Codat vs Perfios (2026)
The decision is whether you want the evidence for a credit decision or the decision itself, and these two are built on opposite sides of that line. Codat standardizes what a borrower's accounting, banking and commerce platforms say and hands it to your underwriters. AI is not central to it, since stripping the models out leaves a working data standardization business. Perfios produces the assessment. Its CAM AI platform is described as a credit underwriting platform rather than an input supplier, which puts it inside the decision rather than beside it. Everything else follows from that. Perfios's permissions are structural, sitting inside the central bank's account aggregator framework, the identity authority and the tax network, each a supervised system it had to be admitted to. Codat names only the general data protection regime while operating adjacent to the regulated data access regimes in both its main markets, without saying which apply to it. Being inside the decision is also why the sharper fairness gap belongs to Perfios. It assesses credit at national scale and publishes no fair lending testing, outcome analysis or adverse action handling at all.
- You want evidence delivered, not a decision rendered. Codat connects to a borrower's accounting, banking and commerce platforms through consented authorization and returns standardized statements, enriched transactions and liability summaries for initial underwriting, periodic review and portfolio monitoring, leaving the credit call with your own risk team.
- The business should hold the switch. Access is granted through an authorization flow the business itself initiates and understands, and it can be withdrawn, so the subject of the data can end the relationship unilaterally rather than petitioning anyone. Perfios describes no route to correct a misread document.
- Your supplier review needs an attestation set. Codat documents its security certifications and trust center in detail. It names more than twenty source platforms individually across accounting, commerce and payments, so you can establish exactly where each field originates.
- You are lending in India and want the rails rather than a connector. Perfios is wired directly into the central bank's consent based account aggregator framework, the national identity authority, the goods and services tax network and the small business development bank. Each is a supervised system with its own admission requirements, so being inside them is a passed process rather than a claim. Codat names only the general data protection regime.
- You want the decision made, not the inputs supplied. CAM AI is a credit underwriting platform built on the company's own models with generative and agentic tooling, stated to cut underwriting turnaround by up to 85 percent, alongside document tampering and fraud detection and collections.
- Scale and reach are the purchase. Perfios documents its customer results in detail and serves banks, non bank finance companies, fintechs and insurers across origination, onboarding, underwriting and monitoring.
This comparison is published by AI FinTech Index, an independent research platform that publishes independent ratings of AI vendors for financial services. Codat and Perfios are each graded against the same capability taxonomy, from each vendor's own public materials and the regulatory record, under the AI FinTech Index verification standard. No vendor pays for placement, and no vendor has reviewed this page. How this evidence is graded
Plain facts
| Codat | Perfios | |
|---|---|---|
| Primary category | Credit Decisioning & Underwriting | Credit Decisioning & Underwriting |
| Founded | 2017 | 2008 |
| Headquarters | London, United Kingdom | Bengaluru, Karnataka, India |
| Website | codat.io | perfios.ai |
Side by Side
Select any grade to read the note behind it.
| Axis | C Codat |
P Perfios |
|---|---|---|
| AI Centrality | ||
| Autonomy and Oversight Model | ||
| Model Risk Management and Transparency | ||
| Operational and Outcome Evidence | ||
| AI Safety and Data Stewardship | ||
| GLBA and Data Privacy Posture | ||
| Security Certifications and Trust Center | ||
| Regulatory Status and Licensure | ||
| AI Governance and Bias Disclosure | ||
| AI Liability and Recourse | ||
| Model Supply Chain Disclosure | ||
| Core Systems and Integration Depth | ||
| Deployment Model and Data Residency | ||
| Commercial Transparency | ||
| Institution and Segment Coverage |
The short version of each
Codat
Codat standardizes small business financial data behind one integration for lenders, commercial banks, neobanks and card issuers. Its Underwriting and Monitoring product connects to a borrower's accounting, banking and commerce platforms through consented authorization. It then delivers standardized statements, enriched transactions and liability summaries for initial underwriting, periodic review and portfolio monitoring, with machine learning categorizing transactions using business rather than consumer categories. According to the AI FinTech Index, it documents its integrations and its security certifications in detail. Its recourse rests on a control held by the subject: the business initiates the authorization and can withdraw it. It says little about its regulators, bias and fairness, accuracy testing, pricing or where data sits.
Source: AI FinTech Index, 2026
Perfios
Perfios supplies the decisioning layer beneath much of Indian lending, serving banks, non bank finance companies, fintechs and insurers across origination, onboarding, underwriting and monitoring. Models read bank statements, tax filings, profit and loss statements and balance sheets to produce income, cash flow and creditworthiness assessments. It also offers know your customer checks, document tampering and fraud detection, and collections. According to the AI FinTech Index, it documents its customer results, who it serves, its regulators and its integrations in detail. Its regulatory position rests on integration, sitting inside the central bank's account aggregator framework, the national identity authority, the tax network and the small business development bank. It says little about accuracy testing, security certifications, pricing, where data sits or what happens when it is wrong, and publishes nothing on bias and fairness.
Source: AI FinTech Index, 2026
Common questions
Is Codat better than Perfios?
They sit at different points in the same lending stack and geography settles most of it. Codat standardizes small business financial data behind one integration and hands it to your own underwriters. Perfios supplies the decisioning layer beneath much of Indian lending, with a credit underwriting platform that produces the assessment rather than the inputs to one. If you lend in India and want national infrastructure integration, Perfios. If you want standardized inputs into a decision engine you own, Codat. Graded by AI FinTech Index against the same capability axes from each vendor's own published materials, verified August 23, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
Which one can tell me what it is permitted to do?
Perfios, and the difference is structural rather than declarative. Its platform is integrated directly into the central bank's consent based account aggregator framework, the national identity authority, the tax network and the small business development bank. Each is a supervised system with its own admission requirements, so presence inside them is a process the company passed. Codat names only the general data protection regime, and nothing published states which of the regulated data access regimes in its main markets apply to it or whether any registration is held. For a vendor pulling banking data on consent, that is the first diligence question. Graded by AI FinTech Index against the same capability axes from each vendor's own published materials, verified August 23, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
If the data is wrong about my business, can I do anything?
With Codat, partially. The business grants access through an authorization flow it initiates and can withdraw, so it controls whether the data flows at all. What that does not reach is the borrower declined because a miscategorized ledger produced the wrong ratios, since nothing describes correction of a classification or notification that one drove an outcome. At Perfios, consent under the aggregator framework can be withdrawn for that portion of the flow, but an applicant whose income was misread from a document, or who was flagged by tampering detection, is not told a machine reached that conclusion and has no described route to correct it. A tampering flag in particular is an adverse finding that follows a person without their knowledge. Graded by AI FinTech Index against the same capability axes from each vendor's own published materials, verified August 23, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
Where does each publish the most, and the least?
Codat publishes most on its integrations and security certifications. It says little about its regulators, how central AI is to the product, bias and fairness, accuracy testing, pricing or where data sits. Perfios publishes most on its customer results, who it serves, its regulators and its integrations. It says little about accuracy testing, security certifications, pricing, where data sits or what happens when it is wrong, and publishes nothing on bias and fairness. Graded by AI FinTech Index against the same capability axes from each vendor's own published materials, verified August 23, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
Related comparisons
Other published head to head assessments involving these vendors or their closest peers. The full set for this category is on the Credit Decisioning & Underwriting page.
The two regulatory positions are close to inverted. Perfios's permissions are structural. Operating inside the account aggregator framework, the identity authority and the tax network means passing each system's admission process, which a reader can check rather than take on trust. Codat names the general data protection regime and no other supervisor, statute or admission process.
That is a specific gap for a business supplying bank feeds and pulling banking data on consent, because that activity sits adjacent to the regulated data access regimes in both its main markets, and those regimes carry their own authorization and conduct requirements. Nothing published states which apply or whether any registration is held. The fairness positions invert the same way and more sharply. Perfios publishes nothing on bias and fairness, and scope is what makes that serious.
Its models produce income verification, cash flow assessment and creditworthiness scoring feeding underwriting at more than a thousand institutions, and CAM AI is described as an underwriting platform rather than an input supplier, which places it inside the decision. Nothing published addresses fair lending testing, outcome analysis across borrower groups or adverse action handling.
Nor does anything address how extraction accuracy varies across document types, languages, regional formats and the informal record keeping typical of the small business and agricultural borrowers it explicitly serves. Codat says little on fairness and carries a milder version of the same exposure, since a miscategorized ledger changes the ratios an underwriter reads without anyone seeing a model in the decision. Neither publishes accuracy by business type.