Table of Contents
There are multiple types of financial institutions and banking service providers out there. A group of them focus not on investments, but on providing infrastructure. Crypto-as-a-Service (CaaS) and Crypto-banking-as-a-Service (Crypto-BaaS) —like Striga’s platform— fall within that category, and though they sound quite similar, they are quite different.
What is Crypto as a Service?
Crypto-as-a-Service (CaaS) traditionally refers to companies that allow other companies to use their exchange platform to trade as a company. The client company can then break down its account into multiple smaller accounts to provide exchange features to its users. So, in brief, CaaS provides exchange features to companies, and the liquidity to back them up.
Examples of them are Bitstamp, Bitpanda, and Zero Hash, though there are many others.
What is Crypto Banking as a Service?
Crypto banking-as-a-service (Crypto-BaaS) refers to companies that provide banking infrastructure —usually both crypto & fiat— for other companies to integrate into their products. Crypto-BaaS usually offer features regarding:
- Crypto wallets
- Crypto exchanges
- IBAN accounts for individual users
- Virtual and Physical Cards
- KYC & AML controls
Examples of them are Striga in Europe or Solid and Synapse in the US.
Where do CaaS and Crypto BaaS overlap?
They share the exchange features, but not in the same way. Usually, Crypto-BaaS partners with a CaaS to be able to provide its features. The Crypto-as-a-Service provider is usually the one who holds control over the liquidity and sets the spread/fees for exchanging cryptocurrencies, while the Crypto-BaaS acts as an intermediary and infrastructure integrator.
But moving on to the actual article: How does Striga’s Crypto BaaS platform compare with Zero Hash’s Crypto-as-a-Service platform for those who want to build a crypto Neobank?
Striga Vs. Zero Hash:
Time to Market
Zero Hash: The time it takes to integrate CaaS depends on two things: Going through a round of calls with the provider (in this case Zero Hash) to get approval and exchange documentation and developing the technical integrations. The expertise required to do the latter is usually high. The full process usually takes between 2 and 6 months, and the size and experience of the client’s developer team play a big role in it.
Striga: It takes between 6 weeks and 3 months to fully deploy a product, from the moment you make the decision, through the integrations, until going live. The simplest features may be deployed even in 2 weeks.
Verdict: Striga is the faster option, though these two categories are the fastest to set up among financial infrastructure providers in general.
Striga
Zero Hash
Time to Market
1.5 – 3 months
2 – 6 months
Striga Vs. Zero Hash:
Financials
Zero Hash: The company’s commercial fees are not publicly available, but since they operate an equivalent model, and on the same market, like Coinbase, we can use them as a reference: Over USD 500,000 in assets are required to use the platform to enable exchange features, which while not being a setup fee or monthly minimum, it is a huge commitment of capital. That said, upfront and monthly costs tend to be zero.
Striga: The Crypto-BaaS platform of Striga charges EUR 5,000 as an upfront/integration cost, plus EUR 3,000 monthly.
Verdict: Without publicly available information, a verdict cannot be reached, but if Zero Hash behaves similarly to Coinbase, then it is far more expensive in terms of committed capital than Striga.
Financials
Striga
Zero Hash (industry benchmark)
Upfront Cost (EUR)
5,000
0
Monthly Minimum / Subscription Fee (EUR)
3,000
0
Striga Vs. Zero Hash:
Services Offered
Zero Hash: As mentioned above, a CaaS company focuses exclusively on providing crypto liquidity to enable exchange features. Zero Hash focuses on enabling institutional exchange access.
Striga: On the other hand, Striga’s Crypto-BaaS has a full list of services including, but not limited to:
- White label infrastructure
- Native crypto support
- Crypto Wallets
- Crypto exchange features
- Individual IBAN accounts
- Physical and Virtual Card Issuing
- Apple Pay & Google Pay support (Tokenization)
- Product lifecycle management via a dashboard
Verdict: Striga far outstrips Zero Hash in terms of a range of services, which is expected, given the different business models. When it comes specifically to exchange features though, Zero Hash is likely the expert.
Services
Striga
Zero Hash
White Label Infrastructure
Yes
No
Native Crypto Support
Yes
Yes
Crypto Wallets
Yes
No
Crypto Exchange Features
Yes
Yes
Individual IBAN accounts
Yes
No
Physical and Virtual Card Issuing
Yes
No
Apple Pay & Google Pay
Yes
No
Product lifecycle management via dashboard
Yes
No
Striga Vs. Zero Hash:
Technical Setup
While financials and services are essential to make a product great, you need to integrate the APIs first. Ask any developer team: if the technical setup is not properly designed, a simple —even enjoyable— setup, can become a months-long nightmare.
Besides the documentation being high-quality, the 4 following elements make the technical setup friendlier:
- Publicly available sandbox
- Number of partners required to build crypto & fiat Neobank
- Interactive setup guide
- Public API Documentation
Zero Hash:
- The company does not appear to have a publicly available sandbox
- It takes up to 7 partners to launch a Neobank (Zero Hash + Card Bureau, Card Processor, BIN Sponsor, IBAN provider, Custody infrastructure, and AML/KYC providers)
- The company does not appear to have an interactive setup guide, just a static one
- The company does share its API documentation publicly
Striga:
- Striga has a publicly accessible sandbox
- It takes 1 partner (Striga itself) to launch a full crypto Neobank platform
- Striga has an interactive setup guide
- Striga shares publicly its API documentation
Verdict: Connecting to Striga requires substantially less effort given the availability of resources and simplicity of connecting to just 1 partner, as opposed to up to 7.
Technical Setup
Striga
Zero Hash
Publicly Available Sandbox
Yes
No
Number of Partners Required to Go Live
1
7
Interactive Setup Guide
Yes
No
Public API Documentation
Yes
Yes
Striga Vs. Zero Hash:
Regulation & Compliance
Once you launch a platform with the services you want and profitable financials, the only thing to worry about beyond growing your business in compliance. There are 3 core points to consider in that regard:
- KYC: Either the provider or the client company has to handle the responsibility of onboarding users and recording their data
- AML: Either the provider or the client company has to handle the responsibility of monitoring transactions to report potential money laundering
- Licenses: Either the provider or the client company has to hold a license to manage and hold virtual assets
Zero Hash: Though they do not appear to publicly disclose their KYC/AML policies, the industry standard is for them to handle it themselves (thus, preventing the client from outsourcing it). Another industry standard is that the client must have a license or registration for the custody of digital assets if they want to connect to the CaaS provider’s infrastructure.
Striga: Striga handles both KYC and AML for its clients (outsourcing it isn’t an option). The client does not need to have any license or registration to handle or custody of digital currencies, as Striga takes care of that*.
- Striga is currently according to the newly updated (March 2022) Virtual Asset Service Provider License in Estonia.
Verdict: Though potentially equivalent in KYC & AML, Zero Hash may have one extra roadblock when compared to Striga due to requiring a license to operate. So, Striga is likely more convenient compliance-wise.
Regulation & Compliance
Striga
Zero Hash
Outsourceable KYC
No
No
Outsourceable AML
No
No
Licenses or Commercial Registrations NOT Required
Yes
No
Verdict
Is Striga better than Zero Hash?
It depends on what you’re looking for.
If what you exclusively want is direct access to cryptocurrency liquidity to offer exchange features with great flexibility, you have a solid development team to back you and are ready to wait up to 6 months, Zero Hash makes sense. At the time of writing, it appears Zero Hash does not operate in Europe, but for the United States and other markets, it is a good option.
If you operate in the European market, and what you want is to build a full-fledged neobanking platform or integrate banking features into your product, and you want to deploy it quickly, then your best bet is Striga.
Striga Crypto-native Banking as a Service:
Your path to building and launching financial products
Join the financial businesses that use Striga’s cloud platform to delight their customers and launch their own products without the complexities that come when dealing with core banking solutions’ relationships, licensing, compliance and payments methods.
EN 
FR