Transaction and Payment Processing Sector Outlook — September 2026

Read the report

SlidesScroll

1 of 23

←→Full screen

FINANCIALS › FINANCIAL SERVICES › TRANSACTION AND PAYMENT PROCESSING

Transaction and Payment Processing: The Premium Sits with Embedded and Cross-Border Volume

How the market is pricing this group of payments companies on forward cash earnings, what separates the top of the range from the bottom, and what the transaction record shows about buyer behaviour.

September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential

Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E)

Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice

Sources & methodology

1

← Previous

1 / 23 · FINANCIALS › FINANCIAL SERVICES › TRANSACTION AND PAYMENT PROCESSING

Next →

What each page shows

The analyst’s walkthrough of the deck, page by page.

1. 01

   FINANCIALS › FINANCIAL SERVICES › TRANSACTION AND PAYMENT PROCESSING

   Cover slide introducing the Transaction and Payment Processing sector outlook as of September 2026.

   We open this sector outlook on Transaction and Payment Processing with market data as of September 28, 2026, priced on an EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) basis throughout. The pages that follow show where the market places a premium within this group, and why that premium sits where it does.

   Everything on this page

   FINANCIALS › FINANCIAL SERVICES › TRANSACTION AND PAYMENT PROCESSING Transaction and Payment Processing: The Premium Sits with Embedded and Cross-Border Volume How the market is pricing this group of payments companies on forward cash earnings, what separates the top of the range from the bottom, and what the transaction record shows about buyer behaviour. September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Market data as of 2026-09-28 · primary valuation basis EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 1

2. 02
   CONTENTS

   What This Report Covers

   Table of contents listing the five numbered sections plus the appendix.

   We've structured this report so the bottom line comes first: five sections cover the thesis, the competitive landscape, valuation and situations, precedent transactions, and the strategic implications, with the appendix behind them. A reader who stops after the first section still leaves with the full argument, and everything after it is the evidence for that argument.

   Everything on this page

   CONTENTS What This Report Covers 01 The Bottom Line Five Businesses, One Sector Label 02 The Landscape Who Sits Where, and What Each Group Sells 03 Valuation & Situations The Range on Forward Cash Earnings 04 Precedent Transactions What Buyers Agreed to Pay 05 Strategic Implications What This Means for How You Run the Business 06 Appendix Comparables Detail, Methodology, Sources and Assumptions Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 2

3. 03
   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE

   Transaction and Payment Processing Is Priced as Five Businesses, and the Faster Growers Sit at the Top of the Range

   The report's central finding: the sector prices as five distinct businesses, with faster-growing names commanding the higher multiples.

   Of the 27 companies in our coverage, 21 carry a CY2027E EBITDA estimate, and the sector median sits at 7.2x. The five names at the top of the range trade at 13.5x against 4.6x for the five at the bottom, and because a forward multiple already prices in the growth we forecast, a premium that survives that adjustment points to durability rather than a single strong year. That gap is the frame for everything that follows: where a company sits in this range tells you what the market believes about its growth and its staying power.

   Everything on this page

   01 · THE BOTTOM LINE Transaction and Payment Processing Is Priced as Five Businesses, and the Faster Growers Sit at the Top of the Range The full story on one page · figures on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), market data as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (21 of 27 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / EBITDA rather than P / E; validated coverage supports the industry standard (23 of 27 companies), so this report follows it. Qualitative characterisations are NeuraCap views. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 3 1 The Top of the Range Sits with Higher Forward Cash Earnings Of the 27 companies on the page, 21 names carry a CY2027E estimate, and the middle of the range sits at 7.2x. The five names at the top sit at 13.5x against 4.6x for the five at the bottom, and a forward multiple already credits the growth in the forecast, so a premium that survives it points to durability rather than to one good year. 2 Faster Growth Travels with the Higher Multiples; Margin Alone Does Not Split at 9% revenue growth, the 11 faster-growing of the 21 names with a CY2027E estimate sit at 8.1x against 6.6x for the 10 below the line. Margin does not line up the same way: three of the five names at the bottom of the range report margins of 39% or higher. 3 The Transaction Record Points to Volume Density and Owned Merchant Relationships Across the 9 recorded transactions, Global Payments Inc. agreed to acquire EVO Payments at 18.3x EBITDA, and GTCR W Aggregator LP completed the purchase of the Merchant Solutions business at $18.5B. Taken together, those deals suggest a buyer pool of scale acquirers, vertical software companies and sponsors weighting owned merchant relationships and routing density ahead of rented referral flow. 4 Buyers Test the Retained Spread Behind the Volume Four of the 21 names with a CY2027E estimate clear both bars on growth and margin, and that group of four sits at 9.0x. In diligence the same question is asked in payments terms: is the take rate held by value-added services and mix or defended on price, and how much of the spread is paid away in residuals to ISO and ISV partners. 7.2x Sector median EV/EBITDA CY2027E consensus · 21 rated of 27 companies 13.5x Premium end EV/EBITDA vs 4.6x at the discount end top quartile (n=5) against bottom quartile (n=5) on EV/EBITDA — the spread the report explains 50 Transactions with disclosed terms 114 recorded in this tier · 3 told as case studies, the full list in the appendix

4. 04
   SECTION 02

   02

   Section divider introducing the market landscape section.

   This section maps the 27 companies into the groups that make up this label, and shows what each group sells and to whom.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 02 02 THE LANDSCAPE Who Sits Where, and What Each Group Sells Five groups under one label, meeting different buyer groups. 02 of 06 Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 4

5. 05
   02 · MARKET MAP

   Over Half the Set Builds the Rails; The Higher Group Multiple Sits in Embedded Software

   A segment map of the 27 approved companies with median EV/EBITDA by group, showing rails-focused businesses as the largest group and embedded software commanding the higher group multiple.

   We group the coverage set into business segments and take the median EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) within each. Over half the set builds core payments rails, but the higher group multiple sits in embedded software, where payments are attached to a vertical software platform rather than sold on their own. That gap between group medians is the first sign that this single label covers businesses the market prices very differently.

   Everything on this page

   02 · MARKET MAP Over Half the Set Builds the Rails; The Higher Group Multiple Sits in Embedded Software 27 approved companies grouped by business segment · median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) per group · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Segment grouping follows the platform's classification; group medians on rated names only. "Why it matters" lines are NeuraCap views. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 5 PAYMENTS INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSACTION SOFTWARE 14 cos median 7.1x XYZ CPAY FOUR WEX ACIW PAY STNE DLO PSFE PAYO PRTH NYAX +2 more The gateway, processing and settlement layer — the largest group here and the one that spans both ends of the range. MERCHANT SERVICES AND ISO DISTRIBUTION 4 cos median 6.9x PAGS EVTC FLYW CASS Where the merchant relationship is won or rented, and where residual arrangements decide the retained economics. COMMERCIAL CARD ISSUING AND SPEND MANAGEMENT 4 cos median 7.2x V MA PYPL GPN Card and spend economics under one label, covering very different business models and very different cash conversion. VERTICAL SOFTWARE WITH EMBEDDED PAYMENTS 2 cos median 8.8x BLKB PAR Payments monetised inside an installed base, where switching costs sit with the software rather than the processor. ADJACENT MODELS 3 cos median 7.3x FISV CXT FNGR Outsourced processing, payments hardware and carrier-billing names that are read against the group but underwritten on their own contract profiles.

6. 06
   02 · LANDSCAPE

   Five Groups Under One Label, Selling to Different Buyer Groups

   A description of the five business-model groups within the sector and the buyers each one serves.

   We break the label into five groups, each selling to a different buyer: payments infrastructure and transaction software, merchant services and ISO distribution, commercial card issuing and spend management, vertical software with embedded payments, and adjacent models. Company-level detail on every name sits in the appendix. Knowing which group a company sits in is the first step to reading its multiple correctly.

   Everything on this page

   02 · LANDSCAPE Five Groups Under One Label, Selling to Different Buyer Groups Segment view of the approved universe · EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) medians on rated names · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. "What they do / why it matters" is a NeuraCap view. Full company-level detail in the appendix and companion tables. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 6 Segment n Share of universe Median EV/EBITDA Names to know What they do — and why it matters Payments infrastructure and transaction software 14 52% 7.1x Block, Inc. (XYZ) · Corpay, Inc. (CPAY) · +12 more The rails and the software. 14 companies, 52% of the set, with a middle multiple of 7.1x on the 12 that carry a CY2027E estimate. Gateway, orchestration, processing and settlement sit here, and the group spans both ends of the range — Paymentus Holdings, Inc. (PAY) at the top and StoneCo Ltd. (STNE) at the bottom. Merchant services and ISO distribution 4 15% 6.9x PagSeguro Digital Ltd. (PAGS) · EVERTEC, Inc. (EVTC) · +2 more Distribution, residuals and boarding. 4 companies, 15% of the set, and the middle multiple of 6.9x rests on only 2 of the 4 carrying a CY2027E estimate. Economics here turn on who owns the merchant relationship and how much of the retained spread is paid away in residuals to ISO and ISV partners. Commercial card issuing and spend management 4 15% 7.2x Visa Inc. (V) · Mastercard Incorporated (MA) · +2 more Card economics and spend control. 4 companies, 15% of the set, with a middle multiple of 7.2x on the 3 that carry a CY2027E estimate. Mastercard Incorporated (MA) sits at the top of the range while PayPal Holdings, Inc. (PYPL) and Global Payments Inc. (GPN) sit in the middle band, so one label covers very different cash conversion. Vertical software with embedded payments 2 7% 8.8x Blackbaud, Inc. (BLKB) · PAR Technology Corporation (PAR) Software first, payments attached. Two companies — Blackbaud, Inc. (BLKB) and PAR Technology Corporation (PAR) — 7% of the set, with a middle multiple of 8.8x on that base of two. Payments monetised inside an installed base carry switching costs that rented referral flow does not. Adjacent models 3 11% 7.3x Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) · Crane NXT, Co. (CXT) · +1 more Processing, hardware and top-up. 3 companies, 11% of the set, at a middle multiple of 7.3x on the 2 that carry a CY2027E estimate. Fiserv, Inc. (FISV), Crane NXT, Co. (CXT) and FingerMotion, Inc. (FNGR) sit here; they are read against the group but underwritten on their own volume and contract profiles.

7. 07
   SECTION 03

   03

   Section divider introducing the valuation analysis on forward cash earnings.

   This section works through the range on forward cash earnings — the 21 of 27 companies that carry a CY2027E EBITDA estimate — and what separates the top of the range from the bottom.

   Everything on this page

   SECTION 03 03 VALUATION & SITUATIONS The Range on Forward Cash Earnings 21 of the 27 companies on the page carry a CY2027E EBITDA estimate. 03 of 06 Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 7

8. 08
   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION

   The Top of the Range Holds a Premium the Forward Multiple Has Already Credited

   All 21 rated companies ranked by EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) against the 7.2x sector median, split into tier zones.

   We rank all 21 rated companies on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) against the 7.2x sector median and cut the set into tiers at the quartiles. The top tier holds a premium that the forward multiple has already credited for growth, which is why that premium is the more demanding one to earn. Where a name sits in this ranking is the most direct read on how the market is pricing it today.

   Everything on this page

   03 · PUBLIC MARKET VALUATION The Top of the Range Holds a Premium the Forward Multiple Has Already Credited EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) · all 21 rated companies, sorted descending · sector median 7.2x · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (21 of 27 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / EBITDA rather than P / E; validated coverage supports the industry standard (23 of 27 companies), so this report follows it. Tier zones are NeuraCap groupings cut at the rated set's quartiles; every multiple quoted on this page is a median on the same EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) basis. Panel commentary is a NeuraCap view. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 8 PREMIUM · median 13.5x CORE · median 7.2x DISCOUNT · median 4.6x Sector median 7.2x WHAT SEPARATES THE TWO ENDS The top sells forward growth. The five names at the top of the range sit at 13.5x. A forward multiple already credits the growth sitting in the CY2027E forecast, so a premium that survives it points to monetisation the market expects to persist rather than to a single strong year. The bottom of the range holds margin. The five names at the bottom sit at 4.6x, and margin is not thin there — WEX Inc. (WEX) reports a 43% margin on 2% revenue growth. In this set the higher multiples sit with the faster growers, and not with the higher-margin names. Owned channels show up here. At the top of the range the businesses monetise payments inside an owned or embedded channel: card network economics at Mastercard Incorporated (MA), biller relationships at Paymentus Holdings, Inc. (PAY), unattended estates at Nayax Ltd. (NYAX) and restaurant software at PAR Technology Corporation (PAR). Rented referral flow is the harder story for the buyer pool to underwrite.

9. 09
   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS

   The Faster-Growing Half Carries the Higher Multiple; Margin on Its Own Does Not Track It

   A comparison of median EV/EBITDA by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort, split at the covered medians.

   Splitting the 21 rated names at the 9% covered median for revenue growth, the 11 faster-growing companies sit at 8.1x against 6.6x for the 10 slower growers. Margin does not track the multiple the same way. That distinction matters for anyone trying to lift their own multiple: growth appears to travel with price here, margin on its own does not.

   Everything on this page

   03 · VALUATION DRIVERS The Faster-Growing Half Carries the Higher Multiple; Margin on Its Own Does Not Track It Median EV / EBITDA (CY2027E) by revenue-growth cohort and by EBITDA-margin cohort (each split at its covered median) · rated names with estimates · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Cohort medians on rated names with the required estimates (faster n=11; slower n=10; higher-margin n=11; lower-margin n=10). Driver readings are NeuraCap views on the supplied data — association, not causation. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 9 EV/EBITDA, median per cohort · growth split at 9% · EBITDA-margin split at 26% Growth Pace and the Multiple Move Together Across the Rated Set Split at 9% revenue growth, the 11 faster-growing of the 21 names with a CY2027E estimate sit at 8.1x, against 6.6x for the 10 below the line. The reading is directional: a forward multiple already credits forecast growth, so the premium is attached to growth the market expects to hold. Margin on Its Own Does Not Line up with the Ranking Paymentus Holdings, Inc. (PAY) reports a 12% margin and sits at the top of the range; StoneCo Ltd. (STNE) reports 52% and sits at the bottom. In this set, heavy margin alongside slower volume growth is associated with the lower end of the range. Take-Rate Durability Is the Question Behind the Cash-Earnings Line Net revenue after interchange and scheme fees, less residuals to ISO and ISV partners, is the number this lens is built on. Buyers test whether the take rate is held by value-added services and mix or defended on price, and whether same-store volume across the existing merchant base is holding. Growth Is Directional Here, Not the Whole Explanation The split rests on 21 of the 27 companies, and the two halves are not measured on identical membership. Much of the distance between individual names sits outside growth and margin — merchant concentration, sponsor-bank dependence, platform conversion costs and contract tenure all sit behind the number.

10. 10
    03 · SITUATION MAP

    The Higher Multiples Cluster Where Revenue Growth Is Running Above the Middle

    The Higher Multiples Cluster Where Revenue Growth Is Running Above the Middle.

    The Higher Multiples Cluster Where Revenue Growth Is Running Above the Middle Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (7.2x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (9%) (columns) · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. 10

    Everything on this page

    03 · SITUATION MAP The Higher Multiples Cluster Where Revenue Growth Is Running Above the Middle Cut on EV / EBITDA vs the sector median (7.2x) (rows) and revenue growth vs the covered median (9%) (columns) · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Situation boundaries are the cohort's own medians (Directional, NeuraCap view). This page characterises situations; it does not recommend buying or selling any security. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 10 Priced up, Growing Above the Middle Above-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 8 names Mastercard Incorporated (MA) · Block, Inc. (XYZ) · Corpay, Inc. (CPAY) · +5 more Eight names sit above the middle on both price and revenue growth, among them Mastercard Incorporated (MA), Corpay, Inc. (CPAY), Nayax Ltd. (NYAX) and Dlocal Limited (DLO). The forward multiple already credits the growth in the forecast, so the standing here rests on delivering it — boarding, same-store volume and take-rate durability. Priced up, Growing Below the Middle Above-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 3 names PayPal Holdings, Inc. (PYPL) · ACI Worldwide, Inc. (ACIW) · Crane NXT, Co. (CXT) Three names carry an above-middle multiple on below-middle revenue growth: PayPal Holdings, Inc. (PYPL), ACI Worldwide, Inc. (ACIW) and Crane NXT, Co. (CXT). The price here is attached to installed base, enterprise and biller contracts rather than pace, and renewal history is what supports it. Priced Below, Growing Above the Middle Below-median multiple · above-median revenue growth 3 names Shift4 Payments, Inc. (FOUR) · Payoneer Global Inc. (PAYO) · Repay Holdings Corporation (RPAY) Shift4 Payments, Inc. (FOUR), Payoneer Global Inc. (PAYO) and Repay Holdings Corporation (RPAY) grow above the middle while pricing below it. Where growth is running and the multiple is not, the questions buyers ask are about take-rate durability, merchant attrition by cohort and how much is paid away in residuals. Priced Below, Growing Below the Middle Below-median multiple · below-median revenue growth 7 names Fiserv, Inc. (FISV) · Global Payments Inc. (GPN) · WEX Inc. (WEX) · +4 more Seven names sit below the middle on both measures, including Fiserv, Inc. (FISV), Global Payments Inc. (GPN) and WEX Inc. (WEX). Several carry heavy margins, and in this set the higher multiples are associated with pace rather than with margin on its own.

11. 11
    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY

    Clearing Both Bars Is Uncommon: Four Names Carry Growth and Margin Together

    A scatter of revenue growth against EBITDA margin for 21 companies, cut at the covered medians, with median EV/EBITDA by quadrant.

    Plotting revenue growth against EBITDA margin for the 21 companies with both estimates, cut at 9% growth and 26% margin, only 4 names clear both bars — and that balanced group prices at 9.0x. Clearing both bars together is uncommon in this set. The quadrant a company sits in says more about its multiple than either metric alone.

    Everything on this page

    03 · GROWTH VS PROFITABILITY Clearing Both Bars Is Uncommon: Four Names Carry Growth and Margin Together Revenue growth (CY2027E, x-axis) vs EBITDA margin (CY2026E, y-axis) · 21 companies with both estimates · cuts at the covered medians (9% growth, 26% margin) · median EV/EBITDA per quadrant · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. Quadrant cuts are the covered set's medians. Quadrant medians on names with a meaningful EV/EBITDA (balanced n=4; margin-only n=7; growth-only n=7; neither n=3). Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 11 0% 10% 20% 30% 20% 40% 60% MARGIN ONLY median 6.2x BALANCED median 9.0x NEITHER median 7.2x GROWTH ONLY median 8.1x WEX FISV PYPL BLKB STNE GPN CXT PRTH ACIW EVTC CPAY PAR PAYO FOUR XYZ MA FLYW PAY NYAX RPAY DLO x: revenue growth (CY2027E) · y: EBITDA margin (CY2026E) HOW TO READ THIS Read it as two bars: revenue growth across the top and margin up the side, each cut at the middle of the 21 names with a CY2027E estimate. Four names clear both — Corpay, Inc. (CPAY), Payoneer Global Inc. (PAYO), Mastercard Incorporated (MA) and Repay Holdings Corporation (RPAY) — and that group of four sits at 9.0x. Seven names clear the margin bar of 26% alone and sit at 6.2x, while seven clear the growth bar alone and sit higher. Rule of 40 (revenue growth + EBITDA margin ≥ 40%): 10 of 21 names clear it.

12. 12
    03 · THE AGENDA

    The Decision: Grow Volume Faster, Defend the Retained Spread, or Own More of the Channel

    A framing of the strategic decision facing owners and acquirers: grow volume, defend the spread, or own more of the channel.

    The evidence in this section points to three questions any owner or acquirer in this space needs to resolve: whether to push volume growth, defend the retained spread, or own more of the payments channel outright. These are observations grounded in the cohort data, not recommendations. How a company answers them appears to line up with where it sits in the valuation range.

    Everything on this page

    03 · THE AGENDA The Decision: Grow Volume Faster, Defend the Retained Spread, or Own More of the Channel NeuraCap view · framed as the questions an owner or acquirer should resolve · observations, not recommendations Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All content on this page is Directional — NeuraCap advisory judgment grounded in the cohort data shown earlier. It does not constitute investment advice. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 12 Push Volume Growth into the Band the Market Is Pricing Higher In this set the higher multiples sit with the faster-growing names. The operating levers are new merchant boarding, same-store volume across the existing base, and cross-sell of value-added services that lift gross profit per merchant without a price move. What changes the answer: Same-store volume across the existing merchant base turning in either direction for two consecutive quarters. Hold the Take Rate with Value-Added Services Rather than with Price Monetisation held by mix and attached services reads differently in diligence than monetisation defended on price in undifferentiated acquiring. Test which of your merchant cohorts carry a durable spread and which are being retained on rate concessions. What changes the answer: Take rate on processed volume slipping while boarding accelerates. Own More of the Channel Instead of Renting Referral Flow Embedded payments inside vertical software carry switching costs that third-party referral flow does not, and the buyer pool prices ownership of the merchant relationship. The choice is whether to build the software attachment, partner for it, or acquire it. What changes the answer: Residual payouts to ISO, ISV and referral partners rising as a share of net revenue. Decide Whether Capital Funds Bolt-Ons or Deepens the Existing Book Sponsors and strategics in this record have both consolidated merchant portfolios and bought capability outright. The internal test is whether a bolt-on portfolio adds volume density and platform scale you can convert, or whether the same capital deepens monetisation of the merchants you already board. What changes the answer: Bolt-on portfolios pricing above what your own forward cash earnings support.

13. 13
    SECTION 04

    04

    Section divider introducing the precedent transaction record.

    This section turns to what buyers have actually agreed to pay, from capability bolt-ons to a sponsor-scale merchant book, across the recorded transactions in this space.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 04 04 PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS What Buyers Agreed to Pay Nine recorded transactions, from capability bolt-ons to a sponsor-scale merchant book. 04 of 06 Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 13

14. 14
    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES

    What Buyers Agreed to Pay for Merchant Volume, Cross-Border Rails and Embedded Estates

    Three case studies drawn from the precedent transaction record, illustrating multiples paid for merchant volume, cross-border rails and embedded estates.

    Among the recorded transactions, Global Payments Inc. agreed to acquire EVO Payments at 18.3x EBITDA, and GTCR W Aggregator LP completed its purchase of the Merchant Solutions business at $18.5B. These deal multiples are calculated on LTM financials at announcement, so we do not read them directly against the CY2027E public basis. Taken together, the case studies point to a buyer pool — scale acquirers, vertical software companies and sponsors — weighting owned merchant relationships and routing density ahead of rented referral flow.

    Everything on this page

    04 · DEAL CASE STUDIES What Buyers Agreed to Pay for Merchant Volume, Cross-Border Rails and Embedded Estates 3 of 50 transactions with disclosed terms, told as case studies · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · the complete list is in the appendix · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 156 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate filings collapsed); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 64 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. "Why the deal happened" is a NeuraCap read of the recorded evidence. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 14 Jun-2026 $2.4B Nuvei Nuvei agreed $2.4B for Payoneer Global Inc., buying cross-border rails and a global merchant base. EV / LTM revenue 2.3x EV / LTM EBITDA 8.7x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Nuvei sits in payments infrastructure and Payoneer Global Inc. serves cross-border collection and payout for small merchants and marketplaces. The transaction suggests a buyer adding local rail coverage, licensing reach and a merchant base it can route onto its own platform. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED The target was agreed at 2.3x revenue and 8.7x EBITDA. That cash-earnings multiple sits above the middle band of the peer set on forward cash earnings, which is where cross-border volume with licensing depth has been pricing in this record. Jun-2024 $820M Payroc Buyer, LLC Payroc Buyer, LLC agreed $820M for i3 Verticals, LLC, a vertical merchant book with software attached. EV / LTM revenue 2.4x EV / LTM EBITDA 8.0x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED Payroc Buyer, LLC is a payments consolidator and i3 Verticals, LLC sells merchant acquiring into specific verticals. The size and shape of the transaction point to a platform-and-bolt-on approach: buy boarded merchants and the software that holds them rather than build the vertical from scratch. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Agreed at 2.4x revenue and 8.0x EBITDA. That sits close to the middle band of the peer set on forward cash earnings, which is where scaled acquiring books without headline growth have been pricing. Jun-2025 $689M 365 Retail Markets, LLC 365 Retail Markets, LLC agreed $689M for Cantaloupe, Inc., an unattended retail estate with payments… EV / LTM revenue 2.4x EV / LTM EBITDA 17.3x WHY THE DEAL HAPPENED 365 Retail Markets, LLC operates unattended retail technology and Cantaloupe, Inc. supplies payments and management software into the same estates. The transaction suggests a buyer consolidating two halves of one installed base, where the device, the software and the transaction flow sit together. HOW THE TARGET WAS VALUED Agreed at 17.3x EBITDA, above the middle band of the peer set on forward cash earnings. Attached payments inside an owned estate has been priced at the higher end of this record.

15. 15
    SECTION 05

    05

    Section divider introducing the strategic implications for operators.

    This section turns the pricing evidence into the operating questions it raises for how you run the business over the next twelve months.

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 05 05 STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS What This Means for How You Run the Business Operating moves the pricing evidence points to. 05 of 06 Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 15

16. 16
    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS

    What the Pricing Evidence Means for Where You Put Effort Next

    The operating implications the pricing evidence raises for owners, management teams, and acquirers.

    The pricing evidence in this report puts specific questions on the table: which half of the growth range a business sits in, whether the retained spread is protected by mix or defended on price, and whether capital is better spent on bolt-ons or on deepening an existing book. These are directional views grounded in the analysis, not recommendations. Each is a lever a team can act on within the next twelve months.

    Everything on this page

    05 · STRATEGIC IMPLICATIONS What the Pricing Evidence Means for Where You Put Effort Next NeuraCap view · the questions this data puts on the table for the next twelve months Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. This page is Directional — NeuraCap views drawn from the analysis in this report. Observations, not recommendations. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 16 FOR OWNERS Know Which Half of the Range Your Growth Profile Puts You In In this set the higher multiples sit with the faster-growing names, and heavy margin alongside slower volume growth sits at the lower end. If same-store volume is flat, the work is in mix — boarding, cross-sell and the pricing of attached products — rather than in the margin line alone. FOR MANAGEMENT TEAMS Protect the Retained Spread Before Chasing Headline Volume Net revenue after interchange and scheme fees, less residuals to ISO and ISV partners, is the line the buyer pool underwrites. Gross-revenue optics and elevated residual payouts sit on the other side of that conversation, and concentration in a single sponsor bank or channel partner is priced as risk. FOR ACQUIRERS AND INVESTORS The Transaction Record Rewards Owned Estates and Rail Coverage Agreed multiples in this record span a wide band, from scaled acquiring volume at the lower end to attached payments inside an owned estate at the higher end. Strategic buyers underwrite routing and platform cost savings explicitly, while sponsors underwrite contracted recurring revenue and cash conversion.

17. 17
    SECTION 06

    06

    06.

    Section 06 of 06 — The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources. Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. Use this divider to reset the room before the section's pages; the progress dots show where the argument stands. 17

    Everything on this page

    SECTION 06 06 APPENDIX The Full Universe, Methodology and Sources Comparables detail behind every figure in the body, the valuation basis, and where each underlying disclosure lives. 06 of 06 Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 17

18. 18
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2)

    Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    The first half of the public comparables table, showing all 21 rated companies grouped by valuation tier against the 7.2x sector median.

    We list all 21 rated companies here, shaded against the 7.2x sector median, with 6 companies in the coverage set carrying no eligible multiple. Every rated row here also sits in the companion workbook alongside the complete field set. This table is the primary-source backbone for every ranking shown earlier in the report.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (1 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (7.2x); amber marks below · 21 rated companies; 6 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 21 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 18 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 PREMIUM — ≥9.5x · median 13.5x · 5 companies Mastercard Incorporated MA Commercial card issuing and spend management $511B 19.3x 13% 63% 76 Paymentus Holdings, Inc. PAY Payments infrastructure and transaction software $3.4B 16.0x 18% 12% 31 Nayax Ltd. NYAX Payments infrastructure and transaction software $1.6B 13.5x 23% 17% 42 Corpay, Inc. CPAY Payments infrastructure and transaction software $34.4B 11.2x 9% 51% 62 PAR Technology Corporation PAR Vertical software with embedded payments $919M 10.8x 10% 10% 25 CORE — 6.2x–9.5x · median 7.2x · 11 companies ACI Worldwide, Inc. ACIW Payments infrastructure and transaction software $5.6B 9.5x 8% 29% 37 Crane NXT, Co. CXT Payments hardware and currency authentication $4.0B 8.3x 6% 24% 30 Flywire Corp FLYW Merchant services and ISO distribution $1.8B 8.1x 15% 23% 40 Dlocal Limited DLO Payments infrastructure and transaction software $3.2B 7.6x 30% 20% 50 Block, Inc. XYZ Payments infrastructure and transaction software $44.6B 7.6x 11% 18% 32 PayPal Holdings, Inc. PYPL Commercial card issuing and spend management $49.2B 7.2x 4% 20% 23 Blackbaud, Inc. BLKB Vertical software with embedded payments $3.1B 6.8x 5% 37% 42 Payoneer Global Inc. PAYO Payments infrastructure and transaction software $2.2B 6.7x 11% 26% 36 Global Payments Inc. GPN Commercial card issuing and spend management $41.8B 6.7x 5% 47% 53 Priority Technology Holdings, Inc. PRTH Payments infrastructure and transaction software $1.6B 6.6x 7% 23% 29

19. 19
    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2)

    Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier

    The second half of the public comparables table, completing the 21 rated companies grouped by valuation tier.

    This page completes the comparables table, again shaded against the 7.2x sector median. Together with the prior page, it carries every rated name in the coverage set. The companion workbook holds the names without an eligible multiple.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PUBLIC COMPARABLES (2 OF 2) Public Comparables on EV / EBITDA (CY2027E), Grouped by Valuation Tier Teal shading marks a EV/EBITDA above the sector median (7.2x); amber marks below · 21 rated companies; 6 not rated (no eligible EV/EBITDA) · tickers link to the underlying source · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. All 21 rated rows are in this appendix and in the companion workbook, which carries the complete field set. Names without an eligible multiple are listed in the companion workbook. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 19 Company Ticker Segment EV EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) Rev growth EBITDA margin Rule of 40 CORE — CONTINUED — 6.2x–9.5x · median 7.2x · 11 companies Fiserv, Inc. FISV Outsourced payments processing and managed services $53.0B 6.2x 3% 41% 45 DISCOUNT — <6.2x · median 4.6x · 5 companies EVERTEC, Inc. EVTC Merchant services and ISO distribution $2.6B 5.7x 8% 39% 48 Shift4 Payments, Inc. FOUR Payments infrastructure and transaction software $7.4B 5.7x 11% 23% 35 WEX Inc. WEX Payments infrastructure and transaction software $6.0B 4.6x 2% 43% 46 Repay Holdings Corporation RPAY Payments infrastructure and transaction software $690M 3.3x 27% 35% 61 StoneCo Ltd. STNE Payments infrastructure and transaction software $3.4B 2.3x 5% 52% 53

20. 20
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    The first half of the precedent transaction list, showing disclosed-terms deals newest first.

    This page opens the list of the 50 transactions with disclosed terms out of 114 recorded in this tier, newest first, with deal multiples calculated on LTM financials at announcement. 18 of the 50 are shown across these two pages; the rest sit in the companion workbook. These multiples are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis shown earlier, and we do not claim a spread between them.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (1 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 50 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (114 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 156 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate filings collapsed); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 64 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 50 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 20 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Jun-2026 Nuvei → Payoneer Global Inc. $2.4B 2.3x 8.7x Nuvei agreed to acquire Payoneer Global Inc. at $2.4B in June 2026, at 8.7x EBITDA. That sits above the middle band of the peer set on forward cash earnings, which fits a target carrying local rail coverage and a global merchant base. Nov-2025 n/a → Paysafe Ltd $2.7B 1.6x 6.2x Paysafe Ltd was agreed at $2.7B in November 2025, at 1.6x revenue and 6.2x EBITDA. That is at the lower end of the recorded multiples here, the shape pricing tends to take for scaled acquiring volume without headline growth. Jul-2025 Euronet Worldwide, Inc. → CoreCard Corporation $257M n/a n/a Euronet Worldwide, Inc. agreed $257M for CoreCard Corporation in July 2025. A processor adding issuer-processing software is the classic build-versus-buy answer: acquire the platform rather than construct it. Jun-2025 365 Retail Markets, LLC → Cantaloupe, Inc. $689M 2.4x 17.3x 365 Retail Markets, LLC agreed $689M for Cantaloupe, Inc. in June 2025, at 17.3x EBITDA. The multiple sits at the higher end of this record, on a target combining an installed estate with attached payments. Jun-2024 Payroc Buyer, LLC → i3 Verticals, LLC $820M 2.4x 8.0x Payroc Buyer, LLC agreed $820M for i3 Verticals, LLC in June 2024, at 8.0x EBITDA. Consolidators buying vertical merchant books with attached software are a repeat feature of this record. May-2024 Corpay, Inc. → Paymerang n/a 0.7x 8.8x Corpay, Inc. and Paymerang were recorded at 0.7x revenue and 8.8x EBITDA in May 2024, and the transaction is recorded as terminated. Accounts-payable automation attached to a spend-management platform is a recurring fit, and a recorded price is not a closed… Jul-2023 GTCR W Aggregator LP → Merchant Solutions business $18.5B n/a n/a GTCR W Aggregator LP completed the purchase of the Merchant Solutions business at $18.5B in July 2023. Sponsor appetite for scaled merchant portfolios with contracted recurring revenue and predictable cash conversion is a standing feature of this market. Aug-2022 Global Payments Inc. → EVO Payments n/a n/a 18.3x Global Payments Inc. agreed to acquire EVO Payments in August 2022, at 18.3x EBITDA. Strategic buyers underwrite processing-platform and scheme-cost savings explicitly, which is how a multiple at that level gets supported. Jan-2021 NCR Corporation → Cardtronics plc n/a n/a 10.6x NCR Corporation and Cardtronics plc were recorded at 10.6x EBITDA in January 2021, and the transaction is recorded as terminated. Self-service estates attract buyers looking for owned endpoints and recurring transaction flow.

21. 21
    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2)

    All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First

    The second half of the precedent transaction list, completing the disclosed-terms deals newest first.

    This page completes the precedent list shown on the prior page. 156 records in the broader precedent set carry data-quality flags, and 64 transactions without a disclosed value or multiple are held in the companion workbook rather than shown here. Reading the two pages together gives a fuller sense of deal cadence than any single transaction can.

    Everything on this page

    06 · PRECEDENT TRANSACTIONS (2 OF 2) All Precedent Transactions with Disclosed Terms, Newest First 50 transactions with disclosed terms in this tier (114 recorded) · multiples on LTM financials at announcement where disclosed · deal values link to the underlying filing · as of 2026-09-28 Source: NeuraCap analytics platform; market data and consensus estimates as of 2026-09-28; company disclosures via SEC EDGAR where linked. 156 precedent record(s) carry data-quality flags (deal value unit unresolved; divestiture roles reassigned; duplicate filings collapsed); figures are shown as recorded in the filing. 64 recorded transactions with neither a disclosed value nor a multiple are omitted from the precedent list and the case studies (kept in the companion workbook). Deal multiples are LTM at announcement (Definitive, from filings); they are not directly comparable to the CY2027E public basis and no spread is claimed. 18 of 50 transactions shown; the rest are in the companion workbook. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 21 Date Transaction EV EV/LTM Rev EV/LTM EBITDA Why it matters Nov-2020 Nexi → Nets A/S n/a n/a 21.4x Oct-2020 Repay Holdings Corporation → CPS Payment Services, LLC, Custom Payment Systems, LLC and Media Payments, LLC $93M n/a n/a Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Feb-2020 RBA → Ingenico Group n/a 18.8x 18.8x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. May-2019 Global Payments Inc. → Total System Services, Inc. n/a 6.7x 16.0x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. May-2019 Nuvei Corporation → SafeCharge International Group Limited n/a 0.7x 8.8x Apr-2019 Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. → Worldpay, Inc. n/a 12.0x 20.3x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Feb-2019 ACI Worldwide, Inc. → Speedpay n/a 2.2x 8.0x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Oct-2018 NCR Corporation → JetPay Corporation n/a 2.3x 30.5x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved. Aug-2018 Francisco Partners Management, L.P.; British Columbia Investment Management Corporation → VeriFone Systems, Inc. n/a 1.8x 12.3x Value shown as recorded in the filing; deal value unit unresolved.

22. 22
    06 · METHODOLOGY

    Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality

    The report's sources, valuation assumptions and data-quality notes.

    We source every figure in this report from SEC filings, consensus estimates and market prices as of September 28, 2026, and priced the coverage set primarily on EV/EBITDA (CY2027E) because validated coverage supports that basis for this industry. Where a figure carries a direct source link, it points to the underlying filing or data record; where it does not, the appendix names the source and the basis on which we read it. This page is the reference point for tracing any number in the report back to where it came from.

    Everything on this page

    06 · METHODOLOGY Sources, Assumptions and Data Quality How this report was built, what was excluded, and where every underlying disclosure lives · as of 2026-09-28 Every figure in this report links to the record it was taken from. Where a figure has no link, the appendix names its source and the basis on which it was read. Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice 22 VALUATION BASIS Primary valuation basis: EV / EBITDA on CY2027E consensus (21 of 27 companies eligible; multiples failing the platform's plausibility gates are excluded, never plotted). Practitioners price this industry on EV / EBITDA rather than P / E; validated coverage supports the industry standard (23 of 27 companies), so this report follows it. EV / EBITDA on CY2027E is the lead convention: it is the sector-appropriate prior for Transaction and Payment Processing and it clears the coverage gate with 21 of 27 companies (78%). EV / Revenue is carried as a cross-check. The set earns: 21 of 27 companies carry a meaningful forward EBITDA on CY2027E, so the profit multiple leads and a revenue multiple would understate what the market is pricing. DATA QUALITY & EXCLUSIONS 7 records were excluded or quarantined by the platform's validation gates (unit errors, implausible ratios, ineligible securities and classification failures); the full ledger ships in the companion tables and never feeds a statistic in this report. DEFINITIVE VS DIRECTIONAL Definitive content is disclosed or consensus data passed through stated arithmetic. Directional content — tier boundaries, situation cuts, "why it matters" commentary, the agenda pages — is NeuraCap analyst judgment and is labeled as such where it appears. WHAT THIS REPORT IS NOT This report characterises a sector. It does not recommend buying, selling or holding any security, and no statement in it should be read as investment advice or a price target. WHERE THE DATA LIVES 1222 registered source documents stand behind the figures in this report. Metric hyperlinks throughout the deck open the specific filing or data record; by publisher: sec.gov (1221) · home.treasury.gov (1). The companion workbook beside this deck carries the complete source index.

23. 23

    Through September 2026, the Higher Multiples in This Set Sat with the Faster Growers.

    Closing statement summarizing that, through September 2026, higher multiples in this set sat with the faster-growing companies.

    Through September 2026, the higher multiples in this coverage set sat with the faster-growing names. The companion tables carry the full universe, the exclusion ledger, and the complete source index for any figure a client wants to trace further.

    Everything on this page

    Through September 2026, the Higher Multiples in This Set Sat with the Faster Growers. NeuraCap AI — Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage September 2026 · Prepared by NeuraCap AI · Confidential Transaction and Payment Processing Coverage | September 2026 | Confidential | Not investment advice Sources & methodology 23

More coverage in Financials

• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Transaction and Payment Processing Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 25, 2026Transaction and Payment Processing Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 11–25, 2026
• Bi-Weekly Update · Sep 28, 2026Mortgage REITs Bi-Weekly Industry Events & M&A Update — September 14–28, 2026
• Sector Report · Sep 28, 2026Leasing and Rental Finance Sector Outlook — September 2026