How to issue cards: Striga vs BIN Sponsor
How to issue cards: Striga vs BIN Sponsor
- Mousser R.
- 8 min read
Table of Contents
What is a BIN Sponsor?
A BIN Sponsor is a company that has gained membership to a card scheme (Visa, Mastercard), and as a member has permission to sponsor other companies for them to have a BIN. A Banking Identification Number (BIN) is the 4 – 6 digits at the start of a card’s number. Without legitimate access to these numbers, it is not possible to issue cards. In brief, BIN Sponsors control these numbers, and allow their clients to use them.
Examples of them are Moorwand and Monavate, though there are many others.
What is Crypto-BaaS?
Crypto banking-as-a-service 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
- Echanges de crypto-monnaies
- IBAN accounts for individual users
- Virtual and Physical Visa Card Issue
- KYC & AML controls
Examples of them are Striga, Solid, and Synapse
Where do they overlap?
There is no overlap of functions, just of what they enable: card issuing. A BIN Sponsor provides one of the key components to issue cards. A Crypto-BaaS like Striga relies on the BIN Sponsor — or even on a banking service provider with a BIN Sponsorship — for this component, and also connects to a Card Bureau and Card Processor to manufacture the cards and process the transactions. Then, it bundles them and offers to issue cards to its clients.
But enough context – The question here is: How does Striga compare to the average BIN Sponsor?
Striga Vs. BIN Sponsors:
Time to Market
BIN Sponsor: The majority of the time to market is related to getting the approvals and paperwork done. It is common for the process to take over a full year.
Striga 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.
Verdict: Striga is the faster option, while getting the BIN Sponsorship is, by far, the slowest way to issue cards.
Striga
BIN Sponsor
Time to Market
1.5 – 3 months
12+ months
Striga Vs. BIN Sponsors:
Financials
BIN Sponsor: They have been known to charge between USD 50,000 and 100,000 as an upfront cost, with monthly minimums or subscriptions in the USD 15,000 – 20,000 range, though it may vary depending on each particular case.
Striga: The Crypto-BaaS platform of Striga charges EUR 5,000 as an upfront/integration cost, plus EUR 3,000 monthly.
Verdict: Striga is, by a long shot, the cheaper option, given that it dilutes the costs from previous stages of the financial chain among its clients so that it can offer competitive financials.
Financials
Striga
BIN Sponsor
Upfront Cost (EUR)
5,000
50,000 – 100,000
Monthly Minimum / Subscription Fee (EUR)
3,000
15,000-20,000
Striga Vs. BIN Sponsors:
Services offered
BIN Sponsor: As mentioned above, their only service is to permit the use of BIN ranges. They provide authorization for the use of the numbers, which is part of the card issuing process, but still requires a card bureau and card processor to complete.
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 Visa Card Issue
- Apple Pay & Google Pay support (Tokenization)
- Product lifecycle management via a dashboard
Verdict: The business models are different. If your focus is solely on getting the most control over your card program, you have time, and resources, and already have a high transactional volume in your banking platform, a BIN sponsorship makes sense. If you are building your banking platform and shopping for the many components required, Striga is the solution for you.
Services
Striga
BIN Sponsor
White Label Infrastructure
Yes
No
Native Crypto Support
Yes
No
Crypto Wallets
Yes
No
Crypto Exchange Features
Yes
No
Individual IBAN accounts
Yes
No
Physical and Virtual Visa Card Issue
Yes
Partially
Apple Pay & Google Pay
Yes
No
Product lifecycle management via dashboard
Yes
No
Striga Vs. BIN Sponsors:
Technical setup
Besides the documentation being high-quality, the 4 following elements make the technical setup friendlier:
- Publicly available sandbox: Striga offers one, BIN Sponsors sometimes do as well, though not always.
- The number of partners required: Assuming you start from scratch, to go live with a full crypto banking platform, you need the BIN Sponsor, plus another 7 partners (Wallet provider, Liquidity Provider, Card Processor, Card Bureau, IBAN provider, KYC provider, and AML provider). Striga, on the other hand, is already connected with all of the above, so you only need the connection to Striga.
- Interactive setup guide: Though all companies have setup guides, they tend to be static. Striga is the only one with a guide that connects to its servers interactively, so clients can test and learn in real-time each step of the guide.
- Public API Documentation: Striga has publicly available documentation. BIN Sponsors don’t, and sometimes even require an NDA for its disclosure.
Verdict: Connecting to Striga requires considerably less effort given the extensive availability of resources it provides, as well as the simplicity of connecting to only one partner, as opposed to 7.
Technical Setup
Striga
BIN Sponsor
Publicly Available Sandbox
Yes
Sometimes
Number of Partners Required to Go Live
1
5 – 7
Interactive Setup Guide
Yes
No
Public API Documentation
Yes
No
Striga Vs. BIN Sponsors:
Regulation & compliance
So, integrations were easy to connect, the app has all the features your users love, and it is making you money due to great financials. The only thing that could put a stop to it is making a regulatory mistake and getting shut down.
There are 3 things to know if you want to stay in business: Know your customer (KYC), Anti-money laundering (AML), and Licenses. The big question here is “who handles the KYC/AML process and holds the licenses”. Being in charge allows for more flexibility, but requires more resources and responsibility.
- On KYC: BIN Sponsors, usually, require their sponsored clients to take handle their KYC operation. Outsourcing it or building it is generally necessary. Striga doesn’t allow for KYC outsourcing, it handles it on behalf of the client.
- On AML: BIN Sponsors, usually, require their sponsored clients to take handle their AML operation. Outsourcing it or building it is generally necessary. Striga doesn’t allow for AML outsourcing, it handles it on behalf of the client.
- On Licenses: Striga does not require its clients to hold virtual asset licenses or commercial registrations. BIN Sponsors, on the other hand, do. Having such close contact with the BINs requires an increased degree of responsibility and accountability.
Verdict: BIN Sponsorships provide more flexibility in terms of oversight, but require more responsibility on the client’s part too. Overall, BIN Sponsors are better if you have the resources to get the licenses and build the KYC/AML operation, but Striga is better if you don’t have them, and just want to build your product.
Regulation & Compliance
Striga
BIN Sponsor
Outsourceable KYC
No
Yes
Outsourceable AML
No
Yes
Licenses or Commercial Registrations NOT Required
Yes
No
Verdict
Is Striga better than the average BIN Sponsor?
If what you want is full flexibility and control over your card program, and don’t mind expending great time, effort and resources to get it, BIN Sponsors are the way to go. This is usually the best alternative for companies that are already big, can justify the expense via economies of scale, and don’t have an accelerated timeline.
If, on the other hand, your company is still in the process of growing (so you focus your resources on it), and you want to quickly launch a card program without hassle, then Striga is the solution for you.
FR 
EN