UY3

Name: UY3
Brand: UY3

AI Native

Sua plataforma CaaS.

Est 2021|Raised $45.6M

LinkedIn 6K|Web traffic 41K|FTEs 133|HQ Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, BR

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

- QI Tech vs UY3: local reporting positions QI Tech as a notable competitor with multiple product pillars (banking, lending, risk/antifraud, capital markets, custody/admin), which can be attractive where buyers want a broader vendor suite. - Celcoin vs UY3: Celcoin promotes "Consignado as a Service" with a single-API concept for specific consignado flows. For teams prioritizing consignado integration and developer clarity, Celcoin may be a suitable alternative. - Matera/Dock adjacency: Matera and Dock typically address broader embedded finance needs (digital accounts, cards, payments). If a buyer’s primary requirement is accounts/cards + Pix + payment orchestration, those providers may be more appropriate than a credit-focused platform.

Market share and adoption trends

UY3: transaction and funding activity has been reported in Brazilian fintech press.
Dock: vendor-published market-share claims for card transaction processing in Brazil; more payments/cards focused than lending.

	UY3	QI Tech	Celcoin (cel_credit)
Starting Price	Not public	Not public	Not public
Typical use case	Partners needing SCD-based credit infrastructure with connectivity to funding/FIDC workflows	Broader end-to-end infrastructure across banking, lending, antifraud, and capital markets/custody	Teams focused on consignado credit flows via API (including productized consignado processes)
Key distinguishing attributes	SCD-focused credit infrastructure and connectivity to funding/FIDC partners	Broader product breadth across banking and capital markets-related services	Productized APIs for consignado flows with developer-oriented documentation
Key limitations	Limited presence on global review platforms; public consumer complaint signals appear moderate; security certifications are not clearly public	Potential complexity and vendor concentration risk depending on integration scope	May not substitute for a full regulated SCD model depending on use case; narrower scope for capital-markets integration

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

QI Tech vs UY3: local reporting positions QI Tech as a notable competitor with multiple product pillars (banking, lending, risk/antifraud, capital markets, custody/admin), which can be attractive where buyers want a broader vendor suite.
Celcoin vs UY3: Celcoin promotes "Consignado as a Service" with a single-API concept for specific consignado flows. For teams prioritizing consignado integration and developer clarity, Celcoin may be a suitable alternative.
Matera/Dock adjacency: Matera and Dock typically address broader embedded finance needs (digital accounts, cards, payments). If a buyer’s primary requirement is accounts/cards + Pix + payment orchestration, those providers may be more appropriate than a credit-focused platform.

Market share and adoption trends

UY3: transaction and funding activity has been reported in Brazilian fintech press.
Dock: vendor-published market-share claims for card transaction processing in Brazil; more payments/cards focused than lending.

	UY3	QI Tech	Celcoin (cel_credit)
Starting Price	Not public	Not public	Not public
Typical use case	Partners needing SCD-based credit infrastructure with connectivity to funding/FIDC workflows	Broader end-to-end infrastructure across banking, lending, antifraud, and capital markets/custody	Teams focused on consignado credit flows via API (including productized consignado processes)
Key distinguishing attributes	SCD-focused credit infrastructure and connectivity to funding/FIDC partners	Broader product breadth across banking and capital markets-related services	Productized APIs for consignado flows with developer-oriented documentation
Key limitations	Limited presence on global review platforms; public consumer complaint signals appear moderate; security certifications are not clearly public	Potential complexity and vendor concentration risk depending on integration scope	May not substitute for a full regulated SCD model depending on use case; narrower scope for capital-markets integration

UY3

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Market share and adoption trends

02Market Map

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Market share and adoption trends

02Market Map