Squiid vs Nango
Nango is product integrations infrastructure: OAuth flows, token refresh, a proxy and syncs across hundreds of external APIs. Squiid is procurement and billing for your own dependencies.
Short answer. If your product has an Integrations page where customers connect their own Salesforce or HubSpot, Nango is the right tool and Squiid does nothing of the sort. If your own app needs a database, a host, an email sender and a model provider, that is Squiid.
The one-line difference. Nango manages connections your customers make to their own systems. Squiid manages the accounts your company opens to run the product.
Side by side
| Nango | Squiid | |
|---|---|---|
| What it covers | Integration infrastructure: OAuth and token refresh for hundreds of external APIs, a proxy for authenticated calls, syncs and actions on a managed queue. | The services your app runs on: models, databases, hosting, email, SMS, storage, auth, search, observability and payments, provisioned and billed. |
| Non-AI services | Almost entirely non-AI, but they are your customers systems. No database, host or email sender comes out of it. | Yes. Postgres, object storage, email, phone numbers, error tracking. |
| Provisioning of accounts | It authorises accounts your users already own. It does not create infrastructure accounts. | Yes. Squiid opens the account and holds the credential. |
| Key custody and rotation | Yes, for connection credentials. Tokens stored and refreshed per connection, the hard part of integrations. | Squiid holds and rotates the provider keys. Your project carries one gateway key, worthless outside it. |
| Billing model | Its own plans, commonly per connection, as of their public docs, with a self-hosted path. External APIs bill their owners. | Prepaid credits at par: $1 of credit is $1 at the provider. Subscriptions pass through at list price. |
| Fee | No fee on provider usage; you are paying for the integration layer. | Free $0/mo + 15% at top-up. Solo $19.97/mo from 8%, falling to 3.5% with spend. Team from $29.97/seat, one point lower. Custom 3% or less. |
| One invoice PDF | One Nango invoice plus everything else you already pay for. | Yes. One monthly PDF: credits, plan, subscriptions. |
| Spend caps and pause-on-zero | Sync frequency and connection limits. No spend balance across vendors. | Yes. Alerts at 75, 90 and 100%, capped auto top-up, pause at zero. |
| Works with coding agents | Yes in the sense that any API is agent-reachable, though it is aimed at product engineering. | Yes. One variable and one base URL convention for every service. |
| Self-host option | Yes. Open source with a self-hosted option. | No. Hosted only. Leaving is a transfer where the provider supports one, a documented export otherwise. See handover. |
| Best for | SaaS products needing customer-facing integrations without writing OAuth twelve times. | Projects that need infrastructure bought, credentialed and billed, rather than end-user SaaS accounts connected. |
When to pick Nango instead
Pick Nango when integrations are a feature you ship. OAuth is deceptively expensive: every provider has its own quirks, refresh semantics, scopes and rate limits, and you maintain all of them for as long as the feature exists.
Pick it when you need data sync rather than single calls. Keeping a copy of a customer records fresh, with retries and a queue, is a lot of infrastructure to build twice.
Pick it when self-hosting matters. Customer tokens are sensitive enough that some teams will not put them in a third-party store.
When Squiid is the better fit
Squiid is the better fit for your own dependencies. Nango assumes your app already exists, with a database to sync into and a host to run on. Getting those is the work Squiid removes: click the service, Squiid opens the account and holds the credential.
It is also the better fit for cost visibility. An integration layer says nothing about what your infrastructure costs this month. One prepaid balance covering models, database, email, SMS and storage says exactly that.
And it is the better fit for reducing secrets. Integration credentials belong to your customers and must be stored somewhere. Your own provider credentials do not have to exist in your project at all.
Use both
A B2B SaaS with an integrations page usually wants both. Nango holds customer connections; Squiid holds the vendor accounts your product runs on. Neither knows about the other, and between them your environment file gets very short.
Questions people ask
Is Squiid an integration platform?
Could Nango manage my provider API keys?
It manages connection credentials for APIs you call, so in principle it holds keys. It will not open the account, agree the price or pay the bill, and has no view of usage cost.
Which one do I need first?
Whichever matches your bottleneck. Customers asking for integrations, Nango. Drowning in provider signups and invoices, Squiid. Most products hit the second one earlier.
Do they both sit in the request path?
Yes, each for its own traffic, which matters for latency and privacy review. Squiid meters calls at its gateway; Nango proxies calls to external APIs.
Can Squiid bill for the APIs my customers connect?
No. Those accounts belong to your customers and are billed to them. Squiid bills for services it provisions for you.
Their integrations.
Your infrastructure.
The services your product runs on. One key, one invoice.