Scienaptic AI is a US-based credit decisioning platform that emerged from the AI-for-credit wave and now serves lenders globally with a model-led decisioning stack. Floowed is a global loan decisioning platform, headquartered in Singapore, built for credit officers who need to turn messy applications into decisions, fast, without a six-month services engagement.
Both run policy and models. Only one was designed for the credit officer to operate directly, on documents that arrive as phone photos and handwritten payslips, with pricing published before a sales call.
Who Scienaptic is built for
Scienaptic AI markets itself as an AI-powered credit decisioning platform. The wedge is models: in-platform model build, deployment, and monitoring, with a credit-officer-facing UI layered on top. The reference customer base skews to US credit unions, US community banks, auto finance, and a growing set of international lenders.
The buyer Scienaptic is built for is the lender with a defined modelling problem: thin-file or near-prime applicants where a better score lifts approval rates without lifting loss rates, with a risk team that wants the modelling lifecycle, deployment, and challenger-champion testing handled in one platform. Pricing is custom enterprise, sales-led, with implementation done by Scienaptic and partners.
Lenders pick Scienaptic when the bottleneck is scoring, not document intake, and when there is appetite for a vendor-led AI engagement that produces a tuned model and a deployment surface for it.
Who Floowed is built for
Floowed was built for the credit officer who needs to make decisions on the applications they actually receive: handwritten payslips, photographed bank statements, scanned identity documents, partially completed forms with corrections in the margin. The buyer is the head of credit at a bank, fintech, NBFC, multifinance company, BNPL, rural bank, cooperative, microfinance lender, or any other lender on the published price list, anywhere in the world.
Floowed is score-agnostic. Bring any score, from CredoLab, Zest, Trusting Social, FICO, Experian, CRIF, your internal model, or a combination. Floowed orchestrates them as inputs to the credit policy on the Decisioning Canvas. We do not build proprietary scores and we do not compete with scoring vendors.
Capability comparison
| Capability | Scienaptic AI | Floowed |
|---|---|---|
| Document intelligence on bad-quality input (handwritten, scanned, photographed) | partial (integration model, not native headline product) | ✓ native, headline product, best-in-class globally |
| No-code policy builder for the credit officer (Decisioning Canvas) | partial (rule UI exists, model-engineer-leaning) | ✓ plain-English canvas, designed for the credit officer to operate directly |
| Time to first decision | weeks to months, vendor-led | ✓ same week, self-serve trial, first application free |
| Pricing transparency (published on website) | ✗ custom enterprise, sales-led | ✓ Core $399 annual / $499 monthly, Scale $799 / $999, Enterprise custom |
| Activation timeline (no professional services dependency) | ✗ vendor-led implementation typical | ✓ same-week activation, no professional services required |
| Integrations breadth (LMS, bureaus, KYC, banking) | partial (bureau and data partners, customer-specific integrations) | ✓ 40+ pre-built integrations |
| Score-agnostic orchestration (bring any score) | partial (Scienaptic also ships its own models) | ✓ bring any score, Floowed orchestrates, never competes |
| Audit trail per decision | ✓ standard for enterprise decisioning | ✓ every decision logged with policy version, inputs, outputs, reasoning |
What Scienaptic pitches hardest
Scienaptic leads with the modelling story. The platform is built around the modelling lifecycle: build, validate, deploy, monitor, retrain. That is a real capability and for a buyer whose stated bottleneck is model quality, it is the headline pitch.
The second pitch is the US reference base. Named credit-union and community-bank customers are public, the US auto-finance presence is real, and the company has documented lift in approval rates and loss reductions at multiple lenders. If your buying committee weights US references heavily, Scienaptic shows that signal.
The third pitch is the vendor-led modelling engagement: Scienaptic offers to do the modelling work as part of the contract. For a buyer who wants to outsource model build, that is the proposition.
The honest pushback on each. Modelling is the right pitch when document intake is already solved. For most lenders globally, including most US community lenders we have spoken with, it is not. The applications arrive as photos, scans, and handwritten forms before any score gets pulled. Document intelligence on that input is the bottleneck before the model. Floowed is best-in-class globally on extraction from handwritten, scanned, and photographed loan documents, ahead of pristine-document IDPs that optimised for clean US enterprise inputs. Solve that layer first and the modelling layer becomes a configuration choice, not a vendor lock-in. Bring any score: FICO, Experian, CRIF, CredoLab, Zest, Trusting Social, an internal model, or Scienaptic's models for that matter. Floowed orchestrates, it does not compete with the scoring vendor. That structural neutrality is the recommendation: take the document layer from the platform that built for messy real-world input, take the score from whichever vendor wins your own bake-off, and own the policy layer yourself on a canvas the credit officer can actually operate.
Where Floowed is the better choice
Three structural choices separate Floowed from the AI-decisioning category.
Document intelligence is native, not bolted on. Floowed reads the documents lenders actually receive. Handwritten, scanned, photographed, partially redacted. Same accuracy whether the input is a clean PDF or a phone photo of a payslip held against a window. This is the headline product, not a partnership, and it is best-in-class globally, particularly strong on non-standard documents where pristine-US-doc IDPs fall over. For any lender whose intake is not already a clean digital pipeline, document quality is the bottleneck before the model ever runs. Scienaptic and most AI-decisioning vendors treat this as someone else's problem.
Pricing is published. Core is $399 a month on annual or $499 a month on monthly. Scale is $799 a month on annual or $999 a month on monthly. Enterprise is custom. No credit card to start a trial. No sales call to see the platform. The first loan application is free. Floowed is the only player in the loan decisioning category that publishes pricing. If your buyer needs to see the price before starting a procurement cycle, you publish the price. If your buyer wants a custom enterprise proposal, you do not. We do both: published tiers for the buyers who evaluate openly, custom Enterprise for the buyers who need dedicated capacity.
Same-week activation, no professional services dependency. The Decisioning Canvas is the implementation. The credit officer writes the first policy directly, in plain English, the same week the trial starts. The 40+ integrations with LMS, bureaus, KYC, and banking are pre-built. The first decision happens in days, not quarters. Scienaptic, like most enterprise decisioning vendors, sells with implementation services. That model fits a buyer with a multi-quarter timeline. It does not fit a lender who needs to be live this quarter.
One more thing. Floowed is score-agnostic on purpose. We do not build proprietary scores, so we never end up in the awkward position of pushing a customer onto our model when their own model or a partner's model is the right answer. Scienaptic ships its own models alongside the platform. For some buyers that is a feature. For buyers who already have a score they trust, it is a conflict of interest baked into the product.
Pricing reality check
Scienaptic does not publish pricing. The pricing model is custom enterprise, sales-led, and depends on volume, products, models, and the scope of the modelling engagement. The market floor for this class of contract is in the high five figures to low six figures annually, with a services component on top for implementation and model build.
Floowed publishes everything. Core $399 a month on annual or $499 a month on monthly. Scale $799 a month on annual or $999 a month on monthly. Enterprise custom for lenders who need dedicated capacity, custom SLAs, or specific deployment models. The first application is free, no credit card. See the live pricing page for the current tier breakdown.
If you are evaluating decisioning platforms and the price is not on the website, that is a buying-motion signal, not a marketing oversight. Vendors who sell custom enterprise contracts will not publish, because the price depends on what the procurement team can be sold. Vendors who serve the open market publish, because that buyer evaluates differently.
How to evaluate
Five questions a credit officer can use to compare any decisioning platform against the applications you actually receive.
- Run a real application end to end. Take a recent declined or escalated loan file, with the original document set, including any phone photos or scans, and put it through the platform's intake. Does it produce structured data the policy can act on, without manual cleanup?
- Edit a credit policy in front of the vendor. Ask the credit officer, not the vendor's analyst, to change a debt service ratio threshold or add a new exception rule, then deploy it. How long does it take? Who has to be in the room?
- Ask for the implementation timeline in writing. First policy live, first decision through, full production. Compare against your business need.
- Get the pricing in writing before the second meeting. If it depends on a custom proposal, ask for the floor and the ceiling. If the floor is above your budget, end the cycle there.
- Confirm the score posture. Can you bring any model? Does the vendor have its own model they will prefer? Is the orchestration layer neutral?
FAQ
Is Scienaptic a competitor to Floowed?
Where the bottleneck is model build and document intake is already solved, Scienaptic and Floowed pitch to different buyers. Where document quality, published pricing, and time to first decision matter more, Floowed is the answer.
Does Floowed build proprietary credit scores?
No. Floowed is score-agnostic by design. We orchestrate any score the lender already trusts, from CredoLab, Zest, Trusting Social, FICO, Experian, CRIF, internal models, or a combination. We do not compete with scoring vendors, we use them as inputs.
What if our bottleneck really is the model, not the documents?
Most lenders we speak to assume that and discover otherwise once they look at their real intake. The applications arrive as photos, scans, and handwritten forms before any score runs. Floowed solves that first. Bring whichever model wins your own bake-off as the score input.
Can a credit officer operate Floowed without engineering support?
Yes, that is the design. The Decisioning Canvas is built for the credit officer to write and edit policy rules in plain English. No SQL, no DSL, no Python. Versioning, rollback, and per-decision audit are automatic. See the Decisioning Canvas walkthrough for details.
How does Floowed compare to other decisioning vendors?
We have published side-by-side comparisons of Floowed vs Zest AI, Floowed vs Provenir, and Floowed vs GDS Link. The pattern is consistent: where document quality and time to first decision dominate, Floowed wins.
Book a walkthrough
If you are evaluating loan decisioning platforms, the fastest way to decide is a 45-minute walkthrough on your own loan flow with your own documents. We will show you the Decisioning Canvas, a live policy edit, and document intake on real applications. Book a Floowed walkthrough, or run a loan application, free, and decide from there.