Payment
wallee
UK / wider Europe Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Wallee Group AG · wallee.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Wallee is a payment platform from Wallee Group AG of Winterthur, scored strongest on recurring billing, where scores sit at 4 on named tokenization, a subscription engine, an on-file sales channel and debt collection, and on licence and account terms, also at 4, where four group entities are published with register numbers and the Swiss entity states FINMA SRO membership. It is weakest at checkout and SCA, scored 2 with no variation, with no public information on 3-D Secure, exemption handling, fraud screening or declined payments, and at sovereignty, where scores run 0 to 1 because data residency, ownership and subprocessor exposure are unknown on the vendor's own pages and the privacy notice authorises transfers of personal data to third parties within or outside the user's country. Pricing transparency spans 4 to 6: higher scores credited the published plan tiers and per-method rates, lower scores weighed the unpublished chargeback, refund, payout and conversion fees. Payment methods scores run 2 to 3 and settlement and reconciliation 3 to 4, in between.
Speaks for it
- Recurring billing scores sit at 4, on named tokenization, a subscription engine, an on-file sales channel and debt collection
- Pricing transparency scores range from 4 to 6, with tier prices and per-method rates published (BASIC EUR19.00 per month plus EUR0.20 per live transaction, BUSINESS EUR65.90 per month plus EUR0.12)
- Licence and account terms scores sit at 4, with four group entities published with register numbers and FINMA SRO membership stated for the Swiss entity
- A free trial is offered with no credit card required, plans cancel anytime, and failed charges carry no additional fee
- A documented API with SDKs in Ruby, C#, PHP and Java, webhooks and a system status link are published
Held against it
- Checkout and SCA scores sit at 2, with no public information on 3-D Secure, SCA exemptions, fraud screening or declined-payment handling
- Sovereignty scores range from 0 to 1, with data residency, ownership and subprocessor exposure unknown on the vendor's own pages and the privacy notice authorising transfers of personal data within or outside the user's country
- Local coverage beyond the six named methods is described only as "a huge list of local and international payment methods", with no country or currency per method and no public information on wallets or SEPA Direct Debit
- We found no public information on chargeback, refund, payout or currency conversion fees, and several card percentages are published only as approximations
- We found no public information on payout schedule, settlement currencies, safeguarding of merchant funds or licence type, and the privacy declaration may be amended unilaterally at any time
Best for
- You run subscription or card-on-file billing and want tokenization and a subscription engine from day one
- You want to compare costs from published plan prices before committing, and to trial with no credit card required
- You need a provider identified with published register numbers across Switzerland, Germany, Luxembourg and Lithuania
- You process over 50,000 EUR per month and want negotiated pricing rather than list rates
Avoid if
- You sell into many EU markets and must plan local payment methods country by country before launch
- Your authorisation rates depend on documented 3-D Secure and SCA exemption handling you can review in advance
- Your data-protection review requires a stated data residency and a subprocessor list, or limits transfers of personal data outside your country
- You must compute your full effective cost, including chargeback, payout and currency conversion fees, from public rates before signing
The scores
Payment methods & local coverage
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Which methods a European customer can actually pay with — cards and wallets, SEPA Direct Debit, and the local methods that decide conversion per country — judged on the named list per market rather than on a method count.
0 — Cards only, or a method list with no statement of which countries and currencies each one covers.
3 — Major cards and wallets plus one or two European methods, with local coverage stated vaguely ("many local methods") and no SEPA Direct Debit.
5 — Cards, Apple Pay and Google Pay, SEPA Direct Debit, and the main local methods for DACH and Benelux (iDEAL or Wero, Bancontact, Klarna or invoice) listed by name with the countries they serve.
8 — Broad EU coverage named per country — including methods such as BLIK, TWINT, Przelewy24, EPS and Wero — multi-currency acceptance with settlement currencies stated, and which methods support refunds and recurring charges documented per method.
10 — Coverage is documented as a matrix a merchant can plan against: every method with its countries, currencies, refund, partial-capture and recurring support, and the provider's own acquiring versus third-party routing stated per method.
The Finance Lead
The pricing page prices Visa, Mastercard, Maestro, American Express, direct debit and invoice by name, but beyond "a huge list of local and international payment methods" there is no named local-method list and no statement of which countries or currencies each method covers. I found no public information on SEPA Direct Debit or wallets such as Apple Pay and Google Pay. 2
The E-Commerce Lead
The pricing pages name and price Visa, Mastercard, Maestro, American Express, Direct Debit and Invoice, and everything beyond that is summed up as "a huge list of local and international payment methods". For the eight EU markets I sell into, no local method is named with the country or currency it serves, and I found no public information on wallets or on SEPA Direct Debit specifically — that is a count, not a list I can plan against. 2
The SaaS Founder
The pricing page names Visa, Mastercard, Maestro, American Express, Direct Debit and Invoice with rates, but the broader promise is only "a huge list of local and international payment methods" with no country or currency stated per method. We found no public information naming SEPA Direct Debit, wallets or the local methods per market, so I cannot plan conversion country by country from these pages. 2
The Payments Engineer
Cards are named and priced — Visa, Mastercard, Maestro, American Express — alongside Direct Debit and Invoice, but the rest of local coverage amounts to "a huge list of local and international payment methods" with no countries or currencies stated per method. We found no public information on SEPA Direct Debit or any wallet, so a European merchant cannot plan conversion from these pages. 2
The Compliance Officer
The pricing pages name Visa, Mastercard, Maestro, American Express, Direct Debit and Invoice, but local coverage appears only as "A huge list of local and international payment methods" with no countries or currencies stated per method. I found no public information naming wallets, SEPA Direct Debit specifically, or any individual local method such as iDEAL or Bancontact. 2
The Skeptic
Cards are priced per scheme — Visa EUR0.20 + 1.49%, Maestro EUR0.20 + 0.9% — alongside Direct Debit and Invoice at EUR0.20 + ca. 1.99%, while local coverage amounts to "a huge list of local and international payment methods" with no names attached. We found no public information on wallets, on SEPA Direct Debit specifically, or on which country and currency each method serves. 2
Checkout, SCA & fraud
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The path from basket to authorised payment under PSD2: hosted and embedded checkout options, 3-D Secure and SCA exemption handling, fraud screening, and what the provider documents about keeping legitimate payments from failing.
0 — A single redirect page with no statement on 3-D Secure, SCA or fraud screening.
3 — Hosted checkout with 3-D Secure 2 mentioned, fraud screening as an unexplained add-on, and no word on exemptions or declined-payment handling.
5 — Hosted and embedded checkout options, 3-D Secure 2 with SCA handled by the provider, configurable fraud rules, and the resulting PCI DSS scope for each integration type stated.
8 — SCA exemptions (low value, transaction risk analysis, merchant-initiated) applied and documented, fraud tooling with rules and risk scores exposed to the merchant, network tokens or account updater, and liability shift explained per flow.
10 — Authorisation is engineered and shown: exemption strategy documented, soft-decline retry handled, authorisation-rate reporting by method and issuer country, and a checkout the merchant can run in their own domain while staying at the lowest PCI scope.
The Finance Lead
Seamless payments without redirection, mobile SDKs, payment links and a terminal channel are published, but I found no public information on 3-D Secure, SCA exemption handling, fraud screening or declined-payment handling. PCI compliance appears only as a passing mention with no scope stated per integration. 2
The E-Commerce Lead
"Seamless Payments (no Redirection)" is exactly what I want — the customer stays on my domain — and tokenization and "Simple PCI Compliance" are named. But I found no public information on 3-D Secure, SCA exemptions, declined-payment handling or fraud screening anywhere in the captured pages, beyond a bare PCI DSS footer reference, so I cannot judge whether legitimate payments would be defended. 2 4
The SaaS Founder
Seamless payments without redirection, payment links, mobile SDKs and "Simple PCI Compliance" are shown, which is more than a bare redirect page. But we found no public information on 3-D Secure, SCA exemption handling or any fraud screening — the part that decides whether legitimate payments survive PSD2. 2 4
The Payments Engineer
Several integration shapes are visible — "Seamless Payments (no Redirection)", mobile SDKs, physical terminals, plus a "Simple PCI Compliance" product bullet and a PCI DSS footer mention — but we found no public information on 3-D Secure, SCA exemptions, or any fraud screening. Without an exemption story and a stated PCI scope per integration type, I cannot judge how many legitimate payments this checkout kills. 2 4
The Compliance Officer
"Seamless Payments (no Redirection)" and "Simple PCI Compliance" are the only checkout evidence captured, alongside a footer reference to PCI DSS. I found no public information on 3-D Secure, SCA or exemption handling, fraud screening, or how declined payments are treated, which is the compliance heart of this criterion. 2 4
The Skeptic
Seamless payments without redirection, mobile SDKs and "Simple PCI Compliance" are the whole story, and we found no public information on 3-D Secure, SCA exemptions, fraud screening or declined-payment handling. An embedded checkout is offered, but nothing published explains the mechanics that decide whether a legitimate payment gets authorised. 2
Subscriptions & recurring payments
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Charging the same customer again: card-on-file and merchant-initiated transactions, SEPA mandates, subscription logic and dunning — and whether the stored payment credentials can leave with the merchant.
0 — No stored payment methods; every charge needs the customer to pay again.
3 — Card-on-file tokens for repeat charges, but no SEPA mandate handling, no subscription logic, and failed-payment handling left entirely to the merchant.
5 — Stored cards and SEPA Direct Debit mandates, merchant-initiated transactions documented, and basic subscription plans with scheduled charges and failed-payment notifications.
8 — Subscription billing with trials, proration and plan changes, smart retries and dunning, card account updater, mandate management with pre-notification, and a documented process for exporting payment tokens to another provider.
10 — Recurring revenue is a first-class product: usage-based and invoice-based billing, dunning with measurable recovery, token migration in and out documented with a stated timeline and format, and recurring support stated for every local method that allows it.
The Finance Lead
Tokenization for one-click and recurring payments, a subscription engine, recurring payments and an on-file sales channel are all named products, but I found no public information on SEPA mandate handling, retry or dunning behaviour, or any process for exporting stored tokens to another provider. 2 4
The E-Commerce Lead
A Subscription Engine, "Tokenization for One Click or Recurring Payments", an on-file sales channel, recurring payments and Debt Collection are all named, which goes beyond bare card-on-file. Nothing documents SEPA mandate handling, scheduled charges, retries or dunning, and I found no public information on whether stored payment tokens can be exported to another provider. 2 4
The SaaS Founder
Tokenization for one-click and recurring payments, an on-file sales channel, a subscription engine and debt collection are all named, which is the right skeleton. We found no public information on SEPA mandate management, retries and dunning, proration or plan changes — and critically nothing on exporting the stored payment tokens, so I cannot tell whether my customer base could ever leave with me. 2 4
The Payments Engineer
Tokenization for one-click and recurring charges, an "On-file" sales channel, a subscription engine and a debt collection product are all named, which clears card-on-file basics with real subscription logic. We found no public information on SEPA mandate handling, scheduled-charge behaviour, retry or dunning mechanics, or any documented process for taking the stored payment tokens to another provider. 2 4
The Compliance Officer
Tokenization for one-click and recurring payments, a subscription engine, recurring payments and debt collection are all named as products, which takes this past bare card-on-file. I found no public information on SEPA mandate handling, merchant-initiated transaction rules, retry and dunning behaviour, or any process for exporting stored payment credentials to another provider. 2 4
The Skeptic
Tokenization for one-click and recurring payments, an "On-file" sales channel and a Subscription Engine are named products, and failed charges carry no additional fee — but a product name is not documentation. We found no public information on SEPA mandate handling, merchant-initiated transactions, dunning behaviour, or whether stored payment tokens can leave with the merchant. 2 4
Settlement, reconciliation & API
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting the money and knowing what it was: payout cadence and currencies, fee itemisation per transaction, reports that match a bank statement, and an API and webhooks a team can build finance processes on.
0 — Payouts on an unstated schedule, one net amount per payout, and no API or report beyond an on-screen list.
3 — A stated payout schedule and CSV exports, but fees netted invisibly into payouts and an API with thin documentation.
5 — Payout frequency and delay stated, per-transaction fee breakdown in reports, a documented REST API with webhooks and a test mode, and exports that link each payout to its transactions.
8 — Configurable payout schedules and settlement currencies, reconciliation reports that match bank lines, accounting integrations or exports named, a versioned API with idempotency and published rate limits, and a public status page with incident history.
10 — Finance can close the month from the provider's data: interchange and scheme fees itemised per transaction, automated reconciliation to the ledger, a deprecation policy for the API, and full historical data exportable after the contract ends.
The Finance Lead
Reconciliation, automated accounting, webhooks and a documented API with SDKs are published, but I found no public information on payout schedule or settlement currencies, and no per-transaction fee breakdown; the pricing model says the percentage is deducted by the acquirer, which leaves the acquiring side of every transaction un-itemised. 2 4
The E-Commerce Lead
Reconciliation, automated accounting, webhooks, SDKs in Ruby, C#, PHP and Java, and a system status link are all named on the captured pages. But I found no public information on payout frequency or settlement currencies, and no per-transaction fee breakdown or export tying payouts to transactions, so finance cannot be judged beyond the labels. 2 4
The SaaS Founder
A documented API with SDKs in Ruby, C#, PHP and Java, webhooks, a system status page and named reconciliation and automated accounting features give a team something to build on. We found no public information on payout frequency, settlement currencies or per-transaction fee itemisation — the things finance needs to close a month. 2 4
The Payments Engineer
The right nouns exist — a documented API with SDKs in Ruby, C#, PHP and Java, webhooks, a reconciliation feature, automated accounting, and a "System Status" link — but we found no public information on payout schedule or settlement currencies, fee itemisation against bank lines, or what makes an API safe to build finance processes on: versioning, idempotency, rate limits and a test mode. A status link is not the same as a page with incident history. 2 4
The Compliance Officer
Reconciliation, automated accounting, webhooks and a documented API with SDKs in Ruby, C#, PHP and Java are named, and a system status page is published. I found no public information on payout frequency and settlement currencies, per-transaction fee itemisation in reports, a test mode, or idempotency and rate limits. 2 4
The Skeptic
A documented API, SDKs in Ruby, C#, PHP and Java, webhooks, and reconciliation and automated accounting named as products are real building blocks — yet we found no public information on payout schedule, payout currencies, fee itemisation per transaction, or whether reports tie each payout to its transactions. A System Status link exists with no published evidence of incident history. 2 4
Licence, risk & account terms
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who holds the merchant's money under which licence, and what the contract lets the provider do on a bad day: freezes, reserves, termination, chargebacks. Scored on what the terms and the imprint state, not on reputation.
0 — No regulated entity named; terms allow freezing funds and terminating the account at any time with no notice, reason or timeline.
3 — A licence mentioned without the entity, supervisor or register number, and terms that permit reserves and holds with no stated limits.
5 — The regulated entity named with its supervisor and licence type, safeguarding of merchant funds stated, chargeback fees and dispute process published, and a notice period for ordinary termination.
8 — Entity, supervisor, register number and passporting stated per country; reserve and rolling-hold conditions defined with limits and release timelines; freeze and termination terms with reasons and a route to appeal; PCI DSS level and attestation published.
10 — The bad day is written down: every regulated entity in the chain named with register links, reserve calculation disclosed, funds release timelines after termination committed, a documented complaint route to the supervisor, and exit terms that include handing back payment tokens and transaction history.
The Finance Lead
The imprint publishes every group entity with register numbers and states SRO membership under FINMA supervision, but no licence type is given per entity and I found no public information on safeguarding of merchant funds, reserve or hold conditions with limits, chargeback fees, or a dispute and appeal process. "Cancel anytime" is the only termination term in evidence. 4 2 5
The E-Commerce Lead
Registered entities with register numbers are published for Switzerland, Germany, Lithuania and Luxembourg, the Swiss entity states it is subject to FINMA through SRO membership, and merchants can "Cancel anytime". But no licence type is stated, and I found no public information on safeguarding of merchant funds, reserves or holds, or on chargeback fees and dispute handling — while the notice says Wallee Group AG "may unilaterally amend the declaration at any time". 2 3 4
The SaaS Founder
The imprint names a chain of entities with register numbers — Winterthur CHE-287.965.343 under a FINMA-recognised SRO regime, Hamburg HRB 123024, Luxembourg RCS B200548, a Lithuanian company number — and the product page says cancel anytime. We found no public information on a licence type, safeguarding of merchant funds, chargeback fees, reserve or hold conditions, or termination timelines and appeal routes. 2 4 5
The Payments Engineer
The legal notice is unusually concrete: Wallee Group AG in Winterthur under commercial register number CHE-287.965.343, membership of a FINMA-recognised self-regulatory organisation, and sister entities in Hamburg, Vilnius and Luxembourg with their own registers, while pricing says "Cancel anytime". But we found no public information on a payment-services licence type, safeguarding of merchant funds, chargeback fees, a dispute process, or reserve and hold limits, and the privacy declaration may be amended unilaterally at any time. 2 4 5
The Compliance Officer
Wallee Group AG is identified with Zurich register number CHE-287.965.343 and states membership of a FINMA-recognised self-regulatory organisation, and the German, Lithuanian and Luxembourg entities are published with register numbers and management — but no licence type or responsible supervisor is stated for any of the EU entities, and SRO membership is not itself a licence. I found no public information on safeguarding of merchant funds, reserves and holds, chargeback fees or a dispute process; "Cancel anytime" on the plan page is the only account-term positive captured. 2 4 5
The Skeptic
Four entities are named with register numbers — Wallee Group AG CHE-287.965.343, Wallee GmbH HRB 123024, Wallee Europe S.A. RCS B200548, Wallee Lithuania UAB 306181820 — and the Swiss entity states FINMA SRO membership, which is more identification than most. But we found no public information on licence type, safeguarding of merchant funds, chargeback fees, reserve or freeze conditions, or any notice period for termination — register numbers without the terms that govern a bad day is half an answer. 4 5
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting and regulated entity is, and where transaction and cardholder data are processed and stored. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline. The card schemes are US-based for every provider, so the scheme layer is not held against any one vendor; the part the vendor controls is.
0 — Non-EU contracting entity, no statement on where payment data is processed, and subprocessors unnamed.
3 — An EU licensed entity contracts, but payment and customer data is processed outside the EU by default without an explained safeguard, or the subprocessor list is absent.
5 — EU contracting and regulated entity, EU processing stated for core payment data, but the group parent or significant parts of the chain (fraud scoring, support, analytics) are non-EU without a stated safeguard.
8 — EU entity and EU licence, payment and cardholder data processed and stored in the EU on named infrastructure, subprocessor list published with locations, and a DPA covering the processing the provider does as processor versus as controller.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, EU entity and licence, every processing location and subprocessor European, European rails (SEPA, Wero or national schemes) offered alongside cards, and certifications published.
The Finance Lead
The data controller is the Swiss parent company, the privacy notice authorises transfers of personal data to third parties outside the user's country without a stated safeguard, and I found no public information on where payment data is processed or on subprocessors. EU entities are published in Luxembourg, Lithuania and Germany, but nothing shows which entity contracts or under which licence. 3 4
The E-Commerce Lead
The named contracting and controller entity is Swiss, with no statement of where payment or cardholder data is processed, no subprocessor list, and a privacy notice that authorises transferring personal data to third parties "within or outside the country" the user resides in. EU-registered subsidiaries in Hamburg, Vilnius and Luxembourg and a referenced data processing contract are the only signals lifting this above the floor. 3 4 5
The SaaS Founder
The pages show a Swiss group with sister entities in Hamburg, Luxembourg and Vilnius, but the pages carry different entity names ("Wallee Group AG" and "wallee AG"), and no page states which entity contracts the merchant, where payment or cardholder data is processed, or any subprocessor. The privacy policy authorises transfers of personal data to third parties "within or outside the country" the user resides in, and every sovereignty attribute — jurisdiction, ownership, data residency, subprocessors — came back unconfirmed on the vendor's own pages. 3 4 5
The Payments Engineer
The controller named in the privacy notice is the Swiss Wallee Group AG, the same notice authorises transfers of personal data to third parties "within or outside the country in which the user resides" without a stated safeguard, and Facebook, Twitter and Google+ plugins are integrated on the sites. We found no public information on where payment and cardholder data is processed, on ownership, or on any subprocessor list; a data processing contract is only pointed at, not shown. 3 4 5
The Compliance Officer
The contracting controller is the Swiss Wallee Group AG of Winterthur, the privacy notice authorises transfer of personal data to third parties "within or outside the country", and I found no public information on where transaction or cardholder data are processed, on any subprocessor list, or on group ownership. A data processing agreement is referenced and Luxembourg, Lithuanian and German group entities exist, but no safeguard for the cross-border transfers is described, so this sits just above the floor. 3 4 5
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is the Swiss Wallee Group AG, and the privacy policy authorises transfer of personal data to employees, agents or other third parties "within or outside the country in which the user resides". We found no public information on where payment or cardholder data is processed or stored, and no subprocessor list. 3 4
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a merchant can compute the effective fee for their own mix of cards, countries and methods — including cross-border and currency conversion markups, chargebacks, refunds, payouts and monthly fees — from public pages alone.
0 — No public prices at all; every rate is a sales conversation.
3 — A headline percentage exists, but it is unclear which cards and countries it covers, and cross-border, currency conversion or chargeback fees are unstated — the effective fee is unknowable.
5 — Rates published per main method with domestic and international cards distinguished, but at least one commonly incurred cost (currency conversion markup, chargeback fee, payout or monthly fee) is missing or "on request".
8 — Every method priced publicly, cross-border and currency conversion markups stated, chargeback, refund and payout fees listed, minimum monthly fees and contract term given, and whether the model is blended or interchange++ said plainly.
10 — Complete fee computability: the effective rate derivable for a given volume, card mix and country mix — interchange++ with the markup published or a blended rate with every exception listed — plus volume tiers, reserves and every ancillary fee on a public page.
The Finance Lead
Per-method rates, monthly fees, per-transaction fees, setup service fees and the no-fee-for-failed-charges policy are all public, and the split between the platform's fixed fees and the acquirer's percentage is said plainly. Domestic versus international cards are not distinguished, the American Express and direct debit rates are only approximate, and I found no public information on cross-border or currency conversion markups, chargeback, refund or payout fees. 2
The E-Commerce Lead
Prices are published plainly: EUR19.00 per month with EUR0.20 per live transaction on the basic plan, EUR65.90 with EUR0.12 on business, Visa and Mastercard at EUR0.20 + 1.49%, Maestro at EUR0.20 + 0.9%, setup services priced in francs and euros, and a statement that the percentage is deducted by the acquirer. But the published rates do not distinguish domestic from international cards, and I found no public information on chargeback, refund, payout or currency conversion fees, so the effective fee for my mix of countries and cards is not derivable. 2
The SaaS Founder
Unusually public: three plan tiers (BASIC EUR19.00 per month with EUR0.20 per transaction, BUSINESS EUR65.90 per month with EUR0.12, ENTERPRISE on request), per-method rates like Visa EUR0.20 + 1.49%, setup services priced in three currencies, no fee for failed charges, and the statement that wallee itself never charges a percentage fee — that is deducted by the acquirer. But several card percentages are approximations ("ca. 2 - 3 %" for American Express), and we found no public information on chargeback fees, currency conversion markups or payout costs, so the effective fee for my mix is still not computable. 2
The Payments Engineer
Public pricing is genuinely there: plans from "EUR19.00 per month" with "EUR0.20" per transaction up to "EUR65.90"/"EUR0.12", per-method rates such as "Mastercard EUR0.20 + 1.49% *" and "Direct Debit EUR0.20 + ca. 1.99% *", priced setup services, no fee for failed charges, VAT treatment stated, and custom pricing above 50,000 EUR per month on request. But the percentages are approximate and asterisked with the note that the acquirer deducts them, and we found no public information on chargeback, refund or payout fees, currency conversion markups, or a domestic-versus-international card split, so the effective fee is not fully computable. 2
The Compliance Officer
Monthly plans and per-method rates are public — Basic at EUR19.00 per month plus EUR0.20 per live transaction, Visa and Mastercard at "EUR0.20 + 1.49%", setup services itemised — and the model is stated plainly as a fixed monthly and transaction fee with the acquirer deducting the percentage. Domestic versus international cards are not distinguished, several rates are approximate ("ca. 2 - 3 %" for American Express), and I found no public information on chargeback, refund, payout or currency conversion fees, so the effective fee is only partly computable. 2
The Skeptic
The pricing page publishes per-method rates (Visa EUR0.20 + 1.49%, American Express EUR0.20 + ca. 2 - 3 %), monthly plans of EUR19.00 and EUR65.90 per month, setup services priced in three currencies, and no additional fee for failed charges — considerably more than a headline rate. But domestic and international cards are not separated, several percentages are flagged as approximate, the fixed-fee statement says the percentage "will be deducted from the acquirer" without that acquirer rate being published, and we found no public information on currency conversion markup, chargeback, refund or payout fees — so the effective fee stays partly in the dark. 2
European sovereignty — proven facts
1 of 4 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Incorporated in CH ⚠ unverified | 3/3 pts | 4 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 22 Sep 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Legal entity. The imprint also lists group subsidiaries in Germany (Wallee GmbH, Hamburg), Lithuania (Wallee Lithuania UAB) and Luxembourg (Wallee Europe S.A.), but the group's parent and responsible entity is the Swiss Wallee Group AG.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- 13 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 integrations facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 legal facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 3 compliance facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 3 support facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 hosting fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 pricing fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (5)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage wallee.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page app-wallee.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy wallee.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Legal notice wallee.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 5 Terms of service wallee.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →