Is ACH cheaper than cards for collecting agency retainers?

Yes, ACH is almost always cheaper than cards for recurring agency retainers. Cards charge a percentage of every payment (roughly 2.9% + 30¢), so a $3,000 retainer can cost about $87 in fees. ACH typically charges a small flat fee or low capped percentage, so the same charge costs a few dollars at most. The gap matters most on large, recurring retainers, where card percentages compound month after month and eat directly into your margin. HubWho is built to take both ACH bank-link (via Plaid) and card, so you can default high-ticket clients to ACH and keep cards as a fallback.

For a marketing agency billing recurring retainers, the payment rail you collect on is a margin decision, not just a convenience choice. Cards price as a percentage of the transaction, ACH prices closer to a flat fee — and on retainer-sized amounts that difference is large enough to show up in your per-client margin. Below is how the two rails actually compare, where the savings are real, and where ACH stops being worth the trade-off.

Why the answer is what it is

Cards price as a percentage, ACH closer to flat

A typical card rate is around 2.9% plus a fixed cents fee per charge. On a $3,000 monthly retainer that's roughly $87 every month — and it scales straight up with the retainer size. ACH bank transfers usually price as a small flat fee or a low percentage with a hard cap (often a dollar or two), so the cost barely moves whether you're collecting $500 or $5,000. The bigger and more recurring the retainer, the more that percentage-vs-flat difference compounds in your favor.

The savings are real money on your margin line

Because retainers recur, card fees aren't a one-time hit — they repeat every billing cycle for the life of the client. An $87/month card fee is over $1,000 a year on a single retainer. Move that client to ACH and most of that fee disappears. HubWho tracks true per-client margin (what you bill versus your own entered wholesale cost), computed on demand, so you can see how processing choice shows up in each client's numbers rather than guessing.

When ACH is worth defaulting to

ACH makes the most sense for established retainer clients: larger recurring amounts, an ongoing relationship, and a client willing to link a bank account once. Those are exactly the payments where card percentages hurt most and where a one-time bank link via Plaid pays off across every future draft. For high-ticket recurring revenue, defaulting to ACH and reserving cards for exceptions is usually the cleaner economics.

When cards still earn their keep

Cards aren't the villain — they're the right tool in some cases. New clients you haven't fully vetted, smaller or one-off charges where the percentage is trivial, and clients who simply prefer a card all justify keeping it available. Card authorization is also faster to confirm than an ACH transfer, which can take a few business days to settle. The point isn't ACH-only; it's matching the rail to the client and the amount.

What to look for

  • Estimate your current card fees: multiply each retainer by roughly 2.9% and add the per-charge cents fee, then total it across all clients monthly
  • Flag your largest recurring retainers first — that's where moving to ACH saves the most
  • Offer ACH bank-link via Plaid as the default for high-ticket established clients, keeping cards as a fallback
  • Keep cards available for new, unvetted, or small/one-off clients where the percentage is minor
  • Account for ACH settlement timing (a few business days) versus near-instant card authorization when planning cash flow
  • Review per-client margin after switching rails to confirm the fee savings landed where you expected

Related questions

How much does a $3,000 retainer cost on cards versus ACH?

On cards at roughly 2.9% plus a fixed cents fee, a $3,000 retainer costs about $87 in processing each month. On ACH, where pricing is typically a small flat fee or a low capped percentage, the same charge usually costs only a few dollars. Because retainers recur, that monthly gap adds up to over $1,000 a year on a single client. Exact rates depend on your processor, so confirm your own pricing before forecasting.

Does HubWho support both ACH and card payments?

Yes. HubWho is built to take payment by both ACH bank-link, via Plaid, and card. That lets you default large recurring retainers to ACH for lower fees while keeping cards available for new clients, smaller charges, or clients who prefer them. HubWho is pre-launch and opening to a founding cohort of agencies; reach info@roffik.com for early access.

Is ACH ever a worse choice than cards for retainers?

It can be. ACH transfers take a few business days to settle versus near-instant card authorization, so if you need faster confirmation of cash flow, cards have an edge. For brand-new or unvetted clients, the percentage fee on a card may be a worthwhile trade for that speed and simplicity. On large, established recurring retainers, though, ACH's flat-style pricing usually wins on cost.

How Roffik addresses this

Billing, ACH and card payments, recurring subscriptions, per-client margin tracking, and branded client portals for marketing agencies — built on Midnight + cyan. Learn more about HubWho.

Keep exploring