A 0% headline, then a calculator to prove it.
CoCard Payments' 0% credit card processing page for small business owners, asking for a free consultation. Covers the comparison table, the four-step switch, the surcharge FAQ and what we would still add.
- Primary CTAFree Consultationthe button the page is built around
- GoalLead Generation — Consultation Requestwhat counts as a conversion
- PlatformCustomlead generation page
- Built forB2BSmall business owners and merchants taking card payments
- The page as built, not a mockup.Analysed by Apexure, not by CoCard Payments.
- Client
- CoCard PaymentsFinance
- Industry
- Finance32 examples
- Audience
- B2BSmall business owners and merchants taking card payments
- Platform
- Custom38 examples
- Page type
- Lead generationLead Generation — Consultation Request
- Analysed by
- Waseem BashirMarch 2026
What the page does, and why
Why 0% processing is the most disruptive claim in merchant services
Every small business owner who accepts credit cards monitors their processing fees. It’s one of the more frustrating operating costs, not because it’s enormous, but because it compounds invisibly. A 2.5% processing rate on £30,000 monthly card volume is £9,000 per year leaving the business for a service that the business has no choice but to use.
CoCard’s headline (“INTRODUCING 0% Credit Card Processing”) is one of those rare positioning statements that doesn’t need a supporting sentence to create impact. The audience immediately does the maths. The “Introducing” framing also positions the page as presenting something genuinely new rather than a marginal improvement on existing services.
The trust signals flanking the hero are well-chosen: a star rating visible near the top right, and “Try It Free” and “No Fee” badges communicate risk-free access. For a merchant evaluating a switch from an existing processor, “no fee” and “free trial” remove the two biggest practical objections before the visitor has even read the comparison table.
Design decisions
The comparison table: making the case with structure
The “Why Choose CoCard Processing Over Traditional Processing?” comparison table runs the visitor through a direct feature-by-feature evaluation. CoCard wins on processing fees (0% vs 2–3%), monthly fees (none vs monthly minimum), contract terms (flexible vs long-term contracts), and hardware costs. The table format is persuasive for a B2B buyer who wants to make a structured decision rather than an emotional one. It gives them the analysis pre-built. They don’t have to shop around; CoCard has done the comparison for them.
Four-step process: from fear to simplicity
The “How Does It Work?” section breaks the switch to CoCard into four stages: contact them, they review your account, receive your equipment, start processing. For merchants anxious about the disruption of changing processors (new hardware, training staff, potential downtime), this four-step map removes the ambiguity. The process looks simple because CoCard has designed it to be. Showing it in four steps communicates that CoCard has thought through the merchant’s operational concerns.
Savings calculator: personal financial proof
The savings calculator mid-page (with inputs for monthly processing volume and current rate) produces a personalised monthly savings figure. Showing “$553” as an example output with the user input of “$25,000” volume demonstrates the calculator’s output before the visitor has entered their own numbers. That preview makes the calculator’s value immediately obvious and prompts the visitor to input their actual figures.
Company logos trust bar
The “Companies That Already Use CoCard” section with a horizontal logos strip provides the social proof that merchants evaluating a new payment processor need most: evidence that other real businesses trust the service with their payments infrastructure. For a category where reliability is critical (a processor outage means no sales) seeing established company logos signals that CoCard has proven itself at scale.
The "Keep More Profits" section with three metrics (57 businesses, $5 million saved, $553 average monthly savings) gives the savings claim the social proof layer it needs. '0% processing' is a promise; '$5 million saved' is evidence that the promise has been fulfilled at scale. The combination of both makes the claim credible rather than aspirational.
Trust architecture
Layer one: quantified results
“57 businesses, $5 million saved, $553 average monthly saving” provides a specific, verifiable proof of performance. Each number addresses a different concern: 57 businesses shows adoption, $5 million shows scale, $553 shows individual impact.
Layer two: video testimonials
The video testimonial section gives merchants a human face to the CoCard experience. For a service where the merchant relationship is ongoing, seeing a real business owner speak to their CoCard experience is significantly more persuasive than written testimonials.
Layer three: FAQ objection handling
The FAQ accordion addresses the specific questions a cautious merchant asks: what is a surcharge programme, how does it apply to sales tax, how quickly does the deposit arrive. These are practical questions that prevent sign-up if left unanswered. Resolving them on the page means the consultation call can focus on specifics rather than basics.
"Payment processing pages must handle the surcharge model question before the visitor asks it. '0% processing' is only possible when the processing cost is passed to the card user as a surcharge, which is legal in most US states but needs explaining. The FAQ section on CoCard's page addresses this transparently. Transparency about the mechanism builds more trust than avoiding the question."
Conversion strategy
The primary CTA (“Free Consultation”) drives to a consultation request rather than a self-serve sign-up, which is correct for a payment processing service where account setup requires review of the merchant’s current processor, transaction volume, and hardware situation. The “Free” framing removes the cost anxiety while “Consultation” positions the next step as advice rather than sales pressure.
The mobile app mockup near the bottom (showing the CoCard app interface with processing data) addresses the “but how will I manage this day-to-day?” question for merchants considering a switch.
Positioning the CTA as "Are You Ready to Start Saving on Processing Costs?" near the close reframes the decision as one the merchant has already made intellectually. They just need to take the action to implement it. That framing (you've already decided, now act) is a conversion technique that works particularly well when the page has already built a strong logical case, as this one has.
What we would evolve today
Add a state-by-state surcharge legality note
The 0% surcharge model isn’t legal in every US state (notably Connecticut and Massachusetts restrict it). A brief note clarifying which states are eligible (or an eligibility checker widget) would reduce wasted consultation calls from ineligible merchants and build trust with eligible ones by showing transparency.
Test a “monthly savings estimate” widget in the hero
Moving a simplified version of the savings calculator into the hero (just processing volume input and an instant estimate) would let visitors see their personal savings figure before they’ve scrolled the page. A visitor who sees “Your estimated monthly savings: $480” in the hero is highly motivated to read the rest of the page.
Add merchant category examples
“Restaurants, retail stores, and service businesses are already saving with CoCard” with specific category breakdowns would help merchants self-identify and feel confident the service handles their industry’s payment patterns. Category specificity in B2B fintech consistently improves conversion rates.
Browse more fintech and payment services examples in our landing page examples gallery. For related reading, see our guide to lead generation landing page design.
Waseem founded Apexure in 2015 and has led its work on 3,000+ pages for 300+ clients since. He writes about what the team sees after the click, which is pages, forms, tracking and the systems behind them.
What the page leans on
The principles at work on this page, each named in the analysis above.
Loss aversion
People feel losses more strongly than gains. Framing around what they will miss motivates action.
Value anchoring
This principle influences visitor behaviour and supports the page's conversion goal.
Social proof
People follow the actions of others. Testimonials, reviews, and client logos build trust and reduce hesitation.
Authority bias
People trust credible experts. Certifications, awards, media mentions, and expert endorsements boost credibility.
Reciprocity
Giving something valuable first (free guide, tool, audit) creates an obligation to reciprocate.
What people ask about pages like this
Small business owners who accept card payments know exactly how much they're paying in processing fees. It's a visible line item every month. '0% Credit Card Processing' in the hero is a direct financial promise to an audience that quantifies the cost impact immediately. A business processing £25,000 per month at 2.5% is paying £625/month in fees. '0%' means that £625 stays in the business. The claim doesn't need to explain the mechanism. The financial implication is understood by the target audience before any copy is read.
A savings calculator converts the abstract '0% processing' claim into a specific personal number that each visitor can calculate for their own business. 'You could save £553 per month' is dramatically more persuasive than 'businesses save thousands on processing fees', because it's about this visitor's business specifically. The calculator also creates engagement: a visitor who inputs their processing volume has actively participated in the page, which increases psychological investment and conversion intent. Time spent on the calculator correlates directly with conversion likelihood.
Payment processing comparison tables convert best when they compare against a familiar, named category rather than a specific competitor. 'CoCard vs Traditional Processing' works because every merchant knows what traditional processing costs and has experienced its limitations. The comparison should focus on fee structure, contract terms, hardware costs, and settlement speed: the four variables merchants care most about. Showing zero processing fees, no monthly minimums, and next-day funding against the traditional alternatives converts the comparison into a straightforward decision for cost-conscious business owners.
Payment processing consultation requests typically convert to active accounts within 1–3 weeks, depending on the merchant's current contract terms and hardware situation. The consultation call allows a CoCard representative to calculate the specific savings for that merchant's processing volume, explain the surcharge model that enables 0% fees, and walk through the onboarding process. Merchants who see their personalised savings figure on the call tend to convert better than those who only saw the calculator on the landing page, which is why the page's primary CTA correctly drives to consultation rather than a self-serve sign-up.
Three more, taken apart the same way
Want one like this?
Tell us what the page has to do and where the traffic comes from. Within 48 hours you get a written quote from the people who wrote this breakdown. Already have a page that is not converting? Send it for a free audit instead.
UK hours, which is the East Coast morning.
"Payment processing landing pages convert best when they make the financial case before anything else. A small business owner evaluating processors is doing one calculation: how much will this save me versus what I pay now? CoCard leads with the most direct possible answer to that calculation: zero. Everything else on the page is support documentation for that single claim."