Embedded finance providers that can support you end-to-end (accounts, payments, safeguarding) without stitching together multiple vendors include ClearBank, OpenPayd and Railsr. 

They often include features such as: 

• Account infrastructure 
• Payment scheme connectivity 
• Safeguarding (via EMIs) or deposit protection (via licenced banks) of client funds 
• Regulatory permissions 

All delivered through a single integration. 

A full-stack embedded finance provider enables a business to embed financial services, such as accounts, payments, or wallets, through a single regulated counterparty. 

In practice, a full-stack embedded finance provider typically offers: 

• Named accounts 
• Domestic payment rails such as Faster Payments or SEPA 
• International payments and FX 
• Deposit protection under schemes such as FSCS 
• Compliance oversight and governance 
• A unified ledger 

Think of it like building a house. The stitched model requires separate contractors for plumbing, wiring, foundations and roofing. A full-stack provider acts as the general contractor with everything under one agreement. 

This reduces integration overhead and ongoing operational risk. Here’s are some providers that enable this: 

ClearBank occupies a distinct position as a fully authorised UK bank that is purpose-built to deliver services to other firms. It’s unique as the bank doesn’t offer any services directly to end consumers, so it’s never in competition with its clients for customer deposits.  

It’s authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by both the PRA and the Financial Conduct Authority, and all GBP client funds are held at the Bank of England. 

This is materially different from an Electronic Money Institution model. 

Through its embedded banking proposition, ClearBank enables firms to offer: 

• Real GBP accounts with an individual sort code and account number 
• Direct access to UK Faster Payments and CHAPS payment schemes 
• Confirmation of Payee 
• Multi-currency clearing 
• Eligible deposits protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme up to £120,000 per depositor  

Because ClearBank is a bank, eligible deposits can be protected under FSCS. This protection does not apply under EMI safeguarding models. 

ClearBank powers savings and current account propositions for fintechs such as Tide, Chip and Revolut, demonstrating its role as regulated infrastructure rather than a front-end brand. 

A bank structure may be preferable if you require: 

• Deposit protection 
• Interest-bearing accounts 
• Indirect scheme membership 
• Reduced intermediary layers 
• Strong regulatory certainty  

However, bank models can involve stricter onboarding and oversight requirements. 

OpenPayd operates as a regulated Electronic Money Institution. 

Under the UK Electronic Money Regulations 2011, EMIs must safeguard client funds by segregating them in protected accounts with credit institutions or investing them in secure, low-risk assets. These funds are not covered by the FSCS deposit guarantee scheme.

Through a unified API, OpenPayd offers: 

• Multi-currency accounts 
• Virtual IBANs 
• Domestic and international payments 
• Foreign exchange services 
• Stablecoin on and off ramps 
• Safeguarding under EMI permissions  

Its strength lies in flexibility and cross-border reach. 

For fintechs operating in: 

• Remittance 
• FX 
• Digital assets 
• Marketplace payouts  

An EMI-led structure can offer faster go-to-market and broader jurisdictional coverage.

Railsr positions itself as an embedded finance experience platform. 

It provides: 

• Wallet and account functionality 
• Domestic and international payments 
• Safeguarding 
• Virtual and physical card issuing 
• BIN sponsorship 
• Open banking capabilities  

Like OpenPayd, Railsr operates within EMI regulatory frameworks and partners with licensed institutions where required. 

Railsr is often suited to: 

• Digital wallets 
• Neobanks 
• Platform propositions 
• Brands launching card products  

Its value proposition centres on simplifying commercial and technical integration under a single agreement.

This is one of the most misunderstood areas of embedded finance. 

• Eligible deposits may be FSCS protected up to £120,000 
• Funds sit on the balance sheet of a regulated bank 
• Bank-grade resilience 

• Funds must be safeguarded under the Electronic Money Regulations 
• Client money is segregated 
• No deposit guarantee scheme directly applies 

EMI safeguarding means: 

• Funds are segregated 
• Funds are protected if the institution fails 
• But deposits are not directly covered by FSCS  

For many use cases, this is sufficient. For consumer savings or deposit products, it may not be. 

Neither model is inherently better. It depends on your product and customer expectations. 

For example: 

• A savings proposition may require deposit protection 
• A marketplace payout flow may not 

For many regulated fintechs operating under an EMI licence, a structural limitation exists: 

• Client funds must be safeguarded. 
• Interest cannot be paid on those balances in the same way as bank deposits. 
• As balances grow, the opportunity cost increases.  

At scale, this becomes commercially inefficient. Large EMI balance sheets can hold significant client funds – but generate no direct yield benefit to customers or the fintech itself. 

A bank-led embedded model changes this dynamic. 

With a licensed bank structure: 

• Funds can be held as deposits rather than safeguarded e-money. 
• Eligible balances can earn interest. 
• Commercial structures can allow interest-sharing arrangements.  

In practice, this means embedded banking can: 

• Improve customer stickiness (customers are less likely to move funds) 
• Enable cross-sell into savings or investment products 
• Create a new revenue stream for the fintech via shared interest economics  

For scaling fintechs, embedded banking can therefore evolve from a compliance decision into a margin strategy. 

“End-to-end” can mean different things depending on geography and regulatory structure. 

Before choosing a partner, ask: 

• Can you act as our single regulated counterparty? 
• Who legally holds customer funds? 
• How are funds protected? 
• Is there one unified ledger? 
• Will we need reconciliation across systems? 
• Which compliance responsibilities sit with you versus us? 
• Do you have direct scheme access or rely on intermediaries? 
• How does your safeguarding model align with FCA expectations? 

If expanding internationally, also ask: 

• Does your model replicate in the EU? 
• Will additional banking partners be required? 

Clarity at this stage prevents costly restructuring later on. 

Even with a full-stack provider, implementation includes: 

1. Commercial structuring 
2. Regulatory mapping 
3. KYC and onboarding design 
4. Ledger configuration 
5. Payment flow testing 
6. Operational resilience planning 
7. Compliance reporting setup  

A unified provider simplifies integration, but it does not eliminate regulatory accountability. 

Sources: 

• https://www.openpayd.com/embedded-finance/ 
• https://www.openpayd.com/banking-as-a-service/ 
• https://www.railsr.com/products 
• https://www.railsr.com/fintech-scaleup