Visual Framework

Embedded Finance Decision Tree

Which program model fits your platform? Walk through the key decision points — volume, product requirements, compliance capacity, and economics needs — to identify the right architecture before you select a vendor.

Q1: What is your current (or projected 12-month) monthly payment processing volume?

Under $3M / month

The economics argument for a direct bank relationship is not yet compelling. The operational overhead exceeds the benefit. → Continue to Q2

$3M+ / month

The annual economics gap between BaaS and direct is likely $300K–$1.5M+. A direct relationship is worth serious evaluation. → Skip to Q4

↓ (Under $3M path)

Q2: Do you need card issuing, disbursements, or float economics in your program?

Yes — card issuing or disbursements

You need BaaS or a direct bank. Pure processor relationships won't cover these. → Continue to Q3

No — inbound payments only

PayFac or Processor

You need a payment processor — Stripe, a PayFac arrangement, or a direct processor relationship. BaaS infrastructure is more than you need at this stage. Start with interchange-plus pricing, not flat rate.

↓ (Card/disbursement needed)

Q3: Do you have an internal BSA/AML compliance program and a dedicated compliance operator?

Yes — compliance program exists

BaaS — with migration plan

BaaS is the right starting point. You can launch in 60–120 days. Design the migration trigger now — the volume or product requirement at which you move to a direct bank relationship — before you're locked in.

No — compliance program not yet built

BaaS — compliance build required

You need BaaS and you need to build the compliance program before your sponsor bank onboarding conversation. Most banks require a written, board-approved BSA/AML program before approving your program.

↓ ($3M+ path from Q1)

Q4: Do you currently have a BaaS relationship? If so, what is your annual economics gap?

Yes — on BaaS, gap is meaningful

The migration from BaaS to direct is your highest-ROI project. → Continue to Q5

No — building fresh at $3M+ volume

Direct Sponsor Bank

At $3M+ projected volume, building directly on a sponsor bank relationship is the correct architecture. The 6–12 month bank onboarding timeline is worth it — you avoid BaaS economics from day one.

↓ (BaaS migration path)

Q5: Was your BaaS integration designed with a migration abstraction layer?

Yes — abstraction layer exists

Direct Bank — 6–9 month migration

You have a clean migration path. Start sponsor bank conversations now — the onboarding takes 6–12 months and can run in parallel with your BaaS program. Build the compliance infrastructure first.

No — tightly coupled to BaaS APIs

Direct Bank — 12–18 month migration

Migration is still worth it at your economics gap — but it requires re-architecture. Start the compliance program and bank conversations while building the abstraction layer. Plan for 12–18 months total.

Every program has context the tree can't capture — customer segment risk, product requirements, bank appetite, and existing contract terms. The tree identifies the likely direction. The architecture conversation determines the specific path.