Price the business you actually run
Begin with the expected transaction profile: volumes, average transaction values, markets, currencies, payment methods, and the split between domestic and cross-border activity. Ask each provider to price against the same assumptions.
Separate processing charges from the other fee categories in the proposal. Understand how interchange and scheme charges are treated, which costs are fixed, and which depend on the transaction. Include refunds, disputes, platform fees, minimum commitments, and any other applicable charges rather than assuming the headline rate covers them.
Follow the currency and settlement flows
Document where customers pay, which currency is collected, where conversion occurs, and which account receives settlement. Review whether the business needs to convert again to fund suppliers or payouts. This makes the operational implications of different provider arrangements easier to compare.
Keep fees and access to funds distinct in the assessment. A reserve or settlement delay is not the same as a processing charge, but the finance team still needs to understand its implications. Confirm schedules, cut-offs, conditions, and reporting directly with providers.
Include the work around the payment
Compare implementation, reporting, reconciliation, exception handling, and support needs. A proposal that looks attractive on processing fees may create a different workload for technology or finance. Record that effort separately rather than hiding uncertain estimates inside a precise-looking transaction rate.
The result should be a transparent comparison: known fees, assumptions, operational dependencies, and questions still to resolve. It gives your team a stronger basis for selection, negotiation, or a review of existing agreements.
Build one cost comparison using your own volumes, markets, methods, and currencies. Make every assumption and excluded fee visible.
Further reading: Provider perspective: Neoflow foreign exchange