Comparisons
How Worthune compares, with the sources attached
The established vendors for embedding calculators on a financial site are CalcXML, Dinkytown, Fintactix, and Leadfusion. The open-source option is PolicyEngine. For most teams the real alternative is building it in-house. Worthune differs from all of them in one way: every model ships a published specification, downloadable test cases, and an audit record per calculation.
Every claim below about another company carries the page it was read from and the date someone read it. Where a vendor does not publish something, the cell says so rather than guessing.
Last reviewed
Everyone, side by side
Summary rows only — each head-to-head below goes further. A cell reading “Not verified” means nobody has checked it yet, which is different from a no.
| Worthune | Dinkytown | CalcXML | Fintactix | Leadfusion | PolicyEngine | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| How it is delivered | REST API, MCP server, and a one-script-tag embed | Calculators licensed for hosting on the customer's own site | Hyperlinks, iframes, an AJAX-loaded div, popup and lightbox overlays, plus HTTP POST with XML and SOAP or REST web service calls where the customer hosts the pages | 88 calculators across 11 categories, hosted by the vendor and embedded with a single line of code using an HTML iframe | Interactive tools deployed to banking sites, landing pages, or branch intranets by iframe, embedded JavaScript, or API integration | A hosted REST API, or a self-hosted Docker image that runs the same model on your own infrastructure |
| Entry price | Free for three models; $199/month for the full catalog | $169.95 one-time for a single calculator on one site | Not stated publicly | Not stated publicly | Not stated publicly | Not verified |
| Programmatic API | Yes — REST and MCP, no key required for the three sample models | Not verified | Yes — HTTP POST with XML, and SOAP or REST web service calls | Not verified | Yes — API integration is offered alongside iframe and JavaScript embedding | Yes — household tax and benefit calculations over HTTP; hosted access is granted on request with OAuth credentials, and the Docker image needs no authentication by default |
| Published specification per calculator | Yes — three in full publicly, the rest with a subscription; every input contract public | Not verified | Not verified | Not verified | Not verified | Not verified |
| Published test cases | Yes — 250 cases per model, downloadable as JSONL | Not verified | Not verified | Not verified | Not verified | Not verified |
| Per-run audit record | Yes — SHA-256 over model, spec version, inputs and outputs, returned with every run | Not verified | Not verified | Not verified | Not verified | Not verified |
Oldest check represented in this table: . Full sources are on each comparison page.
One at a time
Worthune vs Dinkytown
A large licensed catalog with a published one-time price, against fewer models with published evidence.
read the comparison →Worthune vs CalcXML
Many integration routes into financial-institution sites, against an API with specifications and audit records.
read the comparison →Worthune vs Fintactix
Hosted calculators priced by institution size, against a published price and a compliance document per model.
read the comparison →Worthune vs Leadfusion
An enterprise customer-acquisition suite, against a calculation layer. Mostly different jobs.
read the comparison →Worthune vs PolicyEngine
Open-source policy microsimulation, against a productized planning API. Genuinely different questions.
read the comparison →Worthune vs building it yourself
The real incumbent: a cost model with its assumptions in the open, and the arguments against buying.
read the comparison →Questions
Common questions
- What are the alternatives to Worthune?
- For embedding calculators on a financial-institution website: CalcXML, Dinkytown, Fintactix, and Leadfusion are the established vendors. For open-source tax and benefit modeling: PolicyEngine. And for most teams the real alternative is building it themselves, which is why that has a page here too.
- Why do so many cells say a vendor does not publish something?
- Because most vendors in this category do not publish pricing. Where a cell says that, it means someone read the page named in that comparison's sources on the date shown and the information was not there — not that the answer is no. Recording the absence with a date seemed more useful than leaving a blank, which most readers would misread as a negative.
- How do you keep these comparisons accurate?
- Every claim about another company lives in a registry with the URL it was read from, the date a person read it, and a review interval. Past that interval the page stops presenting the claim as current and says when it was last checked instead. A build gate rejects any comparison page that states a third-party claim outside that registry, so a price cannot be typed into copy even once.
- Are these comparisons impartial?
- No, and it would be strange to claim otherwise — we sell one of the products. What we can offer instead is checkability: the factual rows are sourced and dated so you can verify them, our opinions are in sections marked as opinion, and every page carries a section on where the other vendor is stronger and when we are the wrong choice.
Product names and trademarks belong to their owners and are used here only to identify the products compared. Nothing on these pages implies endorsement or affiliation. Found something out of date? Tell us at support@worthune.com and we will re-check it.