Index › Finance › Receivables and billing › Merchants of record › Creem vs Cleverbridge
Merchants of record · November 2026 Edition

Creem vs Cleverbridge

Zero of fourteen models named Creem first on the direct prompt; zero named Cleverbridge. Creem was named by eleven of the fourteen models and Cleverbridge by thirteen and Creem carries 16 labels and Cleverbridge 22, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Creem

criticized challenger

Named in one category this edition.

Cleverbridge

accepted challenger

Named in two categories this edition.

First-choice share14%6%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate25%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#6A position in a field of 12; printed, not drawn.
Labels1622A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Creem reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Paddle was named alongside these two in thirteen of the fourteen direct answers. Paddle vs Creem · Paddle vs Cleverbridge · Creem vs FastSpring

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the merchants of record page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
CreemFirst choices, of fourteen modelsCleverbridge
Direct00
Paraphrase03
Comparative00
Budget-constrained701 against Creem
Scale-constrained00
Negative003 against Creem
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Creem and Cleverbridge stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.20
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30B
Creem Cleverbridge first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Creem on the left and Cleverbridge on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Creem and Cleverbridge stood in it.

Neither was the first choice, one was named

10 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Claude Haiku 4.5Paddle alternatives: 2Checkout, Cleverbridge, FastSpring, PayPro Global
Gemini 3.5 FlashFastSpring, Paddle alternatives: Adyen, Anrok, Avalara, Cleverbridge, PayPro Global, Stripe
Perplexity SonarPaddle alternatives: Cleverbridge, FastSpring
Grok 4.20Paddle alternatives: 2Checkout, Cleverbridge, FastSpring
Mistral SmallPaddle alternatives: Cleverbridge, FastSpring
DeepSeek V4 FlashPaddle alternatives: Cleverbridge, FastSpring, Nexway, PayPro Global
Llama 4 MaverickPaddle alternatives: Cleverbridge, EBizCharge, FastSpring
Qwen 3.7 FlashPaddle alternatives: Cleverbridge, FastSpring
GPT-6 LunaPaddle alternatives: Cleverbridge, FastSpring
Muse Glimmer 30BPaddle alternatives: Cleverbridge, DualEntry, FastSpring, Nexway

Neither was named

4 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniPaddle alternatives: FastSpring
Kimi K2Paddle alternatives: FastSpring, Nexway, PayPro Global
GLM 4.7 FlashXno first choice
MiniMax M2.52Checkout, Paddle alternatives: DualEntry

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Creem leads by seventeen points.
Creem19%#2 of 12
Cleverbridge2%#9 of 12
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Creem leads by eight points.
Creem14%#2 of 12
Cleverbridge6%#6 of 12
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: Cleverbridge leads at enterprise.
Cleverbridge35%#1 of 9
Creem0%#– of 9
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Creem

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.

“Creem is a merchant of record that has been reported to have issues with payment processing, with one user experiencing unexpected payment declines and customer account blocks.” Llama 4 Maverick · negative prompt · hard negative
“Do not use Creem/Dodo despite lower rates. Reliability > Margin here.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · hard negative
“Avoid Creem due to the reported payment and payout issues.” Mistral Small · negative prompt · hard negative
“The best merchant of record for a company with a limited budget is Creem, with a flat rate of 3.9% + 40¢ per successful transaction and no monthly fee.” Llama 4 Maverick · budget prompt · first choice
“For a truly limited budget: Creem offers the lowest published rates at 3.9% + $0.40 with no hidden fees.” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
“Creem is likely the best starting point if its eligibility and feature set fit your business” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about Cleverbridge

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.

“Cleverbridge is a strong, well‑documented recommendation.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Primary Recommendation: Cleverbridge” MiniMax M2.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Top Recommendation: Cleverbridge” Qwen 3.7 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Also compared

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.