Search “push provisioning vs in-app provisioning” and the results contradict each other. Visa treats in-app as a type of push. CPI and Mastercard imply they are related but distinct. Others lumps them in with manual entry as parallel options.
The cleaner version is short.
In-app provisioning is push provisioning, delivered through a mobile app. Web push provisioning is push provisioning, delivered through a browser. They are not alternatives, they are channels.
This post sets out the definitions, the comparison, when to use each, and how digital issuance and manual entry sit alongside them.
The Clean Definitions
Push provisioning is the umbrella term. It means the card programme adds a payment card to a digital wallet, such as Apple Pay, Google Pay, or Samsung Pay, on behalf of the cardholder in one tap, without manual card entry. The card is tokenised by the network and the token is delivered to the wallet.
In-app provisioning is push provisioning executed inside the card programme’s mobile app. The cardholder taps “Add to wallet” inside the app and the card flows to the wallet on the same device.
Web push provisioning is push provisioning executed through a browser. The cardholder taps “Add to wallet” on a web page or via a link delivered by email or SMS, on any device.
Manual provisioning sits outside push provisioning. The cardholder types or photographs the card details into the wallet themselves. There is no issuer involvement.
Digital issuance is a separate concept again. It refers to the digital creation of the card itself, such as a virtual card with a number, CVV, and expiry, independent of any wallet.
Push provisioning is what you typically do once a card has been digitally issued.
Why the Terms Get Confused
There are three main reasons.
First, in-app push provisioning came first.
For years, it was the only kind of push provisioning, so the two terms became interchangeable in practice. Web push only emerged as a mainstream method recently, and the language has not caught up.
Second, schemes and providers describe the same flows from their own angles.
Visa frames the work as “in-app provisioning” because its SDK is the integration point. CPI and others frame it as “push provisioning” because their service initiates it.
Both are correct.
Third, “push” gets misread as a contrast to “manual” rather than a contrast to “pull”.
In wallet language, push means the issuer is pushing the card into the wallet. The opposite is the wallet pulling the card via manual entry, not “in-app”.
The result is articles that imply push provisioning and in-app provisioning are competing options.
They are not.
One contains the other.