One of the wildest design quirks youâll find in Indian e-commerce (especially on the Indian Railways booking site) is that the UI forces the user to choose the payment processor.
At a glance, it looks like bad UX. Why make the user choose between PayU, Razorpay, or NTT Data? If the goal is resiliency, shouldn't automated "smart routing" just dynamically handle failovers behind the scenes?
But if you scratch beneath the surface, itâs actually a masterclass in market-specific engineering. It's actually quite clever:
1. Mind-boggling scale: About 50% of ALL online payments globally happen in India. By comparison, US's share of online payments is ~1-2%, Europe is about ~3-5%.
India's real-time transaction volume is huge: 100 billion transactions yearly! That number is greater than the transaction volumes in the US, UK, Canada, France, and Germany combined...and then multiplied by eleven.
(Where India's share is smaller is transaction value. If you want an insight into the future of micropayments, look here. Because the sheer infrastructure strain is immense, no single traditional payment processor can guarantee 100% uptime.)
2. Power-user overrides: If a Stripe payment fails on a regular e-commerce site, waiting 10-15 minutes while the system figures out what happened is annoying but fine.
But on Indian Railways, high-demand tickets sell out in seconds. You're competing with thousands of people for a fixed number of seats releasing at a specific moment. Those 10-15 minutes could be the difference between getting the ticket or not.
So, counter-intuitively, users want to be power users. They'd rather immediately retry with a different processor, than wait for automated fallback logic to catch up.
3. Anti-monopoly by design: On publicly-funded services such as this, locking into a single payment processor would hand one company a dominant position over an enormous share of transaction volume...and the processing fees that come with it.
The multi-processor setup avoids creating that winner-takes-all dynamic. In fact, the order in which these payment processors are shown is also randomised on every page load, so that the order on the screen itself doesn't disproportionately drive volume to a single processor.
4. Transaction costs aren't always absorbed by the merchant: Unlike the West, where merchants quietly absorb a 2-3% card processing fee, in India the processing fees are often directly passed to the user as a "convenience fee."
Different processors negotiate different rates with specific banks, and some pass on the savings to the users, which creates a live competitive market.
Users actively pick the processor with the lowest fee for their transaction based, or cashback provided based on special promotions. It's a local version of pointsmaxxing.
There's enormous richness and complexity in India's payments ecosystem, and more broadly across the global south. It is a fascinating look at high-velocity financial infrastructure built under real constraints: scale, competition, scarcity, that Western fintechs largely never had to contend with.
But that same ecosystem is also ripe for disruption. Moving payments and finance onchain will be a generational shift in speed and cost, but only if the privacy problem gets solved. No national or local payments infrastructure can run without that, as financial data is some of the most sensitive data there is.