London · founded 2015
- Payments / PSP
- Revolut Payments own
- Banking / BaaS
- Revolut Bank UK Ltd own
- Card issuing
- Lead BankRevolut own
The charter behind the app, the platform in front of the charter, and the processor behind the card: how neobanks assemble their stack, whether or not they hold a licence.
Many US neobanks are not banks: the deposits sit at a partner bank, often reached through a Banking-as-a-Service platform, and an issuer processor runs the cards. Some, like SoFi and Varo, now hold US charters, and in Europe most neobanks hold their own licence.
US rules require a fintech that advertises FDIC insurance to name the insured bank, so the bank layer is unusually well disclosed. This guide counts the stack layer by layer.
The share of neobanks whose public disclosures name each financial layer, and the providers named most often. Layer names link to the full leaderboard; provider names link to the provider’s page.
Community Federal Savings Bank is named by 5 of the 129 that use a provider, ahead of Evolve Bank & Trust and Mbanq. No provider holds more than an eighth of it. 144 run it on their own licence or in-house.
Marqeta is named by 10 of the 92 that use a provider, ahead of Galileo and Paymentology. No provider holds more than an eighth of it. 64 run it on their own licence or in-house.
Stripe is named by 11 of the 49 that use a provider, ahead of Adyen and Checkout.com. 91 run it on their own licence or in-house.
Evolve Bank & Trust is named by 9 of the 101 that use a provider, ahead of Community Federal Savings Bank and Coastal Community Bank. No provider holds more than an eighth of it. 14 run it on their own licence or in-house.
Cross River is named by 3 of the 43 that use a provider, ahead of Mambu. No provider holds more than an eighth of it. 81 run it on their own licence or in-house.
Currencycloud is named by 10 of the 47 that use a provider, ahead of Wise Platform and Nium. 16 run it on their own licence or in-house.
Plaid is named by 17 of the 52 that use a provider, ahead of TrueLayer and Currencycloud. 5 run it on their own licence or in-house.
Fourthline is named by 3 of the 21 that use a provider, ahead of Jumio and Veriff.
DriveWealth is named by 2 of the 13 that use a provider. 11 run it on their own licence or in-house.
Mambu is named by 6 of the 17 that use a provider, ahead of Temenos.
16 neobanks disclose insurance. 14 name a provider, but none more than once. 4 run it on their own licence or in-house.
15 neobanks disclose payroll. 5 name a provider, but none more than once. 10 run it on their own licence or in-house.
Fireblocks is named by 3 of the 15 that use a provider, ahead of BitGo and Tempo.
Companies rarely stop at one layer: 82% of neobanks run two or more. These are the layers that travel together most strongly, compared with companies that don’t run the first one.
Six neobanks with deep public stacks. “Own” marks a layer the company runs itself. Each card links to the full dossier.
Pairs of providers on two different layers, counted across the 303 neobanks. One company can count towards several pairs.
The sponsor bank holds the deposits and the regulatory relationship. Concentration matters: a consent order at one bank can pause programs across many fintechs at once.
In the data: 38% of neobanks disclose a sponsor bank. Most named: Evolve Bank & Trust (9), Community Federal Savings Bank (8), Coastal Community Bank (4). See the layer · full leaderboard
A BaaS platform adds the API, ledger and program management in front of the charter. Larger programs increasingly connect to the bank directly and run their own ledger.
In the data: 82% of neobanks disclose accounts. Most named: Community Federal Savings Bank (5), Evolve Bank & Trust (4), Mbanq (4). See the layer · full leaderboard
The issuing bank sponsors the BIN; the issuer processor handles authorisation, tokenisation and card controls. The choice shapes how fast cards can be issued, controlled and moved between banks.
In the data: 48% of neobanks disclose cards. Most named: Marqeta (10), Galileo (6), Paymentology (5). See the layer · full leaderboard
| Region | Companies | Most-named payments provider | Most-named banking provider |
|---|---|---|---|
| US | 79 | Stripe6 | Community Federal Savings Bank4 |
| APAC | 45 | too few to say | Federal Bank3 |
| EU | 45 | too few to say | Treezor3 |
| LATAM | 40 | too few to say | too few to say |
| UK | 31 | too few to say | too few to say |
| Africa | 31 | too few to say | too few to say |
How this is counted: 303 neobanks in the Embedded Finance Index, each with a dossier built from its own public disclosures. A company counts for a layer when it names a provider for it or runs it in-house; a company that discloses nothing about a layer is not counted, so every share is a floor. Provider spellings are merged. Data as of 2026-11-14. See also embedded finance statistics and every leaderboard.
Of the 303 neobanks in the Embedded Finance Index, 49 name a payments provider. The most named are Stripe (11), Adyen (4), Checkout.com (4), Banco Citibank (1), BillDesk (1).
accounts (82%), cards (48%), payments (41%), a sponsor bank (38%), counted from public disclosures of 303 neobanks. 82% run two or more layers.
Companies that run wealth and retirement are 28.1 times as likely to also offer insurance: 50% of them do, against 2% of the neobanks that don't run wealth and retirement.
Each company in the Embedded Finance Index has a dossier built from its own public disclosures: website, documentation, terms, filings and press. A company counts for a layer when it names a provider for it or runs it in-house. Companies that disclose nothing about a layer are not counted for it, so every share is a floor. Data as of 2026-11-14.