undefined

points

[-]

People compare us a lot because they're also another open source YC company that does billing. So definitely some similarities!

I think in practise though we serve a very different segment. Lago is great for high-throughput event metering and mainly target series B+ companies. They don't yet have an offering for feature permissions management (aka entitlements).

Autumn is built more for early stage companies that have payments in-app. Hence we're trying to invest more in the developer experience (eg React hooks), while also providing that abstraction layer for entitlements too.

We absolutely will be adding more payment providers soon. Our biggest requests are Polar and Razorpay for the indian market.

by codegeek174 days ago|

parent|

[-]

You say but your landing page almost lists similar features that getlago does including things like "metering" etc. It is ok to be similar of course but I don't really see how you are different than them other than saying that they are focussed on Series B and you are for early stage. So feature wise, I am not seeing a huge difference. I could be wrong of course.

by ayushrodrigues173 days ago|

parent|

[-]

I think that's a fault of ours with our landing page and messaging. We can definitely do a better job here. Almost everyone that has used us after using Lago can tell a big difference with the products.

The main reason that people use us is permissions management. We are the source of truth for which of your users can access what, and linking that to billing. Eg, we know that because user ABC is on Pro tier and bought 3 top ups, they have access to 75 AI credits. If their next payment fails, they should only have access to 15 AI credits (etc etc). Our value is in handling this matrix of scenarios related to usage resets, billing cycles, transitioning between monthly and yearly plans, etc.

Lago only handles billing, so if you're using them, then the logic to sync up the user's permissions with the billing state has to be handled yourself.

by ethan_smith174 days ago|

prev|

[-]

Supporting multiple payment providers would be crucial for true payment infrastructure independence - curious if there's a plugin architecture planned that would make it easier to add adapters for Adyen, PayPal, or regional payment gateways.

by ayushrodrigues174 days ago|

parent|

[-]

This is absolutely where we want to end up within the next year, especially as we move upmarket. Enterprises love having redundancy between payment providers to use as leverage for lower fees and there are several companies founded purely around payment routing, (deciding which payment provider has the best acceptance rate based on region, issuing bank, MCC etc). Some examples are primer and payrails.

It just turns out that most of our users are only really interested in using Stripe at the early stage, so for now our codebase is closely embedded into their billing product.

It's going to be fun(?) ripping all of it out and moving towards a PSP agnostic architecture you mentioned.

by ashkulz173 days ago|

parent|

[-]

One more data point: at work we use Stripe for most regions [1], but in our largest region (South Africa) we have to use Paystack [2] (a Stripe subsidiary). The API isn't 1:1 compatible and there's no plans to do so in the near future. Having multiple providers is a must for us to consider a solution.

Lago is better in that they have have support for custom payment integrations [3].

[1] https://stripe.com/global

[2] https://paystack.com/stripe/south-africa

[3] https://getlago.com/docs/integrations/payments/custom-paymen...

by ayushrodrigues173 days ago|

parent|

[-]

This is really helpful context. Thanks for sharing!