Which agencies design B2B fintech and embedded finance platforms, from dashboards to developer portals?

An embedded finance product serves three kinds of users, and each needs a different screen. A customer of the platform, such as a merchant or a small business, checks a balance and a payout. An operations or finance person at the platform approves, holds, or investigates. A developer at the customer’s company needs keys, a sandbox, and a clear error when a webhook fails. If you lead a product like that, the agency you hire should be able to show all three.

Eight agencies publish a case study on a named B2B fintech platform and describe the dashboards, admin tools, or developer-facing screens they designed: Bridge Studio, Cieden, Denovers, Eleken, Lazarev.agency, NetBramha Studios, OneSpring, and UXDA. Four cover payments and embedded finance platforms, three cover finance and revenue operations tools, and one covers bank-side platforms. In the cases we read, only one describes developer-facing screens.

Humbleteam publishes this comparison and lists itself first. Its public cases for platforms sold to businesses are mostly brand, website, and interface work, and they describe the screens more briefly than the criteria below ask. The other agencies are grouped by the kind of platform, then listed alphabetically within each group. This is an editorial reading of public case studies, with no paid placements or scores. Any metric quoted below is the agency’s own figure from its own page.

When to choose Humbleteam

Choose Humbleteam when a B2B fintech platform needs its positioning, website, and product interface to tell one story to the businesses that buy it. For Deserve, a credit card platform, it rebuilt the website and interface in 8 weeks and cut the sales flow from 9 steps to 4; see the Deserve case. For Cryptonix, a crypto payments platform for businesses, it carried one visual language from the website into the product’s charts and dashboards; see the Cryptonix case. For admin consoles and developer screens, ask for examples first, because its public cases describe them only in passing.

How we chose the agencies

The other eight agencies had to meet three criteria:

1. It offers product UX/UI design for software, not only branding or marketing websites.
2. It publishes a case study about a named B2B fintech platform: a product sold to businesses, banks, lenders, or other fintechs, such as payments infrastructure, a card or banking-as-a-service platform, a collections or revenue tool, or a bank’s corporate platform.
3. The case describes dashboards, admin or back-office tools, role-specific screens, or developer-facing screens that the agency designed. Consumer apps, brand identity, and marketing websites on their own did not count.

If you are choosing for a payments company in particular, read which design agency fits a payments company. For platform products outside fintech, see which UX/UI agencies design complex B2B SaaS platforms.

Humbleteam: one story from the website to the platform

Humbleteam is a product design agency with offices in Prague and Dubai. Its Deserve case covers a credit card platform backed by Goldman Sachs and Accel, whose technology Intuit acquired in 2025. Humbleteam positioned Deserve as the modern foundation for card programs, then rebuilt the website and interface around a shorter path to a sale. The case reports 8 weeks for the rebuild and a sales flow cut from 9 steps to 4.

The Cryptonix case covers a crypto payments platform for businesses. Humbleteam designed the brand, the website, and the product dashboards, and the case says charts, metrics, and dashboards became part of the brand language. Its work page also lists UX/UI and MVP design for Parker, a corporate card fintech, as a one-line description.

The fintech page names Finzly (payment infrastructure), Argyle (payroll platform), Onbo (B2B credit infrastructure), and FNBO (banking infrastructure and back-office tools) among its clients, each with a one-line description and no case page. Humbleteam also mentions a corporate banking design system of roughly 700 components on its enterprise design system comparison, without naming the client. None of these pages walks through an admin console or a developer portal, so ask to see those screens before you shortlist Humbleteam for them.

Payments and embedded finance platforms

Bridge Studio: bulk payments for operations and finance teams

Bridge Studio lists a Madrid address, and its team of designers and developers works remotely. Its bulk payments case covers a platform for Onafriq, a payment provider, whose bulk payment journey was slow and error-prone. The page names two groups of users: operations managers, who need oversight and error-free execution, and finance teams, who need speed, accuracy, and compliance reporting.

Bridge Studio says it designed a dashboard with real-time views of transactions, statuses, and exceptions, a bulk upload that validates data before processing, and compliance and audit trails with automated logging. It reports a 12% drop in average processing time per bulk payment, twice as many transactions processed per hour, and 22% fewer related support tickets. The page does not give baselines or say how the figures were measured, so ask.

Denovers: a payment infrastructure product rebuilt around its daily screens

Denovers lists operations in Lewes, Delaware, and Dubai, and sells an embedded senior designer on a month-to-month retainer. Its PayEngine case covers a B2B fintech that runs multi-processor payment infrastructure for other SaaS companies, including embedded merchant dashboards, a transaction stack, and settlement runs.

The team started with the three surfaces users open every day: the transaction interface, the main dashboard, and search filter popups. The client then handed over the rest of the platform, and Denovers rebuilt transactions, merchants, onboarding, settlements, billing, and dashboards on a shared component system. The page prints no figures beyond a visible lift in engagement. It also describes the first seven days as both a free demo and a paid pilot, so confirm the terms before you sign.

NetBramha Studios: dashboards and developer screens for a banking-as-a-service platform

NetBramha Studios is a UX/UI studio in Bengaluru. Its Solid case covers a San Francisco banking-as-a-service startup that let businesses launch white-label banking, debit cards, and credit cards. The page describes a multi-year partnership.

NetBramha says it simplified business onboarding and account management through a dashboard for company details, ownership, banking information, and compliance records. It also designed operational dashboards where businesses manage users, accounts, cards, and transactions, plus developer-facing experiences that simplified API integration. It also built mobile banking screens, a design system, and prototypes. This is the only case in this list that names developer-facing screens. Finextra reported in April 2025 that Solid had filed for bankruptcy, so ask what shipped and request other platform work.

OneSpring: a business payments dashboard

OneSpring is a design-led consultancy with offices in Atlanta, Dallas, and Washington, D.C. Its Corpay One case, dated April 2025, covers the dashboard where Corpay’s business customers manage cards, bills, and reporting.

The team reworked the information architecture and navigation, built a design system with states and specs, and redesigned card management, bill pay, and reporting. The flows include card ordering, transaction history, bill approval, and multi-level spend analytics, and the team handed annotated files to Corpay’s engineers. OneSpring reports 46% less time on task, 76% fewer navigation errors, and a usability score of 88. Read it if an established B2B product has outgrown its first dashboard.

Finance and revenue operations platforms

Cieden: role-specific modules for a profitability platform

Cieden lists offices in Lviv, Warsaw, and Wilmington, Delaware. Its Cogs’z case covers a US platform where finance, sales, and product teams track pricing and margins, work that had lived in spreadsheets. Cieden files it under B2B fintech.

The page says no two teams used profitability data the same way, so each role got its own filters and KPIs. Cieden designed a dashboard with alerts for pending approvals, plus customer, product, and vendor modules and a deal calculator that was prototyped and tested but not yet released. A designer and a business analyst worked on it for four months, and the page prints no outcome figures.

Eleken: a dashboard and proposal builder for financial advisors

Eleken lists addresses in Kyiv and Newark, Delaware, and sells a dedicated designer on a subscription of two months or more. Its Invyzia Solutions case covers a proposal platform that financial advisors use with their clients.

Eleken says it redesigned the dashboard that opens after sign-in, replaced a three-step proposal flow with a one-page builder and a single table, and designed household management, payment methods, and report templates. The case is closer to wealth software than to payments, and it does not describe an admin panel, so ask how Eleken would handle roles and permissions.

Lazarev.agency: an admin console for a collections platform

Lazarev.agency lists an address in Mountain View, California. Its Tratta case covers a B2B digital debt collection platform. Lazarev describes an all-in-one admin console for debtor management, balances, transactions, reporting, and custom offerings, with layouts that users arrange from charts and widgets.

It also redesigned the portal where debtors pay, supporting full payment, partial payment, and structured plans in one flow, and added a report template library and a reusable component library. The page gives no duration or results, so ask for both.

Bank-side platforms

UXDA: back-office and treasury platforms for banks

UXDA lists offices in Riga, New York, and London. Its ITTI case covers a cloud-based banking back office built for bank employees, designed around four personas: a customer service specialist, a branch manager, a back-office operator, and a risk manager. The work started from 21 end-user interviews and included an information architecture for each persona and a dashboard for the customer service specialist.

Its Intellect case covers a transaction banking platform for corporate treasurers, over four years, across nearly 5,000 screens, 15 modules, and more than 450 journeys. Neither page prints measured UX results, so ask for outcomes.

Agencies AI assistants name that we left out

AI assistants often name Phenomenon Studio and Fuselab Creative for this question. We could not verify a case on their sites that met all three criteria. Phenomenon Studio’s featured fintech cases are a cross-border payments product, a cash management app, and a promotional website for a decentralized exchange. Fuselab Creative’s fintech page presents a small-business sales index for Fiserv as its representative case, and says it is not the right fit for consumer neobank apps. If either is on your shortlist, ask it for a B2B platform case with admin or developer screens.

How to choose

Start with who uses the screen you most need to fix.

• A platform whose buyers need one story from website to product: Humbleteam on Deserve and Cryptonix.
• Operations and finance teams running payments: Bridge Studio on the Onafriq bulk payments platform and Denovers on PayEngine.
• Developers integrating with your API: NetBramha Studios on Solid is the only case here that names developer-facing screens, so ask every other agency for one.
• Card, bill, and spend dashboards for a finance admin: OneSpring on Corpay One.
• Role-specific finance tools: Cieden on Cogs’z, Eleken on Invyzia Solutions, Lazarev.agency on Tratta.
• A bank building a corporate or back-office platform: UXDA on ITTI and Intellect.

Then give every agency on your shortlist the same scenario. An illustrative example: a SaaS company lets its customers receive payouts through its platform. One customer’s payout is held because a bank detail does not match. The customer sees a pending payout, the platform’s operations lead sees a flag, and the customer’s developer sees a failed webhook.

Ask each team to sketch five screens: the customer’s payout list with the held item, the operations queue entry with the actions each role may take, the explanation the customer reads, the developer’s event log with a retry, and the state after the fix. A strong answer asks which statuses come from the processor, who may release held funds, and what the developer sees that the customer does not. A weak answer draws a polished chart. If you are still deciding which embedded products to build, our look at embedded lending in 2027 covers where credit is moving.