finance stack consumes on schedule

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed5/10

   Finix docs mention automated dashboard reports (10+ report types covering transactions, disputes, fees) and webhooks for programmatic event notifications, plus seller payout management via API, which together support some reconciliation workflows. However, there is no explicit documentation of scheduled file delivery, per-seller vs rolled-up settlement/balance report APIs, or a dedicated reconciliation/reporting API for finance-stack consumption. Missing for 10: explicit scheduled report export (files/API), per-seller vs aggregate balance reconciliation endpoints, and confirmation of finance-stack integration patterns.

   • [claimed-docs] “From transactions to disputes and fees, more than 10 report types are automated and available in your personal dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks let you receive notifications programmatically when your API resources are created or updated.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Monitor and act on Disputes through the Finix Dashboard or API.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed3/10

   Evidence shows settlement-related building blocks (batch closing/settlement per docs-5, payout visibility per docs-10, webhooks for event notifications per docs-4, and a hosted reporting console per docs-14) but nothing documents automated per-seller and rolled-up reconciliation reports, scheduled delivery, or finance-stack-consumable file/API exports. missing for 10: explicit reconciliation/settlement report generation, per-seller vs rolled-up aggregation, scheduled file exports or dedicated reporting API endpoints for finance systems.

   • [claimed-docs] “By closing a batch via API, a store can ensure their transactions are settled at time of close or end of shift”
   • [claimed-docs] “To view a merchant’s payout speed in the Dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Webhooks provide real-time notifications to your application about events occurring on platform.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Enterprise partners have the ability to host their API, merchant onboarding, and reporting console experiences on a domain that reflects the…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Application fees

1. founderPayments are a revenue line — take an application fee or markup on every transaction, set per-seller pricing, and see my payments revenue reported distinctly from processing costs

   weight 3 · round to Finix
   Finix✓fullclaimed8/10

   Finix explicitly documents platform monetization: per-seller fee customization (international charges, volume discounts, per-method fees), a dedicated 'Monetizing Payments' guide, and dashboard reporting that separates transactions, disputes, and fees across 10+ automated report types. This directly supports application fees/markup, per-seller pricing, and distinct revenue reporting. Missing for 10: no independent/hands-on verification of the revenue-vs-cost reporting split or real-world confirmation that markup fees appear as distinct line items in the dashboard.

   • [claimed-docs] “Finix allows you to easily monetize your payments. We offer out of the box customizability, efficiency, and revenue growth tools.”
   • [claimed-docs] “From transactions to disputes and fees, more than 10 report types are automated and available in your personal dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Some of the fee customizations available are: International charges, Transaction volume discounts, Applying fees per payment method, Acceler…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Finix’s test environment allows you to simulate a live payments experience. Test card payments, configure fees schemas, set payout schedules…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Dispute Management Tools”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed4/10

   Tilled documents per-seller pricing via merchant pricing templates (tilled-docs-9), which supports setting per-seller pricing, but there is no evidence of an application-fee/markup mechanism on transactions or of a dashboard/report that separates platform revenue from underlying processing costs. Missing for 10: explicit application fee or markup configuration per transaction, and a revenue-vs-processing-cost reporting view.

   • [claimed-docs] “Merchant pricing is managed using pricing templates, which serve as a repository of pricing information for a specific payment method.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Buy rates

1. finance leadI control the economics — a documented buy rate from the provider and freedom to set the sell rate my sellers see, with interchange-level cost visibility to manage the spread

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed5/10

   Finix documents platform monetization tools — fee customization (international charges, volume discounts, per-payment-method fees), configurable fee schemas in test/sandbox, and dashboard reports covering transactions, disputes, and fees — which supports setting a sell rate and viewing cost data. However there is no explicit documentation of a 'buy rate' contract from Finix itself or interchange-level cost breakdowns for spread management. Missing for 10: documented buy rate/cost-plus pricing terms, interchange-level line-item visibility, and independent confirmation of spread transparency.

   • [claimed-docs] “Finix allows you to easily monetize your payments. We offer out of the box customizability, efficiency, and revenue growth tools.”
   • [claimed-docs] “From transactions to disputes and fees, more than 10 report types are automated and available in your personal dashboard”
   • [claimed-docs] “Some of the fee customizations available are: International charges, Transaction volume discounts, Applying fees per payment method, Acceler…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Finix’s test environment allows you to simulate a live payments experience. Test card payments, configure fees schemas, set payout schedules…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed4/10

   Tilled's docs mention merchant pricing templates that let platforms set pricing per payment method, implying sell-rate control (tilled-docs-9), but there is no documented buy rate from Tilled or interchange-level cost visibility described anywhere in the evidence pack. missing for 10: explicit buy rate disclosure, interchange-level cost breakdown/visibility tools, and spread-management reporting.

   • [claimed-docs] “Merchant pricing is managed using pricing templates, which serve as a repository of pricing information for a specific payment method.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

1. ai-native userChoose where my data is stored (region/residency)

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   No evidence anywhere in the pack of data residency/region selection controls, storage location options, or compliance-region certifications; Finix's documentation is entirely about payments/payouts/onboarding functionality with no mention of data residency choices.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack mentions data residency, region selection, or geographic storage controls for Tilled's platform.

   ⚑ flag

Global coverage

1. founderSellers can join from where they are — supported onboarding countries, local payment methods, and local-currency settlement documented as a coverage map, not discovered ticket by ticket

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Finix—none0/10

   Evidence covers merchant onboarding mechanics (forms, APIs) but there is no documented coverage map of supported onboarding countries, local payment methods, or local-currency settlement — nothing resembling a country/currency/payment-method matrix appears anywhere in the pack.

   ⚑ flag

   Tilled—none0/10

   No evidence pack item documents a coverage map of supported onboarding countries, local payment methods, or local-currency settlement; all citations relate to API/dashboard mechanics, merchant onboarding flow, and product journal updates rather than geographic/currency coverage. missing for 10: supported-country list, local payment method coverage, local-currency settlement documentation.

   ⚑ flag

Onboarding api

1. developerOnboard a seller through the API — KYB and KYC, bank account linking, and terms acceptance — with hosted flows and embeddable components when I don't want to build the forms

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Finix~partialclaimed6/10

   Finix docs clearly describe API-based seller onboarding (finix-docs-6, finix-docs-9, finix-docs-10) and hosted 'Onboarding Forms' to save developers from building UI (finix-docs-5), plus general merchant onboarding guidance (finix-docs-4). However, the evidence pack never explicitly details KYC/KYB data collection, bank account linking, or terms-of-service acceptance steps, nor confirms an embeddable (non-hosted-redirect) component distinct from the hosted forms. Missing for 10: explicit KYC/KYB field documentation, bank-account-linking flow details, terms-acceptance step, and confirmation of embeddable UI components (vs. only hosted forms).

   • [claimed-docs] “If you are a platform, you can quickly onboard merchants to Finix.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Save time onboarding sellers by using our Onboarding Forms.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Learn how to onboard your sellers with Finix's APIs.”
   • [claimed-docs] “With Finix, you can easily onboard your sellers to start processing their payments and payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Finix's APIs to build your own custom onboarding experience for your sellers.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed6/10

   Tilled's docs show a merchant onboarding API with multiple integration paths — a no-code hosted option and a fully custom API/UI option — plus white-labeled hosted onboarding for enterprise partners, matching the 'hosted flows and embeddable components' ask. However, the evidence never explicitly details KYC/KYB data collection, bank account linking steps, or terms-of-service acceptance as part of that flow. Missing for 10: explicit KYC/KYB field/process documentation, bank account linking API details, and terms acceptance mechanism.

   • [claimed-docs] “No-code option for software platforms to onboard a merchant.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Merchant applications with the `created` or `started` status can be pre-filled and edited on behalf of the merchant.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Customize and build your own UI”
   • [claimed-docs] “Enterprise partners have the ability to host their API, merchant onboarding, and reporting console experiences on a domain that reflects the…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Progressive requirements

1. ops userOnboarding friction is tunable — collect the minimum to start selling and gather the rest before payout thresholds, with clear requirements-due states per seller

   weight 2 · round to Finix
   Finix~partialclaimed5/10

   Finix docs show onboarding forms and APIs for onboarding sellers, plus dashboard/API controls for seller payouts, implying some flexibility in what's collected before payout, but there's no explicit documentation of a tunable 'minimum to start selling then collect more before payout thresholds' workflow or explicit per-seller requirements-due states. missing for 10: explicit documentation of configurable onboarding requirement tiers, requirements-due state tracking per seller, and evidence of payout-threshold gating tied to progressive data collection.

   • [claimed-docs] “Save time onboarding sellers by using our Onboarding Forms.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Learn how to onboard your sellers with Finix's APIs.”
   • [claimed-docs] “With Finix, you can easily onboard your sellers to start processing their payments and payouts.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Use Finix's APIs to build your own custom onboarding experience for your sellers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can manage how sellers get paid out using the Finix Dashboard or our API.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Tilled~partialclaimed4/10

   Tilled docs show merchant applications have progressive statuses (created/started) that can be pre-filled and edited over time, and ISVs get an item-by-item onboarding progress view in the Dashboard, suggesting some staged onboarding exists. However there is no explicit evidence of a tunable minimum-to-sell model gated by payout thresholds or clearly defined 'requirements-due' states per seller like a formal verification/eligibility system. Missing for 10: explicit documentation of minimum data required to start accepting payments, payout-threshold-triggered requirement escalation, and named per-seller requirements-due states.

   • [claimed-docs] “Merchant applications with the `created` or `started` status can be pre-filled and edited on behalf of the merchant.”
   • [claimed-docs] “ISVs can see their progress item by item - creating API keys, submitting a merchant application, collecting a first payment, and more - righ…”
   • [claimed-docs] “To view a merchant’s payout speed in the Dashboard”

   proof ↗⚑ flag