What a Pilot Integration Actually Costs
The number on this page is a proposed commercial package, not a final contractual price: that is the source's own status line, stated first because everything below should be read as a draft. This page prices a proposed engagement, not a delivered one.
The number: $5K–$75K, one-time
Solidus's own pricing draft lists an "Integration sprint" line at $5K–$75K one-time, described as the fee for "serious pilots and enterprise integrations." That is a wide range on purpose. A sandbox integration for a small vendor wiring a single proof event into a checkout flow is a different job than a bank or telco standing up a private issuer/verifier namespace with custom schemas and a security review, the range spans both without pretending they cost the same. Nothing in the source narrows that range further, and this page does not invent a narrower one.
Why the range is this wide
Two of the source's own pricing principles explain the spread, and neither is a Solidus-specific insight, they're stated as general pricing discipline:
- Price by business value, not compute cost. An integration sprint's cost tracks how much of a relying party's existing stack it has to touch, auth flow, console access, webhook wiring, custom proof templates, compliance export formats, not how many CPU-cycles a verification event actually takes. The $0.001-per-verification protocol floor referenced elsewhere in this pricing model is a modeled economic anchor, not a measured cost, and it has no bearing on what a sprint costs, a sprint prices integration labor, not verification compute.
- Make early pilots cheap and fast. The stated intent is to keep the low end of the range accessible enough that a small vendor can trial the integration without an enterprise procurement cycle, while the high end absorbs the actual scope of a bank- or telco-grade rollout, private endpoints, custom schemas, security review, compliance documentation. That is a pricing principle in a draft document, not a promotion currently running.
What sits inside the sprint fee, and what doesn't
The integration sprint is a one-time fee for the work of connecting Solidus into a relying party's existing systems. It is not the same thing as the ongoing SaaS plans, Developer, Team, Business, Enterprise, Private deployment: that price the recurring use of the platform after integration is done; those are covered in 110 and the full packaging breakdown at 115. A pilot could, in principle, pair a one-time sprint fee with an ongoing plan tier, but the source does not specify a bundled figure for that combination, and this page does not invent one. For a bank- or government-scale deployment specifically, where the sprint sits inside a private-deployment engagement rather than a standard plan, see 117.
The honest asymmetry, briefly
Any pilot conversation eventually runs into the same worked comparison that runs through this whole track, and it starts with the unfavorable number, not the favorable one: a first Solidus KYC Level 2 check is priced at $5.00, against a roughly $1.50 incumbent re-check the source models for the same tier. Solidus is the more expensive option on a single first-time check, full stop. The case for reuse only appears over multiple checks, crossing below the incumbent's running total at roughly n ≈ 2.4 uses of the same credential. That arithmetic, and every caveat it depends on, including that a relying party actually has to accept the reused credential instead of re-running its own check, is worked in full at 111. A pilot is exactly where that assumption gets tested for the first time, which is also exactly why none has run yet.
What this page is not
Not a quote. Not a rate card in force. Not evidence that an integration sprint has ever been delivered, billed, or completed, none has. For vendor revenue share on distribution partnerships that might carry an integration alongside it, see 114; for how this figure sits against the total cost of ownership of staying with an incumbent vendor and absorbing vendor lock-in, see those Lexicon entries directly.