stile

Identity verification APIs: 7 providers compared

What actually differs between them: the integration surface, the billing unit, the data boundary, and the coverage behind each vendor's claims.

Buyer's guide · Updated August 12, 2026

The short version

  • Stile suits teams that want document, age, liveness, face match, and mobile driver's licence checks with published per-check pricing, while keeping raw identity data out of their own systems.

  • Jumio suits enterprises that need broad document coverage plus risk analysis that connects signals across events.

  • Entrust Identity Verification (formerly Onfido) suits teams that want configurable verification journeys, or that already buy Entrust security products.

  • Persona suits products that need different checks per user segment or risk tier, with a published entry plan.

  • Socure suits regulated organizations that want identity verification inside a broader fraud-decisioning platform.

  • Veriff suits international consumer products that want published self-serve pricing and broad document coverage.

  • Microblink suits mobile teams that prioritize on-device capture and document authenticity, including a self-hosted backend option.

Billing units differ across these providers, so the rates are not directly comparable. Read the criteria below, then the side-by-side table.

Evaluation criteria

What to look for in an identity verification API

These five questions are the columns of the comparison table below. Settle what each one means for your product before you read the vendor rows.

  • Integration surface

    Native SDK, direct API, hosted link, and QR handoff differ in how much client work you own. Hosted flows reach a pilot faster; SDKs give you more control over capture.

  • Verification speed

    Measure the whole journey, not the API response. Capture retries, liveness prompts, and manual review all sit between a request and a usable result.

  • Pricing and billing unit

    Published per-check rates forecast cleanly at low or variable volume. Compare the billable event too: completed checks, successful verifications, and initiated sessions are not equivalent.

  • Data boundary and lifecycle

    Two separate questions: what reaches your application, and what the provider retains afterwards. Longer retention widens the sensitive data your security and compliance obligations cover.

  • Coverage and supported checks

    Match each provider's checks to the claims your application must verify. A broad feature list adds nothing without coverage for your users' countries and documents.

7-provider comparison

Compare operating models, not feature counts

Public information reviewed August 12, 2026. Coverage is provider-reported and billing units differ. Verify current product and contract terms; every claim below is sourced in the provider notes that follow.

Choose a provider

Provider 1 of 7

Stile

Integration surfaces
API, hosted link, and QR handoff
Pricing and billing
About $0.38 per completed full check; 100 free monthly
Data boundary and lifecycle
Merchant receives a signed result rather than raw artifacts by default; configured Stile lifecycle applies
Coverage and checks
Document, face match, liveness, age, and mDL; confirm planned markets

Provider 2 of 7

Jumio

Integration surfaces
API, SDK, and hosted surfaces
Pricing and billing
Sales quote; confirm the billable event
Data boundary and lifecycle
Review product, region, and contract-specific terms
Coverage and checks
Document, biometrics, screening, and risk graph; provider reports 5,000+ IDs across 200 countries and territories

Provider 3 of 7

Entrust IDV

Integration surfaces
Workflow Studio, API, SDK, and hosted capture
Pricing and billing
Sales quote; confirm the billable event
Data boundary and lifecycle
Review product and contract-specific terms
Coverage and checks
Document, biometrics, trusted data, and screening

Provider 4 of 7

Persona

Integration surfaces
Hosted, iframe, SDK, API, and workflow builder
Pricing and billing
Essential from $250 monthly; successful-verification billing
Data boundary and lifecycle
Configurable controls; confirm the selected plan and retention policy
Coverage and checks
Document, biometrics, databases, and fraud tools; provider reports 200+ countries and territories

Provider 5 of 7

Socure

Integration surfaces
Hosted and API platform with decision workflows
Pricing and billing
Launch self-service credits; enterprise sales-led
Data boundary and lifecycle
DocV publishes product-specific maximum retention periods
Coverage and checks
Document, biometrics, databases, and fraud decisioning across RiskOS

Provider 6 of 7

Veriff

Integration surfaces
Hosted page, API, and SDK
Pricing and billing
$0.80 per verification; $49 monthly minimum to start
Data boundary and lifecycle
Published retention options vary by plan and add-on
Coverage and checks
Document, biometrics, and screening; provider reports 12,500+ documents across 230+ countries and territories

Provider 7 of 7

Microblink

Integration surfaces
Client SDK plus cloud or self-hosted Verify API
Pricing and billing
Trial access; production sales quote
Data boundary and lifecycle
Cloud or self-hosted deployment changes responsibility
Coverage and checks
Document capture, extraction, and authenticity; document-focused

Provider notes

What each provider is built to do

Each profile below carries the same five facets, so you can read across them. Pricing, coverage, and retention vary by product, region, plan, and contract, so treat these as a shortlist aid and confirm the current terms with each finalist.

Stile

Best for: teams that want document, biometric, age, liveness, or mobile driver's licence checks while keeping raw identity data out of their own systems.

Stile creates verification sessions through the API, a hosted link, or a desktop-to-mobile QR handoff, so users verify in a browser without installing an app.

Strengths

  • By default the merchant receives a signed eligibility result and a session id rather than raw document fields, biometric templates, date of birth, or source images.Source for Stile
  • Source images and biometric templates are deleted on completion by default, while policy-governed session data, hashed anchors, outcomes, and reusable credentials may persist.Source for Stile
  • Three integration surfaces (API, hosted link, QR handoff) cover both server-driven and no-app consumer flows.
  • Published per-check list pricing makes a small or variable pilot straightforward to forecast.Source for Stile
  • Checks are priced individually, so a workflow can request only the evidence it needs instead of a full verification every time.Source for Stile

Trade-offs

  • Stile is a newer entrant, so teams that require a long public operating history may prefer an established vendor.
  • The scope is verification, not ongoing identity profiles or broad fraud decisioning; those need a complementary platform.
  • Confirm the exact countries and document types enabled for your account before committing.

Pricing

about $0.38 per completed full check, with 100 completed full checks free each month. Passing and failing completed checks are both billed, and components are priced separately.Source for Stile pricing

Jumio

Best for: enterprises that prioritize broad document coverage and a risk platform that connects signals beyond one isolated check.

Jumio combines document and biometric verification with risk and screening products. Its Identity Graph connects signals across events and over time, which can surface relationships a single document check would miss. Jumio reports support for more than 5,000 ID types across 200 countries and territories; that figure is provider-reported.Source for Jumio

Strengths

  • The Identity Graph gives risk teams more context than an isolated verification result.
  • Broad provider-reported document coverage suits rollouts across many countries.Source for Jumio
  • Ongoing identity checks extend past initial onboarding.

Trade-offs

  • Jumio does not publish self-serve rates, so smaller and low-volume buyers cannot compare cost without requesting a quote.
  • The breadth of the platform adds procurement and integration work when you only need document and liveness checks.
  • Review data handling and retention terms for every product, region, and contract you operate under.

Pricing

custom pricing based on volume, products, and deployment requirements. Confirm which event is billable before comparing the quote to a published per-check rate.

Entrust Identity Verification

Best for: organizations that want configurable verification journeys, or that already buy identity-security products from Entrust.

Formerly Onfido, now sold as Entrust Identity Verification, with existing Onfido API endpoints and integration patterns still in use. Workflow Studio configures verification logic visually, and capture runs through web and native SDKs, direct API calls, or a hosted capture link, so this is not an SDK-only product.Source for Entrust Identity Verification

Strengths

Trade-offs

  • Entrust does not publish self-serve pricing.
  • Sales-led pricing and procurement can slow adoption for smaller companies.
  • Scope the configuration surface honestly: a single document check does not need a visual workflow builder.

Pricing

custom quotes through the Entrust sales team. No published per-check rates or contract minimums.

Persona

Best for: products that need different verification flows for user segments, markets, or risk tiers.

Persona provides hosted flows, iframe and mobile SDK integration, APIs, workflow automation, case management, and a broad catalog of verification and fraud tools. You can route lower-risk users through lighter checks and require biometric verification only where risk warrants it. Persona reports document verification coverage in more than 200 countries and territories, which is provider-reported.

Strengths

  • The no-code workflow builder varies checks by user segment or risk tier without coding each path.
  • Case management supports exception review and audit records.
  • A published entry plan, which is uncommon in this category.Source for Persona

Trade-offs

  • The configuration surface is more setup than a narrow document verification API requires.
  • The Essential plan carries a 12-month minimum, which suits steady volume better than a short pilot.Source for Persona
  • Billing is per successful verification, so normalize that against providers that bill every completed check.

Pricing

the self-guided Essential plan starts at $250 per month with a 12-month minimum; larger deployments are custom. Persona charges for successful verifications.Source for Persona pricing

Socure

Best for: financial institutions and other regulated or fraud-sensitive organizations that want identity verification inside a broader decisioning platform.

Socure RiskOS combines identity verification, KYC and fraud signals, routing, and case management. Applicants can be routed through different checks based on detected risk rather than one fixed flow for everyone. Smaller teams can start self-service through Socure Launch.Source for Socure

Strengths

  • Identity verification and broader fraud decisioning live in one platform.
  • Risk-based routing can reduce manual review for lower-risk applicants.
  • Retention is documented rather than opaque: DocV publishes product-specific maximum retention periods.Source for Socure

Trade-offs

  • The product range is more than teams that need only document and selfie verification will use.
  • Model-based risk decisions need monitoring for false positives and for uneven outcomes across user groups.
  • Enterprise pricing is sales-led; only the Launch tier is self-service.Source for Socure

Pricing

Launch offers self-service credits. Enterprise agreements are sales-led and priced on verification volume, the selected RiskOS products, and contract terms.Source for Socure pricing

Veriff

Best for: international consumer products that want hosted or SDK-based document and biometric verification with a published self-serve starting point.

Veriff supports APIs, SDKs, and hosted verification, with face matching, liveness detection, and NFC chip reading on supported documents. It reports coverage across more than 230 countries and territories and more than 12,500 ID documents; those figures are provider-reported.Source for Veriff

Strengths

  • Published self-serve pricing and a trial, so you can test before contracting.Source for Veriff
  • Broad provider-reported document coverage suits an international customer base.Source for Veriff
  • Retention options are published and vary by plan and add-on.

Trade-offs

  • The $49 monthly minimum makes very low or intermittent volume proportionally expensive.Source for Veriff
  • Teams that need visual workflow orchestration should confirm that Veriff's routing and customization controls meet their requirements.
  • Verify the provider-reported coverage figures against your actual document mix.

Pricing

from $0.80 per verification with a $49 monthly minimum, plus a 15-day trial covering up to 50 sessions.Source for Veriff pricing

Microblink

Best for: mobile or web teams that prioritize document capture, data extraction, and document-authenticity checks, including a self-hosted backend option.

BlinkID performs client-side document capture and initial extraction, including offline-capable scanning, with prebuilt camera components alongside lower-level tools for custom interfaces. BlinkID Verify adds document-authenticity checks through a backend REST API that runs against Microblink's hosted endpoint or a self-hosted deployment.Source for Microblink

Strengths

  • On-device capture stays responsive during unstable connections.
  • Prebuilt components reduce camera interface work, while the core library still supports custom capture flows.
  • A self-hosted verification backend gives you more control over deployment.

Trade-offs

  • This is capture and document authenticity, not a complete document-plus-selfie identity-proofing platform; plan for the other services a full flow needs.Source for Microblink
  • Authenticity checks require a backend request, so the complete flow is not offline.
  • Microblink does not publish production pricing.

Pricing

trial license keys through the Developer Hub. Production pricing and licence access go through Microblink sales.

Fair pilot

Run the same test for every finalist

Use one representative document set and the same exception cases, then normalize what each provider measures and bills.

  • Test the same cases

    Run the same documents, devices, low-light captures, retries, failures, and manual-review cases through every provider.

  • Confirm enabled coverage

    Validate the exact countries, document versions, age claims, digital credentials, screening, and fraud signals enabled for your account.

  • Measure the whole journey

    Track completion, retry, automated-decision, and manual-review time in your own flow instead of comparing unlike provider figures.

  • Normalize the billable event

    Model completed checks, successful verifications, initiated sessions, components, minimums, and committed volume separately.

  • Review both data boundaries

    Separate data returned to your product from evidence, biometrics, session PII, outcomes, and risk signals retained by the provider.

Choose by your main constraint

  • Minimize raw identity data in your product: start with Stile, then validate the configured retention policy and exact market coverage.

  • Maximize provider-reported document coverage: shortlist Jumio and Veriff, then test your real document mix.

  • Configure many user and risk paths: compare Persona, Entrust Workflow Studio, and Socure RiskOS.

  • Control document-capture deployment: evaluate Microblink, including the other services needed for complete identity proofing.

  • Forecast a small or variable pilot: compare published Stile, Persona, Socure Launch, and Veriff terms using the exact billing event for each.

Methodology and procurement checks

Start with the claim your application needs to verify, then work outward. A guided native SDK can improve document capture but adds mobile integration and release work. A hosted link or QR handoff reaches a pilot faster but gives you less control over the capture interface. Neither is better in the abstract; they trade client-side control against integration cost.

Data handling needs two separate questions: what reaches your application, and what remains inside the provider. A narrow merchant-facing result can reduce the sensitive data your own systems hold without saying anything about the provider's retention schedule. Ask both questions of every finalist.

Treat public comparison pages as discovery tools, not procurement evidence. This one included. Ask each finalist for the current rate card, DPA, retention schedule, data-residency options, and the document and country coverage actually enabled for your account. Provider-reported coverage counts describe a catalog, not your users.

The bottom line

Choose the provider whose operating model matches your main constraint. Stile's clearest distinction is its data-minimizing merchant boundary and published component pricing, not an absolute claim that no identity data exists anywhere. Jumio and Veriff lead on provider-reported coverage breadth. Persona, Entrust Identity Verification, and Socure offer more workflow and risk control. Microblink focuses on capture and document authenticity rather than a complete proofing platform. Whichever two or three you shortlist, run the same documents and the same exception cases through each before you sign anything.

FAQ

Questions to settle before a pilot

Use the same definitions and test cases when you compare providers.

What is the difference between an ID verification API and a KYC API?

An identity verification API evaluates evidence such as an identity document, selfie, liveness signal, age claim, or digital credential. A KYC program can also include sanctions and watchlist screening, beneficial-ownership checks, case management, and ongoing monitoring. Identity verification may support KYC, but it does not replace the organization’s complete legal and risk obligations.

How long does identity verification integration take?

A hosted link can reach a pilot faster than a deeply customized native SDK, but the capture UI is only one part of the work. Budget for session creation, authenticated webhooks, retry and expiry handling, manual-review states, analytics, security review, privacy notices, consent, and production exception testing. Ask vendors to prove the complete path in your stack.

How should teams compare PII retention?

Separate what the provider sends to your application from what the provider collects and retains. Review document evidence, extracted fields, biometric templates, workflow-collected PII, device and fraud signals, outcomes, hashes, credentials, manual-review exceptions, and deletion timing. Confirm the policy for each product, jurisdiction, and contract rather than relying on one privacy slogan.

Which checks should an identity verification API support?

Choose checks that prove the claims your workflow actually needs. Document authenticity, face match, liveness, age thresholds, mobile driver’s licenses, database checks, watchlists, and device-risk signals answer different questions. Unnecessary checks add cost, collection, and user friction; missing market or document coverage creates operational exceptions.

Evaluate Stile

Test Stile with your real verification cases

Start with 100 completed full checks each month, then compare completion, retries, data lifecycle, and webhook handling in your stack.

Start freeBook a product review