White-Label Solutions Vs Centroid (Pure Tech Provider)

We are a pure technology provider, not a broker, empowering banks and financial institutions to launch and operate a full-fledged, multi-asset investing and trading business. Our clients retain full control over branding, counterparties, and user experience, enabling them to compete directly with global white-label providers like Interactive Brokers, Saxo Bank, and GTN—not depend on them.

Aspect

Broker White-Label Solution

Centroid-Pure Technology Provider

Ability to build own UI/UX, Customer Journey, etc

Ability to Choose Counterparties Flexibly

Digital Onboarding Capabilities

Cost Structure and Pricing

No Flexibility/High

Flexible/Low

Ability to Offer White-Label Solutions to Other Institutions

Brand Ownership and Market Positioning

White-Label Solutions Vs Centroid (Pure Tech Provider)

Aspect

Broker White-Label Solution

Centroid-Pure Technology Provider

Ability to build own UI/UX, Customer Journey, etc.

Base user interface with limited customization.

Full control over UI, customer journey, work flows, APIs and development tools for deeper customizations or new features.

Ability to Choose Counterparties Flexibly.

These players typically work with pre-defined counterparties and may even charge markups on execution and clearing costs.

Full flexibility to integrate with any counterparty or liquidity provider of choice. This gives more control over pricing, trading clients, spreads and counterparty risk management.

Digital Onboarding Capabilities.

Lack comprehensive digital onboarding features, often relying on manual processes or limited automation, which can slow down client acquisition and increase operational overhead.

Provide seamless, fully customizable and automated digital onboarding solutions, enabling financial institutions to quickly and efficiently onboard clients, ensuring compliance, and enhancing user experience right from the start.

Ability to offer Multiple Asset Classes Within a Single Platform.

Pre-defined set of asset classes.

Support multiple asset classes out-of-the-box and provide flexibility to expand into new asset classes.

Margin Capabilities and Cross-Margining.

Typically offer fixed, limited margin setups tied to their own risk framework.

Enable fully customizable margin frameworks, including advanced features like cross-margining across instruments, accounts, and asset classes, allowing institutions to tailor risk and capital requirements to their clients' profiles and strategies.

White-Label Solutions Vs Centroid (Pure Tech Provider)

Aspect

Broker White-Label Solution

Centroid-Pure Technology Provider

Ability to Offer White-Label Solutions to Other Institutions

They may allow WL solutions. However, no advantage as they are directly competing. ie institutional clients of the broker can partner directly with the main WL broker.

Enables institutions to deploy multiple front-end instances (taxer environments) connected to a centralized backend, facilitating scalable growth and easy management of segmented B2B experiences.

Speed of Deployment and Time-to-Market

Relatively fast.

Might require more time for deployment, especially if a client needs heavy customization or integration with multiple systems (e.g., banking platforms, payment processors). However, the long-term flexibility may justify the initial time investment.

Control Over Compliance, Security, and Regulatory Requirements

White-label solutions are typically more responsible for regulatory compliance, security, and reporting, as they manage the core infrastructure.

Offer a robust platform with built-in security and regulatory compliance tools, but the client (the bank or financial institution) may be responsible for ensuring compliance based on local regulations.

Cost Structure and Pricing

One-time setup fee with ongoing transaction commissions and fees.

One-time setup fee with SaaS-based subscription models and adjustable pricing based on usage.

Integration With Other Systems

Integration with other systems is often limited.

Offer APIs and dedicated integration teams to facilitate integrations with a wide range of third-party systems (CRM, banking, payment gateways, etc.), allowing the institution to create a more comprehensive ecosystem.

Innovation

Tend to innovate more slowly, as they prioritize common denominator features designed to appeal broadly across multiple jurisdictions and client types.

Innovate faster and offer frequent updates, giving clients more control over the platform's look and architecture, providing full control of the trading technology.

White-Label Solutions Vs Centroid (Pure Tech Provider) Cont.

Aspect

Broker White-Label Solution

Centroid-Pure Technology Provider

Brand Ownership and Market Positioning

The brand is essentially “leased”. Clients are operating under their own name, but the core product experience is often recognizable as coming from the white-label provider and thus diluting differentiation.

Full control over branding and product roadmap allows institutions to create a distinct identity in the market, crucial for premium positioning and innovation-led branding.

Product Roadmap

Little to no influence on the product roadmap

Institutions co-develop (mainly on the frontend) and influence the roadmap, especially in enterprise deals. Custom features or integrations can be prioritized.

Modular and Composable Architecture

All-in-one solution with limited ability to decouple components (e.g., risk engine, CRM, OMS).

Offer a composable stack where each module (CRM, trading platform, risk management, etc.) can be adopted independently or replaced over time. This reduces vendor lock-in.

On-Premise vs. Cloud Hosting Options

Hosted on the WL broker’s infrastructure. Clients have little say in the hosting setup or location.

Offer flexible hosting options, on-premise, private cloud, or public cloud allowing clients to meet specific latency, data sovereignty, or compliance needs.

Vendor Lock-In Risk

Tied to the WL broker’s systems, features, roadmap, and liquidity. Switching providers is costly and disruptive.

No risk, especially that the system is modular with open architecture. Migration paths are well structured.

Client Segmentation and Multi-Tenant Capabilities

Multi-Tenant Capabilities Often built for retail-facing brokers, and may not handle complex client segmentation (retail, HNW, institutional) or multiple business entities.

Support multi-tenant and multi-segment architecture (different brands or divisions under one umbrella), making them ideal for large institutions or banks running multiple services.