Provider Comparison
Shortlist up to three providers, then recommend the one that best fits the Value Case.
Provider economics
| Provider | Implementation | Annual cost | Revenue share | Rewards | Expected enrolment | Timeline | Complexity | Fit | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Provider A — Full-Stack Debit Recommended End-to-end debit program with integrated rewards. | $350K | $450K | 0.40% | 0.25% grocer-funded | 28% | 6–9 mo | Medium | 86/100 | |
Provider B — Issuer-Led Program Bank-issued card with provider-funded rewards. | $100K | $250K | 0.20% | Provider-funded | 20% | 4–6 mo | Low | 74/100 | |
Provider C — White-Label Debit Custom-branded debit with maximum revenue share. | $500K | $650K | 0.55% | 0.50% grocer-funded | 32% | 9–12 mo | High | 78/100 |
Provider A — Full-Stack Debit
End-to-end debit program with integrated rewards.
Requirements
- Loyalty CRM integration
- In-store enrolment kiosks
- Card issuance vendor
Provider-specific risks
- Longer launch than issuer-led
- Requires marketing co-investment
Provider B — Issuer-Led Program
Bank-issued card with provider-funded rewards.
Requirements
- Co-brand agreement
- Marketing placements
Provider-specific risks
- Lower economic upside
- Bank controls customer relationship
Provider C — White-Label Debit
Custom-branded debit with maximum revenue share.
Requirements
- POS certification
- Compliance program
- In-house support
Provider-specific risks
- Highest implementation cost
- Longest time to market