Software advice
Best AI Card Issuing Platforms in 2026
AI card issuing platforms are services that let a company create and manage payment cards, virtual or physical, for its customers or its own staff through an API or a program dashboard. They add spend controls, fraud screening and, at some vendors, AI agents that spend or categorize. They are not consumer card apps and not the card networks themselves.
Quick answer
Lithic ranks first because it names agentic commerce and an MCP server and lists four security attestations. Stripe Issuing fits teams already on Stripe, and Extend fits finance teams that want AI policy checks on company cards.
A product team that wants to put cards inside its software, or a finance team that wants cards for its staff, faces two questions at once: who issues the card, and what does the platform do around it. Most vendors here sell through a demo, so printed prices are rare and the pages we read name an AI feature for only a few. This ranking weighs named AI features, printed prices, stated certifications, how clearly the vendor describes its licensing and how easy the product is to leave. We read vendor pages in November 2026 and ran none of the platforms, so every speed or fraud claim remains the vendor's own.
The 12 best AI card issuing platforms in 2026, ranked
There is no score. Vendors can pay for more visibility on this website, for example a higher place in a ranking or more room on a page. Commercial relationships can also affect which products we feature and how prominently. How we rank.
| # | Tool | Best for | Free plan | Entry price |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lithic | Software companies that want to embed cards and may let AI agents pay under controls | No | Quoted |
| 2 | Extend | Finance teams that want virtual cards with budgets, receipts and AI policy checks | Trial | Free for 30 days, no commitment |
| 3 | Airwallex Issuing | Companies spending or paying out in several currencies that want cards beside accounts | No | Quoted |
| 4 | Nium | Companies running card programs and payouts across many countries without a BIN sponsor | No | Quoted |
| 5 | Highnote | Embedded finance teams that want a unified ledger with cards and acquiring on one GraphQL API | No | Acquiring Standard at 2.85% plus .25 cents per transaction as printed |
| 6 | Increase | Technology companies that want cards as one product inside a bank-grade payments API | Trial | Pay as you go, with virtual cards at USD 0.25 each |
| 7 | Enfuce | Fintechs and issuers that want a modular, API-first card stack with multi-PAN balances | No | Quoted |
| 8 | Marqeta | Large fintechs and banks running debit, prepaid and credit on one issuing core | No | Quoted |
| 9 | Unit | Software platforms that want accounts, debit cards and credit from one embedded provider | No | Quoted |
| 10 | Wallester | European companies that want IBAN accounts, corporate cards and a white-label BIN | Trial | Quoted |
| 11 | Pismo | Banks and fintechs that want card issuing and core banking on one processing platform | No | Quoted |
| 12 | Paymentology | Banks, digital banks and fintechs that want prepaid, debit and credit issuing at scale | No | Quoted |
- 1
Lithic ranks first because it pairs the most specific AI statements with the most complete security list. The page tags an Agentic Commerce solution as realtime payments with AI and offers an MCP server for developers, and it lists SOC 1 Type 1, SOC 2 Type 2, PCI DSS and ISO 27001. The cost of the lead is that no price appears anywhere on the page we read.
Strong on
- Names an Agentic Commerce solution and a developer MCP server, so the AI claim is concrete
- Lists four security attestations, more than most vendors in this group
- Instant issuance, identity verification and tokenization control are described for developers
Weak on
- No plans or prices on the page we read
- Hosting region and AI training use of customer data are not stated
Skip it if: Finance teams that want ready-made budgets and receipts, or buyers who need a printed price before talking to sales. No price is published on the page we read, so the entry cost has to be requested from the vendor.
- 2
Extend ranks third because it is the only entry here built for the company paying, not the company building. Virtual cards come with budgets, receipt capture, reimbursements and bill pay, and AI categorization, an AI policy agent and an AI Toolkit are named. It stays below the infrastructure vendors on openness, since no amounts or certifications appear on the page read.
Strong on
- Names AI categorization, an AI policy agent and custom AI agents for agentic workflows
- Virtual cards sit beside budgets, receipt capture, reimbursements and approval workflows
- A 30-day free start lets a team test with real expenses
Weak on
- No dollar prices or tiers appear on the page we read
- Trust Center is linked but its contents were not read, so certifications are unconfirmed
Skip it if: Companies that want to issue cards to their own customers or need a card processing core. The page states a 30-day free start with no commitment and shows no dollar amounts or tiers.
- 3
Airwallex Issuing ranks fourth for a mix of currency reach and a named AI feature. AI Expense-agents are described on the wider platform, cards are issued in multiple currencies with adjustable limits, and PCI DSS, SOC 1 and SOC 2 are stated. It loses ground because the issuing entity is not named on the page and the AI feature belongs to the platform, not the card product.
Strong on
- Multi-currency business cards with adjustable limits for companies and employees
- States PCI DSS, SOC 1 and SOC 2 compliance
- Connects to Xero, QuickBooks and NetSuite on the page read
Weak on
- Issuing entity is not stated on the page, only Dutch and Lithuanian entities
- Pricing page was not readable, so costs are unverified
Skip it if: Buyers who need a stated issuing bank on the page or want AI inside the card product itself. The issuing page links to a separate pricing page that returned an error, so no price was read.
- 4
Nium ranks fifth because its breadth is stated in numbers and its certifications are the longest list on any page here. Card programs run in 30-plus markets without a BIN sponsor, payouts reach 190-plus countries and accounts cover 100-plus currencies. Agentic payments are named as a use case rather than a product, and no price is published, which keeps it below the AI-first vendors.
Strong on
- Physical and virtual card programs in 30-plus markets with no BIN sponsor
- Lists PCI DSS, ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type 2, SOC 1 Type 2 and privacy badges
- Stablecoin payouts and stablecoin cards sit alongside multi-currency accounts
Weak on
- No pricing is published on the page we read
- Agentic payments appear only as a use case, not as a described product feature on the page
Skip it if: Single-country startups that want a short sandbox-to-launch path and a printed rate card. No pricing is published on the page read, and card costs depend on the program you scope.
- 5
Highnote ranks sixth because it prints more pricing structure than most, yet names no AI. Three plans are shown, issuing is custom with an interchange split and a dedicated program manager, and acquiring has a pay-as-you-go rate. A unified ledger, instant virtual cards and capital connections add depth. The odd rate formatting and the missing certifications keep it below the vendors with AI or audit detail.
Strong on
- Prints plan names for issuing and acquiring, including a pay-as-you-go option
- Unified ledger and Virtual Card Express for instant virtual cards
- Issuing pricing includes interchange split and volume discounts
Weak on
- Page states only built-in security and compliance, with no named standard
- The acquiring rate is printed in an unusual way and needs confirmation
Skip it if: Buyers who need AI features, named audits or a vendor that states its headquarters. Issuing Standard is custom priced. The acquiring rate is printed oddly and should be confirmed with the vendor.
- 6
Increase ranks seventh because it is the most open on fees and the narrowest on cards. Virtual cards cost USD 0.25 each, disputes USD 15.00, and the first five physical cards are included, all printed on the pricing page. Cards are one of eight products beside ACH, wires and FedNow, so a team wanting a full issuing program with fraud tooling gets less here.
Strong on
- Per-unit fees are printed, including USD 0.25 per virtual card and USD 15.00 per dispute
- Cards sit next to ACH, wires, Real-Time Payments, FedNow and checks in one API
- First five physical cards and ten account numbers are included
Weak on
- Cards are a narrow product beside seven other payment products
- No AI feature and no certifications named on the pages read
Skip it if: Teams that want a card-first program with credit, rewards and fraud tooling described in detail. No subscription. The first five physical cards and ten account numbers are included, and disputes cost USD 15.00 each.
- 7
Enfuce ranks eighth because it explains how pricing works and what the stack contains, but names no AI and no certification. An implementation fee, a monthly service fee and a volume fee are described, with add-ons priced when used. The multi-PAN card with separate sub-balances and the modular suite are distinctive, though the page states no headquarters.
Strong on
- Multi-PAN card where each sub-balance has its own ledger, also used for meal and mobility benefits
- Pricing structure is explained, with add-ons billed only when used
- Modular suite covers processing, licensing, ledger, fraud and dispute management
Weak on
- No amounts are printed, only the structure of the fees
- No certification is named, and readiness for PSD3, DORA and AMLA is described, not certified
Skip it if: Buyers who want published prices or an AI feature to evaluate. Pricing is scoped per program, with fixed fees and volume fees described but no amounts printed.
- 8
Marqeta ranks ninth because the scope is wide but the page gives little to check. Issuing and processing, credit services, accounts, risk and fraud management and configurable programs are listed, and named customers include Ramp and DoorDash. No price, no AI feature and no named standard appear, only a claim of certification to operate in 40-plus countries.
Strong on
- Issuing and processing core for debit, prepaid, credit and flexible credentials
- Risk and fraud management described from onboarding through disputes
- A developer sandbox and an API reference are linked from the page
Weak on
- No price or plan on the page read
- Names no security standard, only a claim of certification to operate in 40-plus countries
Skip it if: Small teams that need a printed price or a fast self-serve start. Pricing is not published on the page read, so a quote is needed for any cost comparison.
- 9
Unit ranks tenth because it offers deposit accounts, debit cards, credit and program management together, and lists SOC 2 Type 2 and PCI DSS. Debit cards are issued by Unit's bank partners, with access to the Federal Reserve and card networks named. No price and no AI feature were found on the pages read, so it trails the vendors with either.
Strong on
- Deposit accounts, ACH, debit cards and revolving credit come from one provider
- Program management covers disputes, reconciliation, statements and AML monitoring
- Lists SOC 2 Type 2 and PCI DSS
Weak on
- No pricing found on the vendor pages read
- Debit cards depend on Unit's bank partners, which ties your program to them
Skip it if: Teams that want only a card issuing API without accounts, or those that need a printed price. Unit's pricing pages returned errors, so no price was read and none is quoted here.
- 10
Wallester ranks eleventh because the licensing is clear and the rest is thin. It states an Estonian payment institution license and PCI DSS Level 1, offers a white-label BIN in any currency, and lists accounting connections. The only AI reference on the pages read is a blog headline, and no price was readable, so it sits below vendors with either.
Strong on
- States an Estonian Finantsinspektsioon license, Visa principal membership and PCI DSS Level 1
- Exclusive white-label BIN in any currency, with multi-currency IBAN accounts
- Tokenization for Apple Pay, Google Pay and other wallets, plus individual limits per card
Weak on
- No readable pricing page, so every cost has to come from a quote
- No AI feature named, only a blog headline about AI card spend
Skip it if: Buyers who want AI agents, published prices or a vendor outside the European regulatory setting. Pricing URLs on the vendor site returned errors, so no plan or price was read on an opened page.
- 11
Pismo ranks twelfth because it reads as a core banking and processing platform more than a card product. Card issuing on Visa, Mastercard and private-label rails sits beside core banking, wallets and digital lending. The logo calls it a Visa company, SOC 2 appears only as a blog headline, and neither price nor AI was found on the page read.
Strong on
- Issuing on Visa, Mastercard and private-label rails, including plastic, virtual and one-time cards
- Core banking, digital wallets, lending and corporate accounts on the same platform
- Logo alt text states a Visa affiliation, which may matter for network neutrality
Weak on
- No price, plans or legal entity on the page read
- SOC 2 appears only in a blog headline, with no audit scope stated
Skip it if: Small software companies that want a lightweight card API with a sandbox and printed fees. Pricing is not published on the page read, and the footer states no legal entity.
- 12
Paymentology ranks last because the pages read gave the least detail. It states 400-plus clients in 65-plus countries and ISO 27001 certification, and describes prepaid, debit and credit issuing for banks and fintechs. Product pages were unreadable on our visit, the history section says over 60 countries, and no AI, price or API statement was found on the pages read.
Strong on
- States ISO 27001 certification on its about page
- Covers prepaid, debit and credit card issuing for banks and fintechs
- Offers a self-service credit card issuing demo, so buyers can try the flow
Weak on
- No pricing is published on the pages we read
- Country count differs between pages, at 65-plus on one and over 60 on another
Skip it if: Teams that need AI features, a documented API or published fees. No pricing appeared on the pages read, and several product URLs returned errors.
How these AI card issuing platforms were judged
Which card issuing platforms actually include AI?
Few do in a way the pages describe. Lithic tags an Agentic Commerce solution as realtime payments with AI and ships an MCP server for developers. Stripe Issuing describes Issuing for agents, which lets agents buy online under set controls, and cites fraud models trained on very large transaction volumes. Airwallex mentions AI Expense-agents on its wider platform, and Extend names an AI policy agent, AI categorization and an AI Toolkit. Nium lists agentic payments as a use case. Highnote, Increase, Marqeta, Pismo, Unit, Wallester, Enfuce and Paymentology name no AI feature on the pages we read. Ask each vendor which part is a model and which is a rule.
What does card issuing cost and which vendors publish it?
Almost nobody prints a rate card. As of November 2026, Increase lists USD 0.25 per virtual card created and USD 15.00 per dispute, with the first five physical cards free. Highnote prints an acquiring rate and calls issuing pricing custom. Enfuce describes its structure: an implementation fee, a monthly service fee and a volume fee, with add-ons such as wallets and physical card batches. Extend offers 30 free days without amounts. Lithic, Marqeta, Unit, Pismo, Nium, Wallester, Paymentology, Airwallex and Stripe point to sales or a separate page. Budget by asking for interchange share and per-card fees in writing.
What certifications and data statements do these vendors give?
Statements are uneven and none of the pages we read said whether customer data trains AI models. Lithic lists SOC 1 Type 1, SOC 2 Type 2, PCI DSS and ISO 27001. Nium shows PCI DSS, ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type 2, SOC 1 Type 2 and privacy badges. Unit names SOC 2 Type 2 and PCI DSS, Airwallex names PCI DSS, SOC 1 and SOC 2, and Wallester names PCI DSS Level 1. Paymentology states ISO 27001, while Highnote, Marqeta and Extend name no standard on the pages read. No vendor stated a hosting region. Request the audit report itself, not the badge.
How hard is it to leave a card issuing platform?
Harder than leaving most software, because cards carry numbers, tokens and live subscriptions. Swapping an issuer means reissuing cards and updating every merchant that stores a credential, so plan a long overlap. Several vendors act as the program manager over a partner bank, as Unit does, which ties your program to that bank. Enfuce and Nium describe running programs without a BIN sponsor in some markets. Before signing, ask who owns the BIN, whether card tokens can migrate, how ledger history is exported and what the notice period is. Test an export in a sandbox first.
Which card issuing platform fits which company?
Match the vendor to who your cardholders are. A software company embedding cards for its customers looks at Lithic, Highnote, Increase or Stripe Issuing. A bank or scaled fintech with credit ambitions fits Marqeta or Pismo. A company paying out across borders fits Nium or Airwallex Issuing, and a European business wanting IBANs plus cards can read Wallester or Enfuce. Finance teams that mainly want company cards with budgets and receipts fit Extend. Unit suits a platform that wants accounts, debit and credit from one partner. Count cardholders, currencies and countries before asking for quotes.
How to choose an AI card issuing platforms in three steps
- Decide who the cardholder is before you compare vendors. Write down whether cards go to your customers, your staff or a partner network, and which countries and currencies they will use. A product that embeds cards for end users needs program management, KYC and disputes. A finance team issuing cards to employees needs budgets and receipts more than an API. Countries decide the license question too, since Wallester names an Estonian license and Nium lists 40-plus authorizations. Drop vendors that do not cover your markets before any demo, and keep the calls for the three or four that remain.
- Ask who issues the card and who holds the risk. The issuing bank or licensed entity is the party regulators see. Stripe names regional entities, Unit's programs name partner banks, and Airwallex does not state its issuing entity on the issuing page. Ask which institution holds the BIN, who bears fraud and chargeback losses, and what happens to live cards if that partner changes. Get answers in writing, because a card program inherits the partner's rules and fees. A vendor that cannot name its issuer in one sentence is a vendor to question further.
- Test the AI and the sandbox with a real use case. Ask for a live example of the AI feature, such as an agent paying under a spend limit or an automatic categorization, and see which controls sit around it. Then run a sandbox: create a card, set a limit, trigger a decline, issue a dispute and export the ledger. Lithic and Highnote publish developer material, while others sell through a call. Note what the vendor does by rule and what it does by model. If only slides exist, judge the product on controls, licensing and fees.
Frequently asked questions
What is the best AI card issuing platform in 2026?
Lithic ranks first here because it names an Agentic Commerce solution and an MCP server and lists SOC 1, SOC 2, PCI DSS and ISO 27001 on its page. Stripe Issuing is the pick for teams already on Stripe, and Extend suits finance teams that want AI checks on company cards. No vendor here prints full pricing.
Which card issuers name an AI feature?
On the pages we read, Lithic names Agentic Commerce and an MCP server, Stripe Issuing describes Issuing for agents, Airwallex mentions AI Expense-agents and Extend names an AI policy agent and AI categorization. Nium lists agentic payments as a use case. The other eight platforms name no AI feature.
Can an AI agent get its own payment card?
Two vendors describe it directly. Stripe Issuing says Issuing for agents lets agents make online purchases with set controls, and Lithic lists an Agentic Commerce solution. Neither page we read gave limits or fees for it, so ask about spend caps, merchant restrictions and who is liable when an agent buys the wrong item.
Which platforms publish card issuing prices?
Increase is the clearest: USD 0.25 per virtual card created, USD 15.00 per dispute and five physical cards included. Highnote prints an acquiring rate but calls issuing custom, and Enfuce describes its fee structure without amounts. Extend lists a 30-day free trial. The rest require a sales conversation or a separate pricing page.
Which card issuing platforms suit European companies?
Wallester states an Estonian license and PCI DSS Level 1 certification, and Enfuce describes regulatory readiness for PSD3, DORA and AMLA. Airwallex names Dutch and Lithuanian entities and Nium lists 40-plus licenses. Hosting regions were not stated by any vendor, so confirm data location in writing.
Do I need a partner bank to issue cards?
Usually the platform arranges one. Unit says debit cards are issued by its bank partners, and Nium says its card programs in 30-plus markets need no BIN sponsor. Stripe lists licensed regional entities. Ask each vendor who holds the BIN and what happens to cards if that partner changes.
How long does it take to switch card issuers?
The pages we read gave no migration timelines, so treat any promise as unverified. Switching means reissuing cards and updating every merchant holding a stored credential, which tends to take months of overlap. Ask whether tokens can migrate, how ledger history is exported and what the notice period is before you sign.
Is a card issuing platform the same as spend management software?
No. A card issuing platform gives you the cards and the processing behind them, usually through an API. Spend management software adds budgets, receipts, approvals and reimbursements on top. Extend sits closer to the second group and issues virtual cards inside it, while Lithic and Marqeta sell the plumbing.