Skip to content

ComparisonSeveral point solutions vs One layer in front of providers

LILPE vs. Stitching Together Multiple Point Solutions

Most growing businesses end up with a different vendor for each payments job. That's often sensible. The cost shows up in the seams between them.

The approaches

How businesses end up with many vendors

It happens one decision at a time: a gateway for checkout, a payout provider when refunds and vendor payments grow, a verification API for onboarding, a bank connection for statements. Each choice is reasonable. A few years later there are several contracts, several dashboards, several webhook formats and no single view of where money is.
  1. Your businessCheckout, apps, platforms
  2. LILPEOne API and dashboard
  3. Routing engineRules, health, cost
  4. ProvidersPSPs, gateways, acquirers
  5. Payment networksCards, real-time rails, banks
Where an orchestration layer sits. Illustrative; which providers are connected for your business is confirmed during onboarding.

Side by side

How the two approaches compare

Neutral, factual differences. Neither column is better in every situation.
LILPE vs. Stitching Together Multiple Point Solutions: side-by-side comparison
CriteriaSeveral point solutionsOne layer in front of providers (LILPE's approach)
Choice of vendor per jobBest-of-breed for eachWithin the providers the layer can connect
IntegrationsOne per vendorOne, to the layer
Data and reportingSeparate, in each vendor's formatBrought into one view
ReconciliationAcross several formats, often by handAcross providers in one place
Vendor managementSeveral contracts, reviews and support routesThe layer, plus the providers behind it as set up at onboarding
Concentration riskSpread across vendorsThe layer becomes an important dependency

Deciding

When each one makes sense

What point solutions do well

Specialist vendors are often excellent at their one job, and you can switch any single one without touching the rest. For a business with simple needs in each area, that independence is valuable.

Where the seams hurt

Problems appear between the systems rather than inside them.

  • A refund issued in one system that never reaches the payout provider.
  • Customer and payment data in different formats that don't join up.
  • Month-end reconciliation that needs someone to combine four exports.
  • Security reviews, contracts and incident processes multiplied by the number of vendors.

A fair warning about consolidation

Putting one layer in front of your providers reduces the seams but makes that layer important: if it has a problem, many flows are affected. Ask any platform, including LILPE, how it handles its own incidents, what happens to in-flight payments, and how you'd exit.

Which fits you?

Keep separate point solutions if each area is simple and your team can reconcile across them without strain. Consider one layer when the seams (reconciliation, data and vendor management) cost more than the flexibility is worth. Which products LILPE can cover for you is confirmed during onboarding.

FAQ

Questions about this comparison

Do we have to replace all our vendors at once?

No. Consolidation can be gradual, starting with the flows where the seams hurt most.

Can a single layer cover payments, payouts and verification?

It depends on the platform and on what can be connected for your business. For LILPE, that's confirmed during onboarding.

What about vendor lock-in?

Any important dependency carries some. Ask about data export, notice periods and how money in transit is handled if you leave.

Tired of reconciling across vendors?

Tell us which seams hurt most, and we'll talk about what can be simplified.