Payment Processors · reliability comparison
Helcim vs Stax: which is more reliable? (2026)
Helcim is more reliable than Stax, scoring 91.9 vs 49.0 out of 100. Over the last 90 days Helcim reported 1 incident and Stax reported 4, with effective uptime of 99.97% and 98.48% respectively. Helcim resolves incidents faster on average (4h 21m).
Data updated Nov 1, 2026 · How we score
| Metric | Helcim | Stax |
|---|---|---|
| Reliability score | 91.9 | 49.0 |
| Rank (payment processors) | #3 | #11 |
| Uptime (90 days) | 99.97% | 98.48% |
| Incidents (90 days) | 1 | 4 |
| Partial / major outages | 0 | 2 |
| Avg time to resolve | 4h 21m | 21h 59m |
| Outages we detected | 0 | 0 |
| Transparency score | 100/100 | 100/100 |
Where Helcim and Stax differ
- Stax reported 4× as many incidents as Helcim over the last 90 days (4 vs 1).
- Stax had 2 partial or major outages, compared with 0 for Helcim.
- Helcim fixes problems faster: 4h 21m on average, against 21h 59m for Stax (5.1× quicker).
- Helcim's longest outage on record lasted 1h 6m (May 9, 2026); Stax's lasted 2d 2h (Oct 27, 2026).
90-day uptime
Helcim
Stax
- No incidents
- Degraded
- Partial outage
- Major outage
- No data
Recent Helcim incidents
- Degraded performanceOct 24, 2026 · resolved in 4h 21m
Payment processing interrupted
Affected: Payment Tools
Recent Stax incidents
- Partial outageOct 27, 2026 · resolved in 2d 2h
Potential Funding Delayofficial update ↗
Affected: Settlements, Fees, and Payouts
- Partial outageOct 20, 2026 · resolved in 14h 41m
Funding Delay October 20, 2026official update ↗
Affected: Settlements, Fees, and Payouts
- InformationalOct 7, 2026 · resolved in <1m
- Degraded performanceSep 28, 2026 · resolved in 49m
Affected: Scheduled Payments, Stax API