INFI

Name: INFI
Brand: INFI

INFI is a platform that operates on top of existing POS systems to provide guest-facing ordering channels (self-order kiosks, web, and branded apps) and operational tooling including loyalty/CRM, marketing automation, and POS-reconciled order management with near-real-time menu sync.

Est 2019|Valuation $27.5M|21 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 5K|Website|FTEs 82|HQ Chicago, Illinois, US

Published Oct 14, 2026

01Common complaints

- If you require audited security posture and procurement artifacts - If your organization requires public SOC 2 Type II / ISO 27001 documentation or a formal trust center before piloting, this vendor may not meet that requirement based on public sources; request documentation under NDA. - If you want fully transparent all-in pricing upfront - The vendor publishes at least one kiosk subscription line item, but full platform pricing for multi-module deployments was not publicly available; vendors with published tiers can reduce procurement friction. (https://infi.us/product/infi-kiosk-software-monthly-support-subscription/) - If you want one vendor for all restaurant systems including the POS - INFI is designed to operate on top of an existing POS, so buyers will manage multiple vendors (POS vendor + INFI + hardware/peripherals). (https://infi.us/restaurant-ai) - If your kiosk strategy is intentionally minimal tech / minimal hardware - Very small operators may prefer simpler tablet-based kiosk approaches that have lower hardware and integration complexity. (https://www.reddit.com/r/restaurantowners/comments/1rmsqj9/operators_what_kiosk_systems_work_best_for_small/) - If you have edge-case workflows requiring deep POS customization - Complex pricing rules, advanced kitchen routing, strict offline-first requirements, or bespoke integrations may be better served by POS-native ecosystems or specialized enterprise kiosk vendors. - Current limitations acknowledged by the vendor - INFI DISPLAY is listed as "coming soon," indicating some suite components may not be generally available yet. (https://infi.us/) - Features on the roadmap - The vendor publishes product updates and release notes; these are vendor-authored and prospective buyers should confirm timelines and SLAs. (https://infi.us/news) - Scale limitations - Public documentation did not specify maximum recommended locations, orders per hour per kiosk, API rate limits, or detailed offline behavior. - Security or compliance gaps - No public SOC 2 or ISO certification disclosures were located in the accessible sources used for this report. - API limitations or integration constraints - Integration approaches appear to vary; some paths use third-party aggregators. Confirm which POS integrations are direct for the specific POS version and deployment scenario. (https://support.infi.us/hc/en-us/articles/39542772368027-INFI-X-Toast-Integration-Walkthrough)

Deal disqualifiers

Organizations requiring publicly published SOC 2 or ISO 27001 certifications prior to evaluation may find public documentation insufficient; request compliance documentation directly from the vendor
Operators seeking a fully self-serve, instant-deploy solution may find a multi-week guided launch model less suited to their needs (support and onboarding documentation)

02Why they buy

- Vendor-stated differentiators (require validation) - Vendor states it provides partner-authorized POS integrations (direct integrations) in contrast to aggregator-based approaches. (https://infi.us/) - Vendor states a centralized menu across kiosk/online/app/QR, which, if implemented as described, reduces the need to update multiple systems. (https://infi.us/qsrs-fast-casual) - The vendor markets features labeled as AI-driven (e.g., cross-sell and item enrichment) and reports AOV lift ranges; these are vendor claims and were not independently verified in this research set. (https://infi.us/restaurant-ai) - Evidence from customer feedback - The most direct semi-independent channel identified was the Square App Marketplace listing; detailed review content was not captured in the accessible snippets for this report. (https://squareup.com/us/en/app-marketplace/app/infi) - Areas where competitors clearly have advantages - Marketing-first vendors (e.g., Owner.com) emphasize web ordering and published pricing, which may be preferable for customers prioritizing online ordering without kiosk hardware complexity. (https://www.owner.com/pricing) - POS-native stacks (Toast, Clover) may reduce vendor count and provide tighter operational integration depending on the customer's priorities.

03Field reports

- Review-platform availability (important limitation) - INFI had limited coverage on major review platforms in the accessible searches used for this report (Gartner Peer Insights, G2, TrustRadius). - No INFI product page was located on Gartner Peer Insights in the searched results. - G2 searches did not return INFI product reviews; a different "KIOSK Information Systems" result appears unrelated. - TrustRadius did not surface INFI-specific reviews in the accessible searches. - Official marketplace rating (third-party marketplace presence) - The vendor maintains a listing on a major app marketplace (Square App Marketplace). The listing is the most direct third-party marketplace presence located in this research set; full review texts and counts were not captured in the snippet results. (Official third-party marketplace listing) - Vendor-provided testimonials (marketing quotes — not independently verified) - The vendor website includes testimonials from named restaurants that report improvements in ticket size, reduced congestion, and kiosk order share. These testimonials are vendor-provided and should be treated as anecdotal unless independently verified. (Official vendor website and marketing materials) - Community/social discussion (operators asking about INFI) - Community threads show operators considering INFI among Square-compatible kiosk options, generally as part of decision-stage discussions rather than extensive post-deployment reviews. Examples include conversations in relevant restaurant owner and restaurateur forums where INFI is mentioned alongside other kiosk options. (Relevant community and forum discussions) - These threads indicate awareness among operators but do not provide strong evidence of post-deployment satisfaction or ROI. - Negative feedback signals and complaints found in this research - Direct, credible negative reviews of the product itself were sparse in accessible sources. - An independent article discussed consumer confusion regarding charges labeled "INFI KIOSK POS;" this is not a product review and may reflect isolated consumer billing questions rather than systemic product issues. (Independent article on consumer billing questions) - A low-authority page with a very small number of unverified review claims was located but lacked verification; treat such sources with caution. (Low-authority review aggregator page) - Why customers chose this product over alternatives (inferred from vendor + marketplace positioning) - Likely reasons include a desire to retain an existing POS while adding kiosks and multi-channel ordering, and a preference for direct integrations (as described by the vendor) rather than aggregator-based approaches. (Vendor product overview and feature pages) - Why some customers left for competitors (churn reasons) - Not well documented in accessible review sources. Typical churn drivers in this category generally include subscription stacking, hardware issues, integration fragility, and support responsiveness; prospective buyers should request references and exit-related feedback when evaluating vendors. - Vendor-published "results" claims (not independently validated) - The vendor publishes case metrics such as average ticket lift percentages and kiosk sales growth for named customers. These figures are presented by the vendor and were not independently verified in this research set. (Official vendor website and product overview pages) - Critical evaluation of these case claims - Methodology gaps - Vendor-generated metrics typically did not include details on sample selection, baseline periods, seasonality controls, or statistical testing. Prospective buyers should request methodology details when evaluating vendor-supplied case metrics. - Evidence quality - Named customer anecdotes can be informative; buyers are advised to request reference calls, pre/post reporting exports, definitions of metrics (e.g., AOV, basket size), and clarity on whether reported results are typical or selectively presented. - Mixed results / failed projects - No well-documented public failed deployments for INFI were located in the accessible sources used for this report.

04Best fit

Company sizes

- Likely fit (inferred from product scope and onboarding claims): - Single-location QSR/fast casual operators with moderate to high order volumes and line pressure - Small multi-unit chains seeking standardized kiosk/web ordering across locations - Venue/arena or multi-vendor food hall operators with higher-order complexity and potential for higher ROI from kiosks - The vendor cites activity across a set of merchants, suggesting small multi-unit and venue deployments are within scope (official vendor site and product materials).

Industries and verticals where adoption is strongest

QSR & fast casual, beverage/boba, coffee, food halls, venues/arenas, and food trucks as indicated in vendor materials (vendor product and marketing materials).

Roles and personas

Decision makers: owner/operators, multi-unit operators, operations directors, IT/ops leadership at venues
End users: front-of-house staff, shift leads, kitchen staff

Pain points and challenges addressed

Line congestion and throughput
Order accuracy with complex modifiers
Increasing average ticket via automated upsell suggestions
Centralizing menu management across kiosk/web/app

Qualification criteria

Compatible POS deployment (Square/Toast/Clover/Lightspeed/HungerRush) and preference to retain that POS while adding kiosk/web/app capabilities (product integration and compatibility pages)
Order volume sufficient for average order value lift and labor reallocation benefits to justify kiosk hardware and subscription costs

Real customer examples (names used in vendor materials; production status not independently verified)

Pink Owl Coffee, Smokerz Outlet, Chu Minh Tofu & Vegan are named in vendor testimonials (vendor testimonials and case study materials)

05The pitch

- What the product does (core value proposition in objective terms) - INFI describes its product as a platform for restaurant ordering and growth tools that operates on top of an existing POS to add guest-facing ordering channels and operational tooling (vendor product overview and feature pages). - The vendor states it provides direct POS integrations (rather than an aggregator middleman) with near-real-time menu and sold-out sync and reconciled reporting; the vendor asserts that orders are reconciled to appear like register sales (vendor platform documentation). - Product modules listed by the vendor include: - INFI ORDER (self-order kiosks) (vendor product pages) - INFI ONLINE (web ordering) (vendor product pages) - INFI APP (branded app) (vendor product pages) - INFI LOYALTY (loyalty & CRM) (vendor product pages) - INFI SITES (website builder) (vendor product pages) - INFI REACH (marketing automation) (vendor product pages) - INFI CONNECT (POS integration) (vendor product pages) - INFI KITCHEN (order management) (vendor product pages) - INFI DISPLAY (digital menu boards + order-ready board) marked "coming soon" on the vendor site (vendor product pages) - Target market and market positioning - Targeted primarily at quick-service and fast-casual restaurants, beverage/boba, coffee shops, food halls, venues/arenas, and food trucks — operators with queue pressure and modifier complexity where kiosks and upsells can affect throughput and ticket size (vendor vertical pages). - The vendor positions the product as an overlay on top of the POS, emphasizing retention of existing POS systems (Square/Toast/Clover/Lightspeed/HungerRush) while adding channels and automated upsell/marketing features (vendor positioning pages). - Company background (founding year, HQ, key leadership) - HQ appears to be Chicago, IL (address indicated on vendor pages and LinkedIn) (vendor contact and company pages). - Third-party business databases list INFI as a Chicago-based private company; detailed leadership information was limited in the sources retrieved (third-party business database entries). - Funding and growth: investment rounds, acquisitions, estimated customer count/revenue if public - The vendor announced a Series A raise in vendor-published materials; third-party databases also list a Series A round in a similar ballpark, though data detail and dating vary across sources (vendor announcement; third-party funding databases). - Estimated customer count/revenue is not clearly documented in accessible independent sources; the vendor references performance metrics across dozens of merchants in marketing materials, which is not equivalent to audited customer counts (vendor marketing materials; third-party sources). - Pricing model with specific tiers and costs where available - INFI does not publish full platform pricing publicly on the main marketing pages retrieved (vendor pricing/product pages). - A product page lists a per-kiosk monthly support subscription and states kiosk hardware will not function without an active subscription (vendor product page). - The vendor markets "Premium Support" with a guided multi-week launch and 24/7 help desk; public pricing for Premium Support was not found in the retrieved pages (vendor support/product pages). - Hardware pricing is referenced indirectly and a hardware brochure is available, but a complete bill of materials and total hardware pricing were not provided in the accessible sources (vendor hardware brochure). - Total cost of ownership considerations (implementation, training, hidden costs) - Implementation and onboarding - The vendor states a multi-week guided launch with an implementation specialist, staff training, and ongoing optimization. Prospective buyers should confirm whether these services are included in base subscriptions or require additional fees (vendor support/product pages). - Ongoing subscription lock-in at the kiosk level - A published per-kiosk monthly subscription requirement may be significant at multi-kiosk or multi-location scale, particularly if additional modules have separate fees that are not publicly disclosed (vendor product page). - POS partner program fees - Some integration paths may require partner programs (e.g., Toast Partner Connect). A support document references a nominal partner program fee in that context and indicates the vendor may credit that fee; buyers should confirm current partner program requirements and crediting behavior for their deployment (vendor support documentation). - Hardware and peripherals - Kiosk deployments typically entail costs for touchscreen hardware, mounts, printers/KDS screens, payment devices, network segmentation, ADA/accessibility accommodations, and field support. A comprehensive bill of materials is not published in the accessible sources (vendor hardware brochure). - Key competitors in the space (list 4–6 direct alternatives) - Owner.com (online ordering + website + marketing platform for restaurants) (competitor product/pricing pages) - Toast (native ordering/kiosk ecosystem + partner marketplace) (competitor support and product pages) - Clover Kiosk ecosystem (Clover hardware + kiosk solutions/partners) (competitor pricing/product pages) - GRUBBRR (kiosk software available via partner ecosystems) (competitor product pages) - Chowly (integration/aggregator approach relevant to some integration paths) (competitor support pages) - Square's kiosk/ordering features (native Square options frequently considered by operators) (competitor product pages)

Get a comprehensive analysis of INFI including market position, competitive landscape, adoption trends, and peer benchmarks.

Download full report →