| FCF-Pay | Pronamic Pay | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | — | — |
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | — | — |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | — | — |
| Last updated | — | — |
| Metric | FCF-Pay | Pronamic Pay |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | ★ 4.9 ★ | 4.8 ★ |
| Total reviews | 17 | ★ 83 |
| Active installs | 10+ | 2,000+ |
| Free plan | — | — |
| Built for Shopify | — | — |
FCF-Pay edges out Pronamic Pay on rating (4.9★ vs 4.8★), but the gap is small enough that pricing fit and feature differentiation should drive the decision more than the headline number. Recommended by store size: small/early-stage merchants who need fast install and low risk should default to FCF-Pay; mid-market and enterprise merchants with specific feature requirements should evaluate both — Pronamic Pay's 83-review base may include the workflow context that matches your specific use case better than FCF-Pay'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 WordPress Plugin Directory 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: FCF-Pay audit • Pronamic Pay audit
| Keyword | FCF-Pay | Pronamic Pay |
|---|---|---|
| payment form | Not ranked | #226 |
| form builder | Not ranked | #325 |
| contact form | Not ranked | #497 |
FCF-Pay has the higher average rating (4.9★ from 17 reviews) compared to Pronamic Pay (4.8★ from 83 reviews). Both are tracked daily by AppRanks, so the figures here update each refresh cycle.
It depends on what you're optimizing for. FCF-Pay fits better if you prioritize rating consistency; Pronamic Pay is the call if you need the larger user base. Read both apps' detail pages on AppRanks for the full feature breakdown, install counts, and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the WordPress Plugin Directory marketplace. Pronamic Pay has more onboarding documentation maturity (83 reviews vs 17), which usually translates to better-tested setup wizards and quicker time-to-value. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly — read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for merchant-reported install experience.
FCF-Pay typically suits early-stage and growth-mode stores based on its review-base composition (17 reviews). Pronamic Pay aligns more with early-stage and growth-mode stores (83 reviews). Larger review bases generally mean the app has been load-tested at scale — relevant if you're processing high order volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. FCF-Pay and Pronamic Pay 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 FCF-Pay" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
