Move money
Mass payments: pay everyone in one batch
Contractors, partners and your own entities: submit one batch and every payment takes the rail that fits its corridor, with a full audit trail.
In brief
What are mass payments?
Mass payments are outbound payments submitted together as one batch and paid out individually: contractor invoices, affiliate commissions, staff payments, partner settlements or transfers between your own companies.
Mass payments, bulk payments and batch payments are three names for the same thing, and providers use them interchangeably. What differs between providers is not the word. It is whether the batch is only a submission format, or whether it also dictates how the money travels.
One batch in, every payment routed on its own
A bulk upload at a bank sends the whole file down one rail. Here the batch is decomposed and each payment is evaluated on its own corridor, currency and amount.
- 128United KingdomFaster PaymentsSeconds
- 64EurozoneSEPASame day
- 41United StatesLocal railsSame day
- 7Rest of worldSWIFTBy corridor
Which is why a failure behaves differently too: one wrong account number stops one payment instead of bouncing the file. How a rail gets chosen
What you get
Mass payouts
Contractors, affiliates and staff paid in bulk, in their currency, on the right rail.
Inter-entity treasury
Move funds between group companies and jurisdictions with clean records.
Audit trail
Every movement itemised for finance: who, where, which rail, what cost.
How a bulk payment run travels
You submit one batch. Underneath, every payment is treated as its own decision.
Submit the batch
One file, one list, one instruction. The batch is how you work; it is not how the payments travel.
Every payment is routed individually
The batch is decomposed and each payment evaluated on its own corridor, currency and amount, so a euro payment to Germany and a dollar payment to Singapore each take the rail that suits them.
Failures are isolated, not contagious
One bad account number stops one payment. The rest of the batch continues, and you get told which one failed and why, rather than having the whole run bounce back.
The record is itemised
Who was paid, where, on which rail and at what cost, per payment. Finance reconciles line by line instead of against a single lump debit.
Why batch payments and routing
are different problems
Plenty of systems will take a file of payments off your hands. Far fewer will then treat each line on its own merits. That distinction is where the money is: a batch that is routed as a batch has to pick one rail for everything in it, which means every payment inherits whichever compromise suited the average.
Paying a contractor in Manila and a supplier in Munich on the same rail makes one of them wait and costs the other more than it should. Routing per payment removes the compromise, because the corridor, the currency and the amount are evaluated for that payment rather than for the file it arrived in. The criteria the engine uses are published on Smart Routing, so you can read the policy instead of taking it on trust.
The same logic covers movements between your own companies. Group treasury is not a special case that needs a separate product: it is an outbound payment where you happen to own both ends, and it benefits from per-payment routing for exactly the same reasons.
Who this is built for
Businesses paying a distributed workforce
Contractors, freelancers and affiliates in different countries, on different cycles, in different currencies. The administrative cost of paying them is usually larger than the cost of the payments themselves, and that is the part a batch run with per-payment routing removes.
Groups moving money between entities
Multi-entity structures that need funds in the right company, in the right jurisdiction, with records clean enough for an auditor to follow without a covering email. Each movement is executed by a licensed institution and itemised.
Frequently asked questions
Any batch of outbound payments (contractor invoices, affiliate commissions, staff payments, partner settlements) submitted together and routed individually, each on the rail that fits its corridor.
Yes. Treasury movements between group companies are a core use case, with each movement executed by a licensed institution and fully auditable.
Through the same Smart Routing framework as everything else in the group: fastest arrival, highest chance of success, right rail per corridor.
Only that payment stops. The rest of the batch continues, and you are told which payment failed and why, so you can correct the detail and resubmit that one rather than re-running the whole file.
Batch sizes are set by the institution you are matched with, based on your volumes and the corridors you pay into. Tell a specialist the size and shape of your runs and you will get a straight answer before you commit to anything.
Yes. Paying in the recipient’s currency generally lands cleaner at their end and avoids a conversion being applied by an intermediary you did not choose. Where you would rather hold the currency and convert on your own timing, that runs through the group’s currency exchange line.
No. Moving funds between your own entities uses the same batch and routing mechanics as paying third parties. The difference is who owns the receiving account, not how the payment is executed or recorded.
Check if we can help
Tell us what you need. You’ll deal with one team, with the group’s licensed institutions behind it, and get a straight answer either way.