| Invoice Payment Option | Square | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
Order Now and Pay Later! Allow your customers to select invoice payment option during checkout to place orders. Add conditions to show invoice payment options for specific products, categories, countries, cart total, user roles and more.
| Metric | Invoice Payment Option | Square |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ★ 4.7 ★ | 3.4 ★ |
| Total reviews | 12 | ★ 129 |
| Free plan | — | ★ Yes |
| Pricing | $59/year | ★ Free |
Based on the data on this page, Invoice Payment Option is the stronger choice for most WooCommerce Marketplace store owners — 4.7★ vs Square's 3.4★ is a meaningful gap that usually reflects real product or support quality differences across the user base.
On pricing, Square offers a free tier (Free) while Invoice Payment Option starts at $59/year. The free option meaningfully reduces evaluation cost, particularly at low usage volumes where the entry-paid tier can outpace the value delivered.
Square has the larger user base (129 reviews vs 12), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. Invoice Payment Option's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat.
Recommended by size: small/early-stage store owners who need fast install and low risk should default to Invoice Payment Option; mid-market and enterprise store owners with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Square's 129-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than Invoice Payment Option's broader-but-shallower coverage.
This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical WooCommerce Marketplace listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: Invoice Payment Option audit • Square audit
| Keyword | Invoice Payment Option | Square |
|---|---|---|
| form | #251 | #11 |
| payment | #251 | #11 |
Square is the cheaper option — it offers a free plan (Free). Invoice Payment Option starts at $59/year. Both publish their pricing on the WooCommerce Marketplace; AppRanks mirrors what's listed on each refresh cycle.
Invoice Payment Option has the higher average rating (4.7★ from 12 reviews) compared to Square (3.4★ from 129 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
Invoice Payment Option holds the higher average rating (4.7★ vs 3.4★). That is the one dimension AppRanks can separate them on here — read both apps' detail pages for the feature breakdown and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the WooCommerce Marketplace. Square has the deeper published review base (129 vs 12), which often — though not always — accompanies better-tested setup docs. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly: read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for user-reported install experience.
Invoice Payment Option typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (12 reviews). Square typically suits early-stage and growth-mode teams based on its published review base (129 reviews). A larger review base generally means the app has been exercised at scale — relevant if you are processing high volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. Invoice Payment Option and Square both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from Invoice Payment Option" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.