Authorize.net vs Checkout.com
Last verified Sep 19, 2026
At a glance
- Authorize.net scores 2.3/5 and Checkout.com scores 3.2/5 in Benchmark Grid's independent payment processing platforms benchmark, both assessed on the same 10 criteria.
- The widest gaps are global payment method coverage (Authorize.net 2.1, Checkout.com 4.1) and currency & cross-border support (Authorize.net 2.4, Checkout.com 4.3); they are within 0.3 on 4 of 10 criteria.
- Authorize.net is built for small and mid-market publishers; Checkout.com for mid-market and enterprise.
- On total cost of ownership Authorize.net scores 3.2 and Checkout.com 2.2 (higher means better value, not a lower price).
- In our tracking 0 publishers use Authorize.net and 1 use Checkout.com.
- Scores last verified 19 Sep 2026. Vendors cannot pay for a score or a position.
Where they differ
Checkout.com is stronger on global Payment Method Coverage (4.1 vs 2.1), currency & Cross-Border Support (4.3 vs 2.4), payout & Settlement Speed (3.5 vs 2.8) and reporting & Reconciliation (3.7 vs 3.0).
Which one fits
Choose Authorize.net if…
- You publish at small and mid-market scale.
- You weight regulatory Compliance & Licensing heavily — Authorize.net leads on it in this benchmark.
Choose Checkout.com if…
- You publish at mid-market and enterprise scale.
- You weight global Payment Method Coverage, currency & Cross-Border Support and payout & Settlement Speed heavily — Checkout.com leads on those in this benchmark.
Who uses them
Publishers we have detected running each tool, from ads.txt, site code and published case studies. Agencies, brands and vendors are excluded.
Authorize.net · 0
No publisher adoption verified yet.
Checkout.com · 1
Head to head
| Criterion | Authorize.net | Checkout.com |
|---|---|---|
| Transaction Pricing & Fees16% of capability | 3.2 | 3.2 |
| Global Payment Method Coverage14% of capability | 2.1 | 4.1 |
| Authorisation & Uptime Reliability12% of capability | 4.2 | 4.2 |
| Fraud & Risk Management12% of capability | 3.8 | 3.8 |
| Currency & Cross-Border Support10% of capability | 2.4 | 4.3 |
| Integration & Developer Experience10% of capability | 3.5 | 3.9 |
| Payout & Settlement Speed10% of capability | 2.8 | 3.5 |
| Regulatory Compliance & Licensing8% of capability | 4.5 | 4.0 |
| Reporting & Reconciliation5% of capability | 3.0 | 3.7 |
| Support & Chargeback Handling3% of capability | 2.9 | 3.0 |
| Capability45% of composite | 3.2 | 3.8 |
| Publisher fit40% of composite | 1.0 | 3.0 |
| Total cost of ownership15% of composite | 3.2 | 2.2 |
Cost of ownership
| Sub-score | Authorize.net | Checkout.com |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing transparency | 3.5 | 1.0 |
| Entry cost | 3.5 | 1.0 |
| Implementation cost | 4.0 | 2.5 |
| Hidden-fee risk | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| Ongoing cost | 2.0 | 3.5 |
Authorize.net pricing
Gateway fee plus per-transaction
Checkout.com pricing
Interchange-plus, custom enterprise
What users say
Authorize.net
7 positive · 46 neutral · 8 negative
Checkout.com
10 positive · 20 neutral · 7 negative
Mentions we could not tie to a real user, and those flagged as promotional, are excluded. Sentiment is opinion, and is independent of the verified publisher adoptions above.
Authorize.net scores 2.3 and Checkout.com scores 3.2 in Benchmark Grid's independent Best Payment Processing Platforms for Publishers benchmark (benchmarkgrid.com/vs/authorize-net/checkout-com, verified Sep 19, 2026)
Common questions
How do Authorize.net and Checkout.com differ?
Checkout.com is stronger on global Payment Method Coverage (4.1 vs 2.1), currency & Cross-Border Support (4.3 vs 2.4), payout & Settlement Speed (3.5 vs 2.8) and reporting & Reconciliation (3.7 vs 3.0). Neither is better in the abstract — which one suits you depends on which of those dimensions carries the most weight in your operation.
Which is cheaper, Authorize.net or Checkout.com?
On total cost of ownership — pricing transparency, entry cost, implementation, hidden-fee risk and ongoing cost — Authorize.net scores 3.2/5 and Checkout.com scores 2.2/5. A higher score means better value, not a lower sticker price.
How are these scores calculated?
Each tool is assessed against its category's published criteria (10 in this benchmark), which make up Capability (45% of the composite), Publisher fit (40%) and Total cost of ownership (15%). Assessment is carried out by SODP's editorial team against a published methodology. Vendors cannot pay for inclusion, scores or positions.
Share:
Both tools are scored in Best Payment Processing Platforms for Publishers. See alternatives to Authorize.net or alternatives to Checkout.com.
Weighing a third option? Add a tool to this comparison.
Still deciding? Build your stack — four questions about your publication and we'll recommend a full stack, with the reasoning for each pick and what it will cost.
Related comparisons
Other head-to-heads publishers look at in Best Payment Processing Platforms for Publishers.
