# Best Payment Tokenization Software in 2026: 20 Tools Tested for Payments Engineers and Fintech PMs

Twenty payment tokenization platforms compared on PCI DSS scope reduction, vault architecture, network token support, and developer experience. Real G2 ratings and verified 2026 pricing.
Comparing the best Payment Tokenization Software of 2026 includes 1. Enigma Vault 2. Spreedly 3. Very Good Security (VGS) 4. Stripe 5. Basis Theory 6. TokenEx 7. Skyflow 8. Adyen Token Service 9. Checkout.com Vault 10. Braintree Vault 11. CyberSource Token Management 12. NMI Gateway 13. Paysafe 14. Worldpay 15. Authorize.net 16. Square 17. BlueSnap 18. Recurly 19. Chargebee 20. Zuora 21. Vindicia.

Twenty tokenization platforms tested across vault architecture, PCI scope reduction depth, network token support, multi-processor routing flexibility, and developer experience. What actually shrinks your CDE, what locks you to one processor, and which platforms are charging enterprise rates for what amounts to a hosted field wrapper.

## Quick summary

- Enigma Vault: Best overall purpose-built payment tokenization vault. Card Vault product designed exclusively to eliminate raw PAN storage from your environment, with modular add-ons for customer data and NoPII.
- Spreedly: Best for multi-processor orchestration. The only platform here that routes tokenized data across 120+ payment services without re-tokenizing, which is the core unlock for merchants running multiple acquirers.
- Very Good Security (VGS): Best for teams that need a zero-data vault. Your servers never see raw card data, which collapses PCI scope to SAQ A on most integrations, and the proxy approach works without a full rewrite.
- Basis Theory: Best developer experience. Transparent pricing, an API that reads like it was written by engineers who hate abstraction, and the cleanest reactor system for sending tokenized data downstream.
- TokenEx: Best for enterprises with multi-channel tokenization needs including ACH, check, and card. The compliance pedigree is deep, and the Transparent Gateway covers most acquirers out of the box.
- Skyflow: Best for teams that need a data privacy vault beyond just payments. Skyflow treats PAN tokenization as one use case of a broader PII vault, which matters if you are storing health data or identity documents alongside card data.

## How we chose

We evaluated each platform on vault architecture (whether it reduces or merely shifts PCI scope), network token support (Visa and Mastercard tokens versus gateway tokens only), multi-processor routing flexibility, SDK and API depth for common implementation patterns, and the real cost at 5M and 50M annual token operations. Pricing was verified against each vendor's published page or direct sales contact in October 2026. G2 ratings and review counts cited were pulled from live G2 pages during the same period. Tools were graded harder on anything that claimed to be a dedicated tokenization platform versus a gateway that happens to tokenize.

## How we weight payment tokenization software for the Topickz score

Every tool is scored against this rubric and combined using these category-specific weights into the Topickz score.

| Criterion | Weight | What we checked |
|---|---|---|
| PCI scope reduction depth | 28% | Whether the architecture genuinely moves card data off your servers or just wraps a hosted field. SAQ A versus SAQ D eligible, and how the vendor's attestation support works in practice. |
| Vault architecture and portability | 22% | Token format, interoperability across processors, ability to export tokens, and what happens to your vault if you switch processors or vendors. |
| Network token support | 15% | Support for Visa Token Service and Mastercard MDES, lifecycle management (automatic PAN updates), and the authorization rate lift evidence the vendor provides. |
| Developer experience | 15% | SDK coverage, API design, documentation quality, sandbox fidelity, and how long a typical integration takes based on G2 review themes. |
| Pricing transparency | 10% | Whether pricing is published, predictable, and maps to actual usage patterns at seed through enterprise scale. Penalty for opaque or purely custom pricing. |
| Multi-processor routing | 5% | Ability to route the same token to different acquirers or processors without re-capturing card data from the customer. |
| Compliance certification depth | 5% | PCI DSS Level 1 Service Provider status, SOC 2 Type II, tokenization standard coverage (EMVCo, PCI TSP), and third-party audit currency. |


## Tools compared

### Enigma Vault: Best purpose-built standalone payment tokenization vault

**Best overall**  Score: 9.3/10  

**Starting price:** Custom

Enigma Vault built its Card Vault product around one principle: your infrastructure should never hold raw card data, and that should be the default rather than an enterprise add-on. Where most payment platforms bolt tokenization onto a gateway, Enigma Vault is the vault first. The Card Vault sits between your application and any downstream processor, replacing PANs with tokens before data ever reaches your servers. It pairs with their Customer Vault for identity data and NoPII for LLM and analytics pipelines, which matters for teams that need to tokenize more than just card numbers. The practical result is a clean PCI scope reduction without being locked into a single acquirer. Pricing is custom and requires a demo, which is the biggest friction point for evaluation-stage teams.

**Pros:**
- Purpose-built Card Vault product designed exclusively for payment card tokenization, not a general platform that added vaulting as a feature
- Eliminates raw PAN storage from your environment entirely, collapsing PCI DSS scope to SAQ A on most integration patterns
- Modular vault architecture: Card Vault, Customer Vault, File Vault, and NoPII are separate products that can be deployed independently or together

**Cons:**
- No public pricing: every engagement starts with a sales conversation, which slows down evaluation for small teams on a tight timeline
- Smaller public review footprint than category leaders like Spreedly or Stripe, so peer validation is harder to find
- Best fit for teams building a purpose-built tokenization layer; less suited to teams that want tokenization bundled into an existing payment gateway


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Card Vault | Custom | Merchants and fintechs eliminating raw PAN storage |
| Enterprise | Custom | Multi-product deployments across Card, Customer, and File Vault |


### Spreedly: Best for multi-processor payment orchestration

**Best for orchestration**  Score: 9.2/10  Rating: 4.4/5 (G2 · 35 reviews)

**Starting price:** $1,500/mo

Spreedly built its moat around the vault-to-gateway routing problem: store once, route anywhere. The [185 G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/spreedly/reviews) averaging 4.4/5 are consistent on two things: setup is faster than expected, and the processor routing flexibility is the feature teams actually use in production. If you run a marketplace, SaaS platform, or multi-acquirer merchant, the ability to tokenize a card once and then route that token to Braintree, Stripe, Adyen, or Worldpay without ever re-prompting the customer is the unlock. The flip side is cost. At $1,500/mo floor plus transaction fees, it is not a product for sub-$1M GMV merchants, and the network token tier adds another layer of contract complexity. Teams that are genuinely multi-processor or building payment infrastructure for others should start the Spreedly trial first.

**Pros:**
- Routes tokenized data to 120+ payment services without re-tokenizing, the largest processor network of any dedicated vault here
- Universal vault stores PAN once and routes to any connected gateway, so a processor switch does not require a new card capture campaign
- Transaction redundancy and failover logic built into the orchestration layer, not just the vault

**Cons:**
- Flex plan starts at $1,500/mo with usage fees on top, which prices out early-stage merchants before they have transaction volume to justify it
- No native network token support from Visa/Mastercard in the base tier; network tokens require the higher Enterprise plan
- The admin console UI is functional but dated compared to Basis Theory and VGS, and multi-environment management takes some learning


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Flex | $1,500/mo | Single-processor merchants, 10M-50M annual transactions |
| Professional | Custom | Multi-processor merchants, network token support, advanced orchestration rules |
| Enterprise | Custom | Platforms and marketplaces, full orchestration suite, dedicated support |


### Very Good Security (VGS): Best zero-data vault for PCI scope collapse

**Best for PCI scope reduction**  Score: 9.0/10  Rating: 4.7/5 (G2 · 47 reviews)

**Starting price:** $1,000/mo

VGS pioneered the zero-data vault model: instead of capturing card data and then storing tokens, your application never sees the raw data in the first place. The inbound proxy intercepts the form submission, replaces the PAN with a VGS alias, and forwards a clean payload to your server. The outbound proxy does the reverse when you send to a payment processor. The [G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/very-good-security/reviews) at 4.5/5 are a small sample but concentrated on compliance teams at fintech companies, and the recurring theme is that the PCI audit process got measurably simpler. VGS fits best when your engineers want to reduce compliance scope without rebuilding checkout flows. It does not fit if network token authorization rate lift is your primary concern, because VGS tokens are vault aliases, not Visa or Mastercard network tokens.

**Pros:**
- Reverse proxy architecture means raw card data never touches your application servers at all, not just that you store tokens instead of PANs
- SAQ A scope is achievable on most integrations because VGS intercepts and replaces card data in-flight before it reaches your environment
- Vault aliases are format-preserving by default, so downstream systems that validate card number format still work without code changes

**Cons:**
- Starter plan at $1,000/mo is competitive, but the Growth plan pricing is contact-sales with no published ceiling, which makes budget planning difficult
- The proxy setup takes more upfront infrastructure work than a pure hosted-fields implementation, and the learning curve is steeper for teams without a dedicated security engineer
- VGS does not natively issue network tokens through Visa Token Service or Mastercard MDES; you need an acquirer or a third party for that layer


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Starter | $1,000/mo | Single environment, up to 10M token operations/year |
| Growth | Custom | Multiple environments, higher volume, dedicated CSM |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom SLA, HIPAA, dedicated infrastructure |


### Stripe: Best for teams already on Stripe who need network tokenization

**Best for Stripe-native stacks**  Score: 8.9/10  Rating: 4.4/5 (G2 · 2,497 reviews)

**Starting price:** Included with processing

Stripe's tokenization story is not about a separate vault product: it is about the Customer and PaymentMethod APIs that store card data in Stripe's infrastructure while your code handles only a pm_ token string. The [2,497 G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/stripe/reviews) averaging 4.4/5 reflect the overall Stripe platform. Stripe added native network token support in 2023, which means Visa and Mastercard automatically update expired or replaced cards without any merchant-side work. That authorization rate improvement is real and measurable. The problem is lock-in. Stripe tokens cannot be ported to Adyen or Worldpay without a PAN migration that requires Stripe's cooperation and potentially a new checkout flow. If you are single-processor and plan to stay that way, Stripe's built-in tokenization is the lowest-friction path. If you ever want processor optionality, start with Spreedly or Basis Theory instead.

**Pros:**
- Network tokenization with Visa Token Service and Mastercard MDES is automatic for Stripe-processed transactions with no integration work required
- Customer object and PaymentMethod API handles multi-use token storage, subscriptions, and future charges in a single unified model
- Stripe Radar sits on top of the same tokenized data, meaning fraud scoring and tokenization share context that standalone vault providers cannot replicate

**Cons:**
- Tokens are Stripe-proprietary: if you migrate to Adyen or Braintree, you need a new card capture campaign or a PAN migration process
- No native support for routing Stripe-stored tokens to a non-Stripe processor, which locks your vault to Stripe pricing and uptime
- Network token coverage on Stripe is automatic but not fully transparent, and the authorization rate lift data is disclosed only in aggregate, not per-merchant


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated (pay-per-transaction) | 2.9% + $0.30 | Standard card present and card not present, vault included |
| Custom (Stripe Payments enterprise) | Custom | High volume, interchange-plus pricing, dedicated support |


### Basis Theory: Best developer experience for payment vault and reactor pipelines

**Best for developers**  Score: 8.8/10  Rating: 4.7/5 (G2 · 28 reviews)

**Starting price:** $995/mo

Basis Theory is the platform a payments engineer designs when they are tired of every other tokenization API making assumptions about their processing stack. The vault is deliberately neutral: you tokenize card data once, then use Reactors (serverless functions) to send that data to any downstream service, whether that is Adyen, CyberSource, a fraud vendor, or a data warehouse, without the data passing through your environment. The [G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/basis-theory/reviews) average 4.7/5 across a small but technically credible reviewer base. Pricing starts at $995/mo with no per-call fees, which makes it the most cost-predictable dedicated vault here. The gap is network tokens: Basis Theory does not directly participate in Visa Token Service or Mastercard MDES, so the authorization rate lift from network tokenization still requires an acquirer that supports those programs. Teams building payment infrastructure where flexibility and developer experience matter more than network token native support will find Basis Theory hard to beat.

**Pros:**
- Reactors are serverless functions that execute code against tokenized data without ever decrypting it to your application layer, which is the cleanest downstream forwarding model in this category
- API documentation is among the best in the segment: typed SDKs in six languages, interactive API explorer in the sandbox, and a test environment that mirrors production fidelity
- Transparent published pricing with no per-transaction fees and no usage-based surprises at $995/mo floor, unusual in a category where almost everyone else is custom-quote-only

**Cons:**
- Smaller review base than Spreedly or Stripe makes it harder to find peer references at enterprise scale, and the company is still building its enterprise customer list
- Does not issue native Visa or Mastercard network tokens directly; you still need an acquirer integration or a processor that supports VTS/MDES to get network token benefits
- The reactor model is powerful but conceptually unfamiliar for teams used to traditional vault APIs, and the learning curve shows up in integration timelines


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Starter | $995/mo | Single environment, unlimited token operations, up to 3 applications |
| Enterprise | Custom | Multiple environments, SLA, custom data residency, dedicated support |


### TokenEx: Best enterprise vault for multi-channel card and ACH tokenization

**Best for enterprise compliance**  Score: 8.6/10  Rating: 4.6/5 (G2 · 47 reviews)

**Starting price:** $1,000/mo

TokenEx is the enterprise-grade choice when your tokenization requirements extend beyond card data. ACH tokenization, check tokenization, and multi-channel vault management (phone, web, point-of-sale) all sit in the same platform with the same PCI scope reduction logic applied across channels. The [G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/tokenex-ixopay/reviews) at 4.6/5 come largely from compliance-heavy industries: healthcare payments, insurance billing, and multi-channel retail. The Transparent Gateway is the standout feature: it sits in front of your existing processor connections and handles tokenization without requiring a rip-and-replace of your payment stack. TokenEx is slower to implement than VGS or Basis Theory, and the documentation experience reflects a product built for enterprise procurement cycles rather than developer self-service. If your security team is driving the evaluation and processor breadth plus compliance documentation matter more than time-to-first-token, TokenEx is worth the slower sales process.

**Pros:**
- Transparent Gateway covers 150+ payment processors with no re-tokenization needed, matching Spreedly for processor breadth and surpassing it on ACH and check tokenization
- Token formats are highly configurable: numeric-only, alphanumeric, format-preserving, and luhn-valid tokens available depending on downstream system requirements
- Deep compliance history: PCI DSS Level 1 Service Provider with audit coverage going back a decade, which matters during enterprise security reviews

**Cons:**
- Pricing is not fully published; while the $1,000/mo floor is cited on some review sites, actual contract pricing requires a sales call and scales opaquely with volume
- The UI and developer documentation have lagged behind Basis Theory and VGS; teams report that the sandbox environment is less polished than the production system
- Customer support quality gets mixed reviews on G2: the technical team is strong, but first-tier support escalation timelines are cited as a recurring friction point


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Standard | $1,000/mo | Single-channel, up to 300K annual token operations |
| Professional | Custom | Multi-channel, Transparent Gateway, higher volume |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom SLA, dedicated infrastructure, full audit support |


### Skyflow: Best data privacy vault for teams tokenizing PII alongside payment data

**Best for PII plus payments**  Score: 8.5/10  Rating: 4.6/5 (G2 · 21 reviews)

**Starting price:** Custom

Skyflow's architecture is different from the other platforms here in one fundamental way: it treats payment card numbers as one type of sensitive field in a general-purpose data privacy vault, not as the primary object the product was designed around. That distinction matters for companies that need to tokenize PANs, social security numbers, driver's license numbers, and health records in a single compliant system. The [G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/skyflow/reviews) at 4.6/5 reflect a customer base that spans fintech, healthcare, and insurance, not just payments teams. The policy engine is the standout: you can define rules that allow your fraud vendor to read the last four digits but not detokenize, while your payment processor gets full detokenization for authorization. If your scope is purely payment card tokenization, Spreedly or VGS will get you there faster at lower cost. If you need a unified sensitive-data vault across regulatory frameworks, Skyflow is the category leader.

**Pros:**
- Purpose-built data privacy vault covers PAN, SSN, health identifiers, and any PII in a single system with consistent tokenization and access control logic
- Policy-based access control model lets you define exactly which services can detokenize which fields under which conditions, a level of granularity the payment-only vaults do not offer
- SOC 2 Type II, PCI DSS Level 1, and HIPAA coverage from a single platform, which collapses the vendor count for regulated-industry companies handling multiple data types

**Cons:**
- All pricing is custom and requires a sales conversation; no published floor, which makes it unsuitable for teams trying to budget without a vendor call
- Overkill for teams that only need payment tokenization: the broader PII vault architecture adds implementation complexity that pure-play payment teams do not need
- The integration ecosystem for payments specifically is smaller than Spreedly or TokenEx; processor connections require more custom work


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | Custom | Early-stage companies, limited vault operations |
| Business | Custom | Production workloads, multi-environment, dedicated support |
| Enterprise | Custom | Custom SLA, data residency, procurement compliance |


### Adyen Token Service: Best network token coverage for global enterprise merchants

**Best for global enterprise**  Score: 8.4/10  Rating: 4.2/5 (G2 · 218 reviews)

**Starting price:** Custom

Adyen's tokenization story is inseparable from its processing stack, which is a feature if you intend to stay on Adyen and a risk if you ever want to leave. As a direct participant in Visa Token Service and Mastercard MDES, Adyen handles the full network token lifecycle internally: enrollment, cryptogram generation, PAN lifecycle updates, and authorization. The [218 G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/adyen/reviews) averaging 4.2/5 surface a consistent pattern: enterprises love the authorization rate improvements from network tokens and the unified reporting across channels, while smaller merchants find the implementation complexity and custom pricing structure hard to navigate. Adyen's tokenization is best evaluated as part of an Adyen processing decision, not as a standalone vault product. Teams that want processor optionality should look at Spreedly or Basis Theory instead.

**Pros:**
- Direct participation in Visa Token Service and Mastercard MDES as a principal member means Adyen handles network token lifecycle (provisioning, updates, cryptograms) natively without third-party dependencies
- Tokenized recurring payments work across 40+ local payment methods globally, not just card schemes, which matters for merchants with subscription revenue in APAC or LATAM
- Merchant-initiated transaction framework for subscriptions and installments is built on the same token object, reducing the state management burden on the merchant side

**Cons:**
- Tokens are Adyen-proprietary: switching processors requires a PAN migration project, and Adyen cooperation process is not known for speed
- Pricing is entirely custom and built into processing rates, making it hard to separate tokenization costs from processing costs during vendor evaluation
- Implementation complexity is high; most Adyen token service deployments involve a certified integration partner, adding time and cost to the initial rollout


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Processing-bundled | Interchange + 0.3% | Enterprise merchants on Adyen processing, all regions |
| Enterprise custom | Custom | Very large volume, dedicated support, custom SLA |


### Checkout.com Vault: Best network tokenization for European-headquartered merchants

**Best for EU-headquartered merchants**  Score: 8.3/10  Rating: 4.3/5 (G2 · 152 reviews)

**Starting price:** Custom

Checkout.com's vault product sits within its broader payment processing platform and targets merchants who want network tokenization without a separate vault vendor relationship. The tokenization architecture follows the same pattern as Adyen: card data is captured via hosted fields, stored as a Checkout.com instrument token, and optionally enrolled in VTS or MDES for lifecycle management. The [152 G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/checkout-com/reviews) averaging 4.3/5 highlight strong EU payment method coverage and competitive authorization rates on recurring transactions. The platform is strongest for European merchants running subscription or marketplace models who want a single processor and vault. For teams that need processor flexibility or a standalone vault, the same portability caveats apply here as with Adyen and Stripe.

**Pros:**
- Stored instrument tokens persist across payment sessions with a single payment_instrument_id reference that works for one-click payments, subscriptions, and MIT transactions
- Network token enrollment through Visa and Mastercard is built into the processing flow, with lifecycle management handled server-side by Checkout.com
- Strong SEPA and EU local payment method tokenization coverage, useful for European subscription businesses that need recurring mandates alongside card tokenization

**Cons:**
- Vault is tightly coupled to Checkout.com processing; tokens are not portable to other acquirers and the PAN retrieval process for migration has limited documentation
- G2 reviewer themes include support responsiveness issues during implementation and a documentation set that lags behind Stripe and Adyen in coverage depth
- No published tokenization-specific pricing; costs are bundled into processing agreements and require direct sales to separate


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Processing-bundled | Interchange + fees | EU and global merchants on Checkout.com processing |
| Enterprise | Custom | High volume, custom SLA, regional account management |


### Braintree Vault: Best for PayPal-ecosystem merchants with recurring billing needs

**Best for PayPal ecosystem**  Score: 8.0/10  Rating: 4.0/5 (G2 · 562 reviews)

**Starting price:** Free with Braintree processing

Braintree Vault is the right answer for one specific situation: you are already processing through Braintree and you need a tokenized recurring billing flow without paying for a separate vault vendor. The vault is included in Braintree's processing fees, which are standard interchange-plus rates. The [562 G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/braintree/reviews) averaging 4.0/5 reflect a platform that used to lead on developer experience (the original Drop-in UI was ahead of its time in 2014) but has since been lapped by Stripe's API quality and Adyen's global coverage. Teams building new payment infrastructure in 2026 should evaluate Braintree as part of a broader PayPal ecosystem decision, not as a standalone tokenization choice. The vault works well. The platform around it has drifted.

**Pros:**
- Vault storage is free when you process through Braintree, which makes it the lowest-cost tokenization option for merchants already on the platform
- Drop-in UI achieves SAQ A-EP compliance with minimal implementation work, and hosted fields give developers direct field-level control for custom checkout designs
- PayPal, Venmo, Apple Pay, and Google Pay all tokenize through the same Braintree vault object, reducing integration complexity for multi-wallet merchants

**Cons:**
- Braintree has not received major product investment from PayPal since the acquisition, and the developer experience feels behind Stripe and Adyen by 2-3 product cycles
- Network token support (VTS/MDES) is available but requires additional configuration and Braintree support engagement, not automatic like Stripe
- Like all processor-bundled vaults, tokens are non-portable; migration away from Braintree requires a PAN migration project or re-capture campaign


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Standard | 2.59% + $0.49 | Card not present, vault included, up to 200K transactions/mo |
| Custom | Custom | High volume, interchange-plus pricing, dedicated support |


### CyberSource Token Management: Best for Visa-ecosystem enterprises with existing CyberSource contracts

**Best for Visa-ecosystem enterprise**  Score: 7.8/10  Rating: 3.6/5 (G2 · 71 reviews)

**Starting price:** Custom

CyberSource is a legacy category leader that earns a spot on this list because of its Visa parent relationship and enterprise installed base, not because of its product experience in 2026. The [71 G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/cybersource/reviews) averaging 3.6/5 are consistent: implementation takes longer than expected, support quality is uneven, and the API design reflects a product built for 2010-era enterprise integration patterns rather than modern developer workflows. For large enterprises that are already running CyberSource for fraud management or payment processing, the Token Management Service is a natural extension that avoids adding a new vendor relationship. For everyone else, the developer experience and review scores point clearly toward Spreedly, Basis Theory, or VGS as better paths to vault and tokenization.

**Pros:**
- Token Management Service (TMS) integrates directly with CyberSource payment processing and Visa network tokenization infrastructure with no third-party dependency
- Established enterprise compliance record with PCI DSS Level 1 Service Provider status and audit history that covers procurement requirements at Fortune 500 buyers
- Transact Token gives merchants a single token that works across all CyberSource-connected processors globally, useful for large enterprises with multi-region acquiring relationships

**Cons:**
- G2 rating of 3.6/5 is the lowest of any deep tool in this guide; recurring review themes are implementation complexity, support responsiveness, and outdated documentation
- The developer experience is decidedly enterprise-grade: integration timelines are measured in months, not weeks, and self-service onboarding does not really exist
- The platform shows its age in API design: REST coverage is incomplete, some token operations still require SOAP calls, and the sandbox environment is less reliable than competitors


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise | Custom | Large volume merchants on CyberSource processing, existing Visa contracts |


### NMI Gateway: For ISVs and PayFacs needing white-label vault tokenization

Score: 7.8/10  Rating: 4.7/5 (G2 · 104 reviews)

**Starting price:** Custom ISV pricing

NMI's tokenization strength is within its ISV and PayFac platform: white-label vault management, recurring billing, and network token support in a package built for software companies that want to embed payments. The [104 G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/nmi-gateway/reviews) averaging 4.7/5 are strong for a category where most vendors score in the 4.0-4.4 range.

**Pros:**
- White-label vault tokenization built for ISVs and payment facilitators, with sub-merchant management included in the platform
- Both gateway tokens and network tokens (Visa/Mastercard) supported, with network token lifecycle management in the same platform
- Recurring billing engine is tightly integrated with the vault, making NMI a strong pick for subscription-heavy ISV platforms

**Cons:**
- Pricing is not published and is structured for ISV partner relationships rather than direct merchant access
- Not designed as a standalone tokenization vault; you get the most value if NMI is also your payment gateway
- Enterprise-level customization requires reseller relationship setup, which slows initial evaluation timelines


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| ISV Partner | Custom | ISVs and PayFacs with embedded payment needs |


### Paysafe: For iGaming and high-risk merchants needing tokenized recurring billing

Score: 7.7/10  Rating: 4.0/5 (G2 · 53 reviews)

**Starting price:** Custom

Paysafe is the tokenization pick when your merchant category is high-risk and standard acquirers will not underwrite you. The vault and recurring billing stack are built with iGaming, forex, and digital goods merchants in mind. Not the right choice for mainstream e-commerce.

**Pros:**
- Tokenized vault covers high-risk and regulated merchant categories that most standard processors decline outright
- Multi-currency vault storage with settlement in 40+ currencies, suitable for cross-border iGaming and digital goods merchants
- Paysafecard and digital wallet tokenization alongside card vault, covering the payment mix of iGaming and digital goods buyers

**Cons:**
- Custom pricing with no published floor makes budgeting difficult during vendor comparison
- Developer documentation quality is below the category standard; integration support often requires account management escalation
- Not a general-purpose tokenization platform; the product is optimized for specific verticals and may have unnecessary overhead for standard e-commerce use cases


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise | Custom | High-risk and regulated merchants, iGaming, digital goods |


### Worldpay: For enterprise retailers with omnichannel card-present and card-not-present tokenization

Score: 7.6/10  Rating: 3.9/5 (G2 · 118 reviews)

**Starting price:** Custom

Worldpay's OmniToken is the enterprise retailer play: one token across your POS terminals, mobile app, and web checkout, managed within a single Worldpay processing relationship. Best evaluated as part of a Worldpay processing decision for large omnichannel merchants.

**Pros:**
- OmniToken covers in-store, mobile, and online channels with a single tokenization layer, useful for omnichannel retailers with unified loyalty programs
- Global acquiring presence means tokens are issued and managed within a single acquiring relationship across US, EU, and APAC regions
- Network token support through Visa and Mastercard programs with lifecycle management built into the Worldpay processing stack

**Cons:**
- G2 rating of 3.9/5 reflects recurring feedback about support quality, implementation complexity, and post-acquisition product consolidation friction
- Tokens are Worldpay-proprietary and not portable; switching acquirers requires a full PAN migration
- Pricing is opaque and often tied to existing processing volume relationships, making it hard to evaluate independently


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise processing | Custom | Large omnichannel retailers, multi-region acquiring |


### Authorize.net: For small merchants needing basic card vault without custom development

Score: 7.6/10  Rating: 4.2/5 (G2 · 205 reviews)

**Starting price:** $25/mo + processing fees

Authorize.net CIM is the right vault pick for small merchants who need recurring billing without a complex vault implementation, provided they are single-processor and do not need network token benefits. The $25/mo all-in price is unmatched for basic vault storage.

**Pros:**
- Customer Information Manager (CIM) provides tokenized card storage at $25/mo with no usage fees, the most affordable published price in this guide
- Long track record since 1996 means broad plugin and shopping cart support; most e-commerce platforms have a native Authorize.net CIM connector
- Simple hosted payment page option achieves SAQ A compliance without custom JavaScript integration, accessible for teams with limited dev capacity

**Cons:**
- No network token support through VTS or MDES; stored tokens are Authorize.net vault tokens only, with no automatic card lifecycle management
- Not suitable for multi-processor scenarios or teams that need vault portability; the product is designed for the Authorize.net ecosystem only
- Product investment has been limited since the Visa acquisition; the API design and developer experience lag behind Braintree and Stripe by years


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| All-in-one | $25/mo + 2.9% + $0.30 | Small merchants, basic recurring billing, CIM included |
| Payment Gateway only | $25/mo + $0.10/txn | Merchants with existing merchant account |


### Square: For retail and F&B merchants needing point-of-sale and card-not-present tokenization in one stack

Score: 7.5/10  Rating: 4.6/5 (G2 · 1,192 reviews)

**Starting price:** Included with Square processing

Square's tokenization works exactly as expected for the market it serves: retail and F&B merchants who want card-on-file and recurring billing without building payment infrastructure. The SDK is clean and the sandbox is excellent. Not a fit for any scenario requiring multi-processor flexibility.

**Pros:**
- Card on File tokenization is built into the Square Payments SDK at no additional cost, covering in-person and online channels from the same token object
- Nonce-based tokenization model means raw card data never reaches the merchant server even in custom integrations
- Strong developer documentation and a JavaScript SDK that is widely regarded as cleaner than Authorize.net or Braintree for new implementations

**Cons:**
- Square tokens are Square-proprietary; processor migration requires a full re-capture campaign with no PAN export path
- Network token support through VTS or MDES is not available for Square tokens, limiting the authorization rate optimization available to other platforms
- Not designed for enterprise or high-volume payment infrastructure; Square pricing and product limits become friction points past $5M annual GMV


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Standard | 2.6% + $0.10 | In-person; card-on-file tokenization included |
| Plus | $60/mo + processing | Retail and restaurant with advanced reporting |


### BlueSnap: For global B2B SaaS companies needing vault storage across 100+ currencies

Score: 7.6/10  Rating: 4.1/5 (G2 · 106 reviews)

**Starting price:** Custom

BlueSnap's vaulted shopper model is best for B2B SaaS companies selling globally who want to avoid building multi-currency payment logic from scratch. The token object handles currency conversion context, which reduces the merchant-side state management burden on international subscriptions.

**Pros:**
- VaultedShopper object stores tokenized payment data with multi-currency authorization in 100+ currencies from a single vault record
- Hosted Payment Fields tokenize card data on the client side, scoping the merchant to SAQ A-EP without full iFrame checkout
- B2B-focused feature set including Level 2/3 data, ACH, and SEPA tokenization alongside card vault

**Cons:**
- Tokens are BlueSnap-proprietary with no published PAN migration path; processor lock-in is the key risk at scale
- Implementation timeline is longer than Stripe or Braintree for standard use cases, with some G2 reviewers citing 3+ month go-live timelines
- Support quality for smaller accounts gets lower scores in G2 reviews; dedicated account management is reserved for higher-volume merchants


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Custom | Custom | B2B SaaS and mid-market merchants with global payment needs |


### Recurly: For subscription-first SaaS companies tokenizing card data for dunning and retries

Score: 7.6/10  Rating: 4.0/5 (G2 · 204 reviews)

**Starting price:** $249/mo

Recurly tokenizes card data in service of its subscription billing and revenue recovery logic. The vault is the mechanism; dunning and payment retries across gateways is the value proposition. Best for SaaS companies where payment failure rates and involuntary churn are the primary metrics, not for teams who need a general-purpose payment vault.

**Pros:**
- Revenue recovery on tokenized transactions is the core differentiation: smart dunning, automatic retries with gateway intelligence, and account updater integration
- Multi-gateway vault lets you route subscription retries to a backup gateway without a new card capture, reducing involuntary churn
- Native integration with 10+ payment gateways means the same token can be retried across processors during decline recovery

**Cons:**
- Recurly is a subscription billing platform, not a standalone tokenization vault; the tokenization capability only makes sense if Recurly is your billing layer
- Pricing at $249/mo floor plus 0.9% of recovered revenue on the Starter plan gets expensive for high-volume merchants with complex dunning needs
- Token portability outside of Recurly is not a feature; migrating off Recurly means rebuilding your billing and vault stack simultaneously


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Starter | $249/mo + 0.9% recovered | SaaS with up to $10M ARR, basic dunning |
| Professional | Custom | Mid-market SaaS with complex billing models |
| Elite | Custom | Enterprise SaaS, custom SLA, multi-currency billing |


### Chargebee: For high-growth SaaS companies running complex multi-currency subscription billing

Score: 7.7/10  Rating: 4.4/5 (G2 · 992 reviews)

**Starting price:** $599/mo

Chargebee handles tokenization by delegating it to your connected gateway (Stripe, Braintree, Adyen, etc.) and storing the resulting token in the Chargebee customer record. It is not a vault in the same sense as Spreedly or VGS. But for SaaS companies where subscription complexity (plans, add-ons, trial logic, coupons, tax) is the actual problem, Chargebee's depth in billing logic with [992 G2 reviews](https://www.g2.com/products/chargebee/reviews) at 4.4/5 makes it the strongest subscription billing pick in this guide.

**Pros:**
- Tokenization is gateway-delegated: Chargebee integrates with 30+ payment gateways and stores the gateway-issued token in its own customer vault, so your PCI scope is handled by the gateway layer
- Account Updater integration keeps stored tokens fresh when cards expire or are reissued, built into the billing engine rather than requiring separate configuration
- The strongest multi-currency and multi-tax subscription logic of any billing platform in this guide, with 150+ currency support and automatic tax calculation

**Cons:**
- Chargebee does not issue or manage tokens directly; token quality and portability depend entirely on which underlying gateway you connect
- Performance plan at $599/mo covers up to $100K/mo in billing; high-growth companies will see pricing scale significantly past $1M ARR
- The vault portability situation mirrors Recurly: migrating off Chargebee means re-evaluating your gateway and billing stack simultaneously


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Starter | Free to $250K ARR | Early-stage SaaS with basic subscription needs |
| Performance | $599/mo | Growth SaaS, up to $100K/mo billing volume |
| Enterprise | Custom | Complex billing, custom SLA, enterprise procurement |


### Zuora: For enterprise B2B companies with usage-based and contract-driven billing

Score: 7.5/10  Rating: 3.9/5 (G2 · 311 reviews)

**Starting price:** Custom

Zuora is the enterprise billing platform for companies whose revenue model complexity (usage-based, ramp contracts, multi-element arrangements) exceeds what Chargebee or Recurly handle well. The tokenization capabilities are gateway-delegated, not native. Best evaluated as a billing and revenue architecture decision for companies past $50M ARR with a dedicated billing operations team.

**Pros:**
- Payment Method Updater automates card lifecycle management for enterprise accounts, keeping tokenized B2B payment methods current across multi-year contracts
- Deep support for ACH, SEPA, and BECS direct debit tokenization alongside card, covering the payment mix of enterprise B2B recurring invoices
- Revenue recognition and billing orchestration depth that subscription billing-only platforms cannot match for complex enterprise contracts

**Cons:**
- G2 rating of 3.9/5 across 311 reviews reflects consistent feedback about implementation complexity, support quality, and a product that requires significant admin investment
- Pricing is enterprise-only and non-published; most implementation projects involve a Zuora partner, adding cost that is not reflected in any published number
- Tokenization quality depends on the underlying gateway connection; Zuora does not operate its own vault in the sense that VGS or Basis Theory does


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise | Custom | Enterprise B2B SaaS with complex billing and revenue recognition needs |


### Vindicia: For media and entertainment companies with high involuntary churn on recurring subscriptions

Score: 7.5/10  Rating: 3.8/5 (G2 · 22 reviews)

**Starting price:** Custom

Vindicia serves a specific market: consumer subscription businesses in media, streaming, and digital publishing that face high involuntary churn rates from failed card transactions. The tokenized multi-gateway retry logic is the product. If that is your problem, Vindicia is worth evaluating. If not, Chargebee or Recurly will serve you better.

**Pros:**
- CashBox billing engine is purpose-built for high-volume consumer subscription recovery, with payment retry algorithms built specifically for media and streaming billing patterns
- Multi-gateway retry logic uses tokenized payment data to attempt recovery across different processors, increasing authorization rates on soft declines
- Long history in media and entertainment billing means the platform handles the specific retry and account updater patterns common in streaming subscription models

**Cons:**
- Small G2 review base (22 reviews) makes it difficult to benchmark against peers and find reference customers outside the media vertical
- Platform is optimized for consumer subscriptions; B2B SaaS and enterprise billing use cases are not the target market
- Implementation requires vendor-led onboarding and is not designed for developer self-service; go-live timelines are measured in months


Pricing breakdown:

| Plan | Price | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise | Custom | Consumer subscription media and entertainment, high-volume retry optimization |



## More


## The payment tokenization landscape in 20 tools

Payment tokenization software splits into four distinct architecture families, and picking the wrong one forces a painful migration later.

**Dedicated neutral vaults** (Spreedly, VGS, Basis Theory, TokenEx, Skyflow) are processor-agnostic. They store your card data independently of which payment processor handles the authorization. You can route the same token to Adyen today and Worldpay tomorrow without a new card capture. These are the right choice for any team that wants processor optionality, is building payment infrastructure for others, or needs a vault that will outlast their current processor relationship.

**Processor-bundled vaults** (Stripe, Adyen, Checkout.com, Braintree, CyberSource) include tokenization as part of their processing stack. The vault is free or included, implementation is straightforward, and network token support is often native. The cost is lock-in: your tokens are that processor's proprietary format, and migration requires a PAN export project that the processor controls the timeline of.

**Subscription billing platforms** (Chargebee, Recurly, Zuora, Vindicia) delegate tokenization to an underlying payment gateway and store the resulting token in their customer record. They are not vaults in the strict sense. The tokenization is a side effect of the billing architecture. Evaluate these if subscription revenue complexity is your actual problem, not if standalone vault architecture is the goal.

**Vertical and specialty gateways** (NMI, Paysafe, Worldpay) offer tokenization as part of a broader processing product targeted at specific channels (ISV/PayFac, high-risk, omnichannel retail). They are worth considering when your merchant category or distribution model is the primary constraint, not when tokenization architecture is the primary driver.

The dividing line that matters most in 2026 is network token support. Gateway tokens (processor-issued, processor-specific) are the baseline. Network tokens (Visa Token Service, Mastercard MDES) deliver automatic card lifecycle updates that improve authorization rates on recurring charges by 2-5 percentage points in most published studies.

Platforms that issue network tokens natively versus those that only support gateway tokens are meaningfully differentiated, and that gap shows up in renewal authorization rates at scale.

## Picking the right tokenization platform

### 1. Processor optionality in 12 months

If there is any scenario in which you might add a second processor, run A/B routing experiments, or switch acquirers, start with a neutral vault. Spreedly, VGS, or Basis Theory all let you route the same token to any supported gateway. Processor-bundled vaults (Stripe, Adyen, Braintree) do not support this without a PAN migration project.

### 2. PCI scope reduction target

If your goal is to drop from SAQ D to SAQ A, VGS's proxy architecture is the most direct path because raw card data never enters your environment. Hosted-fields implementations (Stripe Elements, Braintree Drop-in, Authorize.net Accept.js) achieve SAQ A-EP, which is a significant improvement but not the same. If you need SAQ A and you have a non-standard checkout flow, VGS is the only option in this guide that can deliver it without rewriting the checkout.

### 3. Data type scope

Payment card data only? Spreedly, VGS, or Basis Theory handle this cleanly. Card data plus PII (SSN, health records, identity documents)? Skyflow is purpose-built for this. The compliance overhead of managing multiple sensitive data types with different regulatory frameworks justifies a platform that handles all of them in a single policy model.

### 4. Authorization rate optimization as a primary metric

If improving renewal authorization rates on recurring transactions is the main driver, evaluate Adyen, Stripe, or Checkout.com first. Their native Visa and Mastercard network token integration is the most direct path to authorization rate improvement, and the improvement is automatic rather than requiring configuration. NMI and Worldpay also support network tokens for merchants within those ecosystems.

### 5. Developer self-service versus enterprise procurement

Basis Theory, Stripe, and Braintree support developer self-service onboarding where an engineer can have a working sandbox integration in an afternoon. TokenEx, CyberSource, Adyen, and Skyflow involve enterprise procurement cycles measured in weeks, with sales-led onboarding. Know which mode your team is in before you start evaluating.

## The pick by stage

**Seed-stage, single-processor, no compliance team yet:** Stripe's built-in tokenization. Zero additional cost, hosted fields in an afternoon, PCI scope reduced automatically. You can revisit vault portability when you have 100K+ customers.

**Series A, building subscription billing from scratch:** Basis Theory for the vault plus Chargebee for subscription logic. Basis Theory keeps the vault portable; Chargebee handles billing complexity. The combination costs more than a single-processor path but avoids lock-in.

**Series B, running Stripe but evaluating multi-processor routing:** Add Spreedly above your Stripe integration. Spreedly can wrap existing Stripe tokens in some configurations, and it positions you for acquirer redundancy without a new card capture.

**Mid-market, PCI audit coming, security team driving evaluation:** TokenEx or VGS. Both have deep compliance documentation that security teams trust during audit cycles. VGS is faster to implement; TokenEx has broader multi-channel coverage for non-card payment types.

**Enterprise, existing CyberSource or Adyen relationship:** Stay on the processor-bundled vault and invest in network token optimization within the existing stack. The implementation cost of migrating to a neutral vault rarely pays back at this stage unless you are actively switching acquirers.

**Marketplace or platform building embedded payments:** Spreedly or NMI, depending on whether you need a white-label PayFac model. Spreedly for orchestration-first platforms. NMI for ISV partners who want a white-label gateway relationship.

**Healthcare or insurance, PII plus payment data:** Skyflow. The policy-based access control model handles the intersection of HIPAA and PCI DSS in a single compliance perimeter.

**High-risk or iGaming merchant:** Paysafe. Standard acquirers will decline your category; Paysafe's tokenized vault and acquiring relationships are built for it.

## What I check in every tokenization demo

**One, confirm the vault is actually yours.** Ask the vendor directly: if you terminate the contract, can you export PANs to a new vault? Which partner handles the key ceremony? How long does it take? Processor-bundled vaults will tell you this requires a migration process they manage. Neutral vaults (VGS, Basis Theory, Spreedly) will walk you through a test export.

**Two, verify network token enrollment.** Ask the sales rep to screen-share a live account with network token enrollment enabled. If the rep cannot show you a live VTS or MDES enrollment event in the dashboard, the feature is not production-ready or is only available at a higher tier than you are being quoted.

**Three, test the sandbox fidelity.** Decline codes, rate limiting, and multi-gateway failover behavior in the sandbox should mirror production. Platforms where the sandbox only handles happy-path flows (Authorize.net, legacy CyberSource) will produce integration surprises in production.

**Four, run the actual PCI scope reduction exercise.** Bring your QSA into the technical conversation with the vendor. Some vaults claim SAQ A eligibility in marketing materials but require a detailed architecture review before a QSA will sign off. VGS and Basis Theory both have standard QSA engagement materials. TokenEx has an account management team dedicated to audit support. Adyen and Stripe provide compliance guides but QSA engagement is your responsibility.

**Five, ask for the API rate limit and failure mode behavior.** Tokenization platforms that are in the critical path of your checkout flow need documented SLAs, rate limits, and graceful degradation behavior. Basis Theory publishes these. Several vendors in this guide require a support ticket to find out.

**Six, check the token format compatibility with your downstream systems.** If you are sending tokens to a fraud vendor, a data warehouse, or a legacy billing system, format matters. Numeric-only tokens versus alphanumeric versus Luhn-valid-but-fake are different values, and not all downstream systems accept all formats.

## Where payment tokenization is heading in 2026

**Network token mandates are coming from the card schemes.** Visa and Mastercard have been signaling for two years that merchant-initiated transactions on stored credentials will eventually require network tokens rather than gateway tokens for optimal interchange and authorization rates.

The Adyen, Stripe, and Checkout.com customers who have already moved to network tokens are seeing 2-4% authorization rate improvements on recurring charges. Every other platform in this guide is building toward native network token support because merchants will eventually be pushed to it.

**AI-driven retry logic is becoming the differentiation in subscription billing.** Recurly, Vindicia, and Chargebee are all investing in machine-learning-based retry timing and authorization optimization. The tokenized payment data these platforms hold is the training set for recovery rate improvements. Expect this to become a standard feature across subscription billing platforms by 2027, rather than a premium add-on.

**PCI DSS v4.0 compliance deadlines are forcing architecture reviews.** The March 2025 deadline for PCI DSS v4.0 adoption has driven a wave of tokenization evaluations by merchants who were still on SAQ D and realized the new requirements around JavaScript security (requirement 6.4.3) apply specifically to their checkout pages. VGS and Basis Theory both reported significant inbound volume from this compliance driver in the first half of 2026.

**Vault consolidation is happening.** Teams that separately manage a payment vault, a PII vault, and a secrets manager are being pushed toward unified sensitive-data platforms. Skyflow is the clearest expression of this trend. Expect Basis Theory and VGS to extend their non-payment sensitive data capabilities in 2026-2027 as the unified vault category develops.

**Processor portability is becoming a procurement requirement.** Procurement and vendor risk teams at companies past Series B are starting to include vault exportability as a standard clause in payment processor contracts. This is a direct response to the lock-in experience of the Stripe and Braintree vault generations, and it is pushing mid-market merchants toward neutral vaults even when a processor-bundled vault would have been simpler to implement.

---

Payment tokenization software decisions age badly when they are made for the current processor relationship rather than the future architecture. Start with what your PCI scope target actually is, then pick the vault architecture that matches, and evaluate processor optionality before you have a reason to need it.

For corrections or pricing updates on this guide, reach editorial@topickz.com. Pricing and G2 ratings on this page are reviewed quarterly, next refresh scheduled January 2027.

## FAQs

### What is the difference between a gateway token and a network token?

A gateway token is issued by your processor and only works with that processor. A network token (VTS/MDES) is issued by Visa or Mastercard and works across any processor, with automatic card lifecycle updates.

### Which tokenization platforms support Visa Token Service (VTS) and Mastercard MDES natively?

Adyen, Stripe, Checkout.com, and Worldpay support VTS and MDES natively. Spreedly and TokenEx support them at the Enterprise tier via acquirer integration.

### Does payment tokenization eliminate PCI DSS compliance?

No. Tokenization reduces PCI scope. A well-implemented vault can drop you from SAQ D (300+ controls) to SAQ A (22 controls), but some compliance obligations remain.

### Can I move my token vault from one vendor to another?

Only if your vault vendor supports PAN export and your new vendor supports PAN import. VGS, Basis Theory, and Spreedly support this. Stripe, Adyen, and Braintree do not.

### What is the monthly cost for a dedicated tokenization platform at 5M transactions per year?

Expect $1,000-$1,500/mo for Basis Theory, VGS, or TokenEx at 5M annual operations. Processor-bundled vaults (Stripe, Adyen) have no separate line item.

### Do I need a separate tokenization platform if I already use Stripe?

Only if you want multi-processor flexibility or plan to switch processors. Stripe's built-in tokenization is sufficient for single-processor Stripe merchants.

### What is format-preserving tokenization and when does it matter?

Format-preserving tokens look like valid card numbers (16-digit Luhn-valid). They matter when downstream systems validate card number format and cannot easily accept non-numeric tokens.

### How does VGS differ from a traditional vault like TokenEx?

VGS uses a proxy to intercept data in transit so your server never sees raw card data. TokenEx vaults data after collection. Both reduce PCI scope but through different architectural paths.

### What compliance certifications should I look for in a tokenization vendor?

Minimum is PCI DSS Level 1 Service Provider. Also look for SOC 2 Type II, current attestation date, and EMVCo tokenization standard coverage if you need network tokens.

### Is Basis Theory suitable for non-payment sensitive data like SSNs?

Yes, Basis Theory is a general-purpose sensitive data vault. Skyflow is the stronger choice when PII vaulting at scale is the primary use case alongside payments.