Omise, MoMo, ZaloPay: A Comparison of Payment Gateways in Vietnam

Below are the three main payment gateways in Vietnam Omise, MoMo, ZaloPay The comparative analysis covers key indicators and applicable scenarios for enterprises and users:

1. Basic background

dimension (math.) Omise MoMo ZaloPay
Established 2013 (from Thailand) 2014 2016
parent companies Omise Holdings (multinational) M_Service (local Viet Nam) VNG Corporation (indigenous Vietnam)
primary positioning B2B Online Payment Solutions C2C/B2C e-wallet C2C/B2C e-wallet + social integration

2. Functionality and coverage

(1) Method of payment

  • Omise:
    Supports international credit cards (Visa/Mastercard), bank transfers, and code-sweeping payments; suitable for cross-border e-commerce and enterprise API integration.
  • MoMe:
    E-wallet top-up, QR code payment, bill payment (utilities/telephone bills), code scanning for offline merchants; covering over 50,000 offline shops.
  • ZaloPay*:
    Similar to Momo but deeply integrated with Zalo social app, it supports social scenarios such as red packet transfer and game recharge.

(2) User size

  • MoMe: >30 million users (largest independent e-wallet in Vietnam).
  • ZaloPay: ~20 million users (relies on Zalo eco-diversion).
  • Omise: B-side customers predominate, no publicly available C-side data.

(3) Cross-border capacity

3. Cross-border capacity and internationalisation

dimension (math.) Omise MoMo ZaloPay
Cross-border payment support ✅ Strong (support for international credit cards, multi-currency settlement) ❌ Transactions within Vietnam only ❌ Only in Vietnam, some cross-border game reloading
Country/area coverage Southeast Asia (Thailand, Japan, New Zealand, etc.) + some European and American markets Vietnamese mainland Local Vietnam + Limited ASEAN Co-operation
Applicable Scenarios -Cross-border e-commerce
-Multinational enterprise API integration		 -Local Life Payment
-Domestic e-commerce/retail		 -Social Red Packet Transfer
-Local O2O services

4. Fees and costs

(1) Merchant Fees

  • Omise:
    Credit card transactions: ~3% + fixed fees; lower for bank transfers. Ideal for high-frequency, large-value transactions.
  • Momo:
    Code payment: 0.5%-1.5% (adjusted according to the industry); e-wallet top-up is free.
  • ZaloPay:
    Similar to Momo, but with discounts for merchants within the Zalo ecosystem (as low as 0.3%).

(2) User Fees (user side)

  • MoMe/ZaloPay.
    Charge and transfer are free of charge, withdrawal to bank card charges 0.5%-1% commission.
  • Omise.
    There is no direct cost to the user and the cost is borne by the merchant.

5. API and technology integration

Omise (Developer Friendly)｜ Momo (Simple Access)｜ ZaloPay (Social integration)
API Documentation Completeness ✅ Complete (Multi-language SDK) ✅ Basic version is sufficient ⚠️ need to contact sales
Sandbox test environment ✔️ provides a simulated payment process ✔️ limited support ❌ no public sandboxes
Customisation capability High (for complex business logic) Medium (standardised solutions predominate) Low (dependent on Zalo ecosystem)

6.Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses
🔹Omise:
✓ Strengths: strong internationalisation, flexible technology, support for credit card collections; ✗ Weaknesses: low C-suite visibility.
🔹MoMe:
✓ Advantage: wide offline coverage + large user base; ✗ Disadvantage: serious homogenisation of functions.
🔹Zalopay.
✓ Strengths: social fission marketing potential; ✗ Weaknesses: slow technical response.

7.How to choose?
–Go with Omise.:: Enterprise-level clients requiring cross-border collections or custom development.
–Choose Momо:: A lifestyle app for maximum local coverage.
–Choose zalopay.:: Social e-commerce targeting young users with limited budgets.

💡 Tips for 2024: Momo and zalopay are vying for 'super app' status, while omisе may face competitive pressure from giants like stripe