Comparison · 2026 edition
Lithic vs Nium: card issuing compared 2026.
Lithic and Nium side by side in the Card Issuing Index 2026: scores, evidence, published facts and awards.
WhatsApp and Telegram +44 7563 115980
[email protected]
Lithic and Nium side by side in the Card Issuing Index 2026: scores, evidence, published facts and awards.
In the Card Issuing Index, Nium scores higher overall: 3.0 out of 5 (61 out of 100) against 2.9 (58), ranking 3 and 5 of 11. Nium also scores higher in every segment.
Overall and segment scores out of 100, and the score out of 5.
| Score | Lithic | Nium |
|---|---|---|
| Score out of 5 | 2.9 | 3.0 |
| Score out of 100 | 58 | 61 |
| Overall rank | 5 of 11 | 3 of 11 |
| For fintechs and e-money firms (out of 100) | 60, rank 4 | 62, rank 3 |
| For expense and B2B payment platforms (out of 100) | 54, rank 6 | 58, rank 3 |
| For banks and lenders (out of 100) | 60, rank 5 | 63, rank 4 |
| Type | Card issuing processor | Card issuing platform |
Each score with the evidence behind it.
| Criterion | Lithic | Nium |
|---|---|---|
| Card range | 5/5 Credit, debit, prepaid, virtual and physical cards and digital wallet provisioning published. | 3/5 Virtual, physical, prepaid and tokenised cards published; debit and credit not specified. |
| Published pricing | 1/5 Pricing described in words without figures. | 0/5 Not published on the pages read. |
| Issuing countries | 0/5 Not published on the pages read. | 3/5 30+ markets published. |
| Integration | 4/5 API, sandbox and self-serve sign-up; no launch time published. | 5/5 API, sandbox, self-serve sign-up and a stated time to production. |
| Regulatory standing | 2/5 SOC 2 Type 2 published; PCI DSS without level counts as half; sponsor banks not named. | 4/5 Own licences with numbers and SOC 2 Type 2; PCI DSS without level counts as half. |
| Programme support | 5/5 Bank sponsorship, programme management, KYC, fraud tools and dispute handling all published. | 3/5 Own issuing, programme management and fraud protections published; KYC and dispute services not described on the pages read. |
Each criterion is scored 0 to 5 against the best published offer in the Card Issuing Index. 0 means not offered or not published. How it is scored
What each provider publishes on its own pages, read on 26 October 2026.
| Fact | Lithic | Nium |
|---|---|---|
| Card range | "Credit, debit, and prepaid cards for individuals and businesses"; virtual and physical cards with custom printing and instant issuance; digital wallet provisioning for Apple Pay, Google Pay and Samsung Pay. | Physical, virtual and digital cards; prepaid, embedded and white-label programmes; tokenisation and 3DS; Visa, Mastercard and Discover. Debit and credit not specified. |
| Pricing | No pricing page. Launch post: "Create active cards for a few cents each, with no expensive monthly fees", with a share of interchange paid back. | Not published on the pages read. |
| Issuing countries | Not published on the pages read. | "Operate custom card programs in 30+ markets with no BIN sponsor"; country tables for Australia, the EEA, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Singapore, the UK and the USA. |
| Integration | API, sandbox and self-serve sign-up at app.lithic.com/signup; no launch time published. | Self-serve Nium Web Portal sign-up and sandbox; SDKs for Node, Python, Go and Java; "Most teams reach production in under two weeks." |
| Regulatory standing | Homepage lists "SOC 1 Type 1, SOC 2 Type 2, PCI DSS, and ISO 27001" (PCI DSS level not stated); Trust Center says the programme "aligns with" these frameworks. Sponsor banks not named: "can be shared during engagement". "Lithic is a fintech company, not a bank." | Licences page lists FCA e-money and payment authorisations (refs 901024, 900800, 721549), a Bank of Lithuania EMI licence (No. 14), MAS Major Payment Institution PS20200276 and US money transmitter licences (NMLS 1528562). Badges for PCI DSS (level not stated), SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO/IEC 27001. |
| Programme support | Program Management covers bank and network relationships, regulatory oversight, "AML, KYC/KYB, OFAC, and ongoing risk monitoring"; fraud and disputes as Program Services, with a stated "90% win rate" on eligible chargebacks. Named clients include Mercury, MoonPay and Novo. | Issues without a separate BIN sponsor; card programme management API; tokenisation and 3DS protections. Named clients include Aspire, AXA Bank and Amadeus. |
| Date read | 26 October 2026 | 26 October 2026 |
Not published or not stated by Lithic: issuing countries, integration and regulatory standing.
Not published or not stated by Nium: pricing, regulatory standing and programme support.
Facts read on 26 October 2026 from: lithic.com, lithic.com/blog/introducing-lithic, lithic.com/services/program-management, trust.lithic.com/resources; and nium.com/products/issue-cards, nium.com/developers, nium.com/licenses, nium.com/newsroom/nium-us-card-issuance.
Awards follow from the published scores and cannot be bought.
From each provider's strongest criteria and published terms.
Developers wanting a self-serve sandbox and full programme management.
Travel and B2B platforms issuing in Asia Pacific, Europe and the US.
Tell us what you need and where you operate.