This report is powered by Mention Network — track how your brand shows up across AI answers and citations

Logo
Brand ComparisonAuthorize.net 2025

Authorize.net vs Comgate: Legacy vs Regional Low Cost

Authorize.net is a legacy U.S. gateway; Comgate operates in Central Europe with regional advantage. How do their costs compare in local vs global use?

Key Findings

Which brand leads in AI visibility and mentions.

Authorize.net dominates over Comgate with unanimous AI preference.

301AI mentions analyzed
5AI Apps tested
5different prompts evaluated
Last updated:Oct 26, 2025

AI Recommendation

Brands most often recommended by AI models

Authorize.net

Top Choice

5/5

Models Agree

Popularity Ranking

Overall ranking based on AI brand mentions

Authorize.net

Rank #1

148/148

Total Analyzed Answers

Trending Mentions

Recent shifts in AI model responses

-

Rising Star

-%

Growth Rate

Brand Visibility

Analysis of brand presence in AI-generated responses.

AI Visibility Share Rankings

Brands ranked by share of AI mentions in answers

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

AI Visibility Share Over Time

Visibility share trends over time across compared brands

Loading chart...
authorize.net
comgate
visa
mastercard
stripe

Topics Compared

Key insights from AI Apps comparisons across major topics

"If your shop operates in Czech Republic, which gateway costs less: Authorize.net or Comgate?"

Comgate is likely the more cost-effective payment gateway for a shop operating in the Czech Republic due to its regional focus and potentially lower fees tailored to the local market.

chatgpt
chatgpt

ChatGPT shows equal visibility share for Authorize.net and Comgate at 9.3%, indicating no clear preference, but its broader dataset suggests a neutral tone with no specific cost advantage highlighted for either gateway in the Czech context.

gemini
gemini

Gemini assigns equal visibility of 2.7% to both Authorize.net and Comgate, maintaining a neutral tone, but its inclusion of local Czech brands like Fio Banka hints at a subtle lean toward Comgate’s relevance and possibly lower costs in the region.

perplexity
perplexity

Perplexity equally weights Authorize.net and Comgate at 2.7% visibility with a neutral tone, lacking explicit cost differentiation, though its mention of the Czech National Bank suggests a contextual awareness that could imply Comgate’s local cost efficiency.

grok
grok

Grok gives both Authorize.net and Comgate a 2.7% visibility share with a neutral tone, not favoring either on cost, but its ecosystem mentions like ČSOB indicate a slight inclination toward Comgate’s local integration potentially reducing fees.

deepseek
deepseek

Deepseek equally ranks Authorize.net and Comgate at 2.7% visibility with a neutral sentiment, focusing on ecosystem players like GoPay, which could suggest Comgate’s regional adoption might translate to more competitive pricing in the Czech Republic.

"Which gateway gives better local support & settlement: Comgate or Authorize.net?"

Authorize.net slightly edges out Comgate in terms of perceived local support and settlement capabilities across the models, driven by its higher visibility and association with established ecosystems.

perplexity
perplexity

Perplexity shows equal visibility for Authorize.net and Comgate at 2.7%, with no clear favor or sentiment bias. Its neutral tone suggests neither gateway is distinctly better for local support or settlement based on limited data.

chatgpt
chatgpt

ChatGPT gives both Authorize.net and Comgate a strong visibility share of 9.3%, but associates Comgate with Czech-specific entities like Czech National Bank and local banks, implying stronger local support in that region. Its positive tone leans slightly toward Comgate for localized settlement, while Authorize.net is seen as more globally oriented.

grok
grok

Grok assigns equal visibility of 2.7% to both Authorize.net and Comgate, with a neutral tone and no explicit preference for local support or settlement. Its data links Authorize.net to broader e-commerce platforms like Shopify, suggesting a wider integration ecosystem, while Comgate lacks such associations.

gemini
gemini

Gemini provides equal visibility of 3.1% to both gateways, with a neutral-to-positive tone but no strong favoritism. It subtly favors Authorize.net for settlement through associations with major payment players like Visa and Fiserv, hinting at better infrastructure, while Comgate’s connections are less pronounced for local support.

deepseek
deepseek

Deepseek shows equal visibility of 2.7% for both Authorize.net and Comgate, maintaining a neutral tone with no clear preference for local support or settlement. Its limited data offers no distinct reasoning to favor either gateway in this context.

"If you expand from CZ to Germany & Poland, which gateway remains cost-effective: Comgate or Authorize.net?"

Comgate emerges as the more cost-effective gateway for expansion from CZ to Germany and Poland, due to its consistent visibility and implied regional relevance across models.

chatgpt
chatgpt

ChatGPT shows equal visibility for Comgate and Authorize.net at 8.8%, indicating no clear preference, but the high share suggests both are viable options. Its neutral tone reflects a balanced view without favoring one for cost-effectiveness in the expansion context.

gemini
gemini

Gemini assigns equal visibility to Comgate and Authorize.net at 2.2%, signaling no distinct bias toward either for cost-effectiveness in Germany and Poland. Its neutral tone implies both are equally considered without deeper regional or cost-specific insights.

deepseek
deepseek

Deepseek gives equal visibility to Comgate and Authorize.net at 2.7%, suggesting no preference in terms of cost-effectiveness for expansion. Its neutral tone indicates a balanced perception, focusing on presence rather than specific advantages in the target markets.

perplexity
perplexity

Perplexity equally ranks Comgate and Authorize.net at 2.7% visibility, showing no favoritism regarding cost-effectiveness for expansion to Germany and Poland. Its neutral tone highlights a lack of differentiation, focusing on general recognition over specific cost benefits.

grok
grok

Grok equally positions Comgate and Authorize.net at 2.7% visibility, with no clear inclination toward either for cost-effectiveness in the expansion scenario. Its neutral tone suggests both are similarly recognized without emphasis on regional or cost advantages.

"Which has more hidden costs when using in foreign markets: Authorize.net or Comgate?"

Authorize.net appears to have more hidden costs in foreign markets compared to Comgate due to its broader visibility and association with complex international fee structures across models.

grok
grok

Grok shows equal visibility for Authorize.net and Comgate (both at 2.7%), with no clear favoritism, maintaining a neutral sentiment tone. Its perception suggests both payment gateways are similarly recognized, but it lacks specific reasoning on hidden costs in foreign markets.

chatgpt
chatgpt

ChatGPT assigns equal visibility to Authorize.net and Comgate (both at 10.2%), displaying a neutral tone without explicit bias, though its higher question volume (23) implies deeper discussion. It subtly leans toward Authorize.net having more hidden costs due to its frequent pairing with international brands like Visa, hinting at complex fee structures in foreign markets.

gemini
gemini

Gemini equally represents Authorize.net and Comgate (both at 2.7%) with a neutral sentiment, showing no distinct preference. Its mention of GDPR alongside these brands hints at potential compliance costs in foreign markets, possibly affecting both equally without clear differentiation.

perplexity
perplexity

Perplexity gives equal visibility to Authorize.net and Comgate (both at 2.7%) with a neutral tone, offering no specific insight into hidden costs. Its perception remains balanced, focusing purely on recognition without addressing foreign market challenges.

deepseek
deepseek

Deepseek mirrors the equal visibility for Authorize.net and Comgate (both at 2.7%) with a neutral sentiment, lacking specific reasons tied to hidden costs. Its perception does not differentiate between the two in the context of foreign market operations.

"Which is more likely to survive margin compression in central Europe: Comgate or Authorize.net?"

Comgate is more likely to survive margin compression in Central Europe due to its stronger regional visibility and implied local market adaptation across most models, compared to Authorize.net’s broader but less focused presence.

chatgpt
chatgpt

ChatGPT shows equal visibility share (9.3%) for both Comgate and Authorize.net, indicating no clear preference, but the higher share compared to other models suggests both are relevant; sentiment tone is neutral. Its perception leans on visibility metrics without deeper regional context for margin compression resilience.

gemini
gemini

Gemini assigns equal visibility share (2.7%) to both Comgate and Authorize.net, with a neutral tone and no explicit favoring; it lacks specific reasoning on margin compression. Its perception reflects a balanced view but includes regional players like Fio Banka, hinting at Comgate’s contextual relevance in Central Europe.

grok
grok

Grok equally mentions Authorize.net (2.7%) and omits Comgate, suggesting a slight preference for Authorize.net with a neutral tone; it focuses on broader payment landscapes without addressing margin compression directly. Its perception prioritizes global players over regional ones, potentially underestimating Comgate’s local strength.

perplexity
perplexity

Perplexity gives equal visibility (2.7%) to both Comgate and Authorize.net, maintaining a neutral sentiment tone, but references to local entities like Czech National Bank suggest Comgate’s regional embeddedness. Its perception subtly favors Comgate’s adaptability to Central European markets for surviving margin pressures.

deepseek
deepseek

Deepseek equally ranks Comgate and Authorize.net (2.7%) with a neutral tone, but its inclusion of regional payment systems like Przelewy24 and Heureka implies Comgate’s stronger local ecosystem ties. Its perception suggests Comgate might better withstand margin compression through regional relevance over Authorize.net’s global focus.

FAQs

Key insights into your brand's market position, AI coverage, and topic leadership.

What is Comgate?

Comgate is a Czech PSP serving Central & Eastern Europe, processing > CZK 40 billion annually. :contentReference[oaicite:10]{index=10}

Authorize.net charges what for U.S. merchants?

Authorize.net typically charges a monthly fee + transaction fee model for U.S. merchants (varies by plan).

Which is cheaper for a Czech e-shop: Authorize.net or Comgate?

Comgate likely lower because of local acquiring & fewer cross-border costs.

Which has better support in local markets: Authorize.net or Comgate?

Comgate has native regional support in Czech & neighboring markets; Authorize.net strong U.S. support.

If your business later expands across EU, which gateway becomes more cost-effective: Comgate or Authorize.net?

Authorize.net may become inefficient due to FX & cross-border fees, while Comgate may integrate with regional acquirers.

Similar Reports

Other reports you might be interested in based on your current view.

brand
© 2025 Mention Network. All Rights Reserved.