7 Best Alternatives to Oyster for EOR in 2026

Companies evaluating alternatives to Oyster aren't questioning whether they need an EOR. They're questioning whether their current provider can scale with them. The calculus changes when you're hiring your 50th international employee, expanding into regulated markets like India or the EU, or negotiating your second annual renewal with pricing that no longer reflects your operational reality.

This guide examines seven Oyster alternatives through the lens of what matters after the honeymoon phase ends: 

• Local execution depth
• Pricing transparency
• Compliance accountability
• Operational resilience under load

We've structured each evaluation around the questions HR leaders ask during vendor diligence, not the questions providers want you to ask.

You already understand EOR fundamentals. What you need now is signal clarity on how these platforms perform when employment complexity increases, regulatory environments shift, or employee experience issues surface at 11 PM in a market eight time zones away.

The Top Oyster Competitors: A Quick Overview

Coverage numbers matter less than entity ownership models. Pricing transparency separates partners from vendors. Compliance depth reveals itself in how platforms handle exceptions, not standard cases.

This table highlights decisive operational differences, not feature parity claims.

See how entity-backed EOR with statutory depth compares to partner-reliant models  → Explore Gloroots

Best 7 Alternatives to Oyster You Should Try

These platforms represent the realistic shortlist for companies moving past Oyster. We've led with Gloroots not as house bias, but because its compliance-first EOR model and India specialization address the gaps most commonly cited in Oyster migration conversations:

• Pricing unpredictability
• Support responsiveness in complex markets
• Statutory handling when regulations shift mid-quarter

Here are the top 7 alternatives to Oyster:

1. Gloroots

Gloroots is an Employer of Record and global hiring platform built for companies that treat international expansion as a compliance and execution challenge, not just a vendor selection exercise.

While many EOR providers compete on country coverage and surface-level features, Gloroots focuses on operational depth in complex employment markets, where payroll, tax, and labor law mistakes create real business risk. Its model combines a technology platform with in-house legal and HR expertise, rather than relying solely on third-party partner networks.

Gloroots also supports companies from the hiring stage through ongoing employment. Recruitment services are available in select markets, and the platform is designed to connect hiring, onboarding, and EOR into one workflow, reducing handoffs and delays.

By pairing self-serve tools with dedicated human support and transparent, country-specific pricing, Gloroots gives startups and mid-market teams a more predictable way to build and manage global teams.

Key Features

• Employer of Record services across 140+ countries with direct entity ownership in high-priority markets
• India GCC enablement: Accelerated setup for Global Capability Centers, including payroll, PF/ESIC/gratuity, statutory filings, and local HR advisory
• Bridges the temporary stopgap needs while entities form or support long-term operations
• Contractor management with compliant conversion pathways to full-time employment as teams scale
• Country-specific legal playbooks reducing misclassification and regulatory exposure through jurisdiction-level compliance frameworks
• Consolidated global payroll with transparent FX handling, automated tax deductions, and local currency payouts
• Finance-grade reporting: Line-item invoices with country-level cost breakdowns, GL mapping, and audit-ready exports for CFO visibility
• Recruiting and talent advisory (India-focused): Local sourcing support, compensation benchmarking, and onboarding playbooks to retain GCC talent
• Hybrid service model: Self-service dashboard for contracts paired with assigned Customer Success Managers for compliance guidance

Pros

• Transparent pricing with no surprise fees or mid-contract cost escalations
• India's statutory depth is unmatched by global-first platforms, critical for GCC operations, where PF compliance and gratuity calculations require local expertise
• Faster activation timelines: Hire-to-onboard in days rather than weeks, with entity setup bypassed entirely
• Direct legal employer accountability, where Gloroots assumes statutory compliance risk rather than externalizing it to third-party partners
• Finance integration quality: Detailed invoicing and GL exports reduce month-end reconciliation burden for distributed finance teams

Cons

• Fewer enterprise add-ons compared to platforms targeting Fortune 500 workforce management (no native performance management or learning modules)
• Coverage footprint smaller than Remote or RemoFirst, though 140+ countries covers 95%+ of global hiring demand
• Less brand recognition in the North American market relative to Deel or Remote

Pricing

Gloroots starts at $299 per employee per month for full EOR services. This positions between budget providers like Deel ($49/month) and premium platforms like Oyster ($699/month). According to Gloroots' pricing analysis, pricing remains consistent across geographies with transparent add-on costs for benefits upgrades or compliance advisory.

What People Say About Gloroots

What our clients are saying

"Gloroots has been exceptional so far, allowing us to make seamless transactions with our contractors with minimal effort on their end."

Prabhav Varambally

VP, Customer Enablement at AssetMantle

Read Case Study

Best For

• Companies establishing or scaling GCCs in India where statutory expertise and local HR advisory differentiate operational success from compliance exposure. 
• Startups and mid-market teams (10-250 employees) prioritizing cost predictability and dedicated support over enterprise feature sprawl. 
• Organizations are converting contractors to employees across multiple markets, where Gloroots handles classification risk and benefits transitions smoothly. Finance-conscious teams require audit-ready reporting and transparent month-end reconciliation.

2. Deel

Deel built its market position on contractor payment infrastructure before expanding into full EOR services. This heritage shows in the platform's strength in managing mixed workforce models (contractors, employees, direct hires) from a unified dashboard. 

The company owns entities in key markets but relies on partner networks for long-tail country coverage, creating variable service quality across geographies.

Key Features

• EOR coverage in 150+ countries with entity ownership in 80+ markets
• Contractor management with automated compliance screening and payment workflows
• Integrated HRIS and payroll for multi-country workforce consolidation
• Immigration and visa support for employee relocations

Pros

• Deel is viable for early-stage international hiring
• Contractor-to-employee conversion workflows run smoother than most competitors due to the platform's dual infrastructure
• Strong API ecosystem for companies requiring payroll/HRIS integrations with existing tech stacks
• Quick onboarding timelines for standard employment scenarios

Cons

• Higher base pricing ($599/employee/month+) eliminates Deel from consideration for budget-conscious early-stage teams
• Partner reliance in many countries creates inconsistent employee experience and compliance gaps, particularly in regulated markets
• Support quality degrades at scale, with multiple customer reports citing delayed responses during payroll issues or regulatory questions
• Deel faced regulatory scrutiny in multiple jurisdictions for misclassification and licensing gaps
• Pricing opacity beyond the entry tier, where costs escalate quickly with benefits, equity, or compliance add-ons

Pricing

Deel's EOR pricing starts at $599 per month per employee, though this rate applies primarily to contractor management. Full EOR services with benefits and statutory compliance typically range from $599 to $699/month, depending on country and service level.

What Do Deel Users Say?

User sentiment splits sharply based on workforce composition. Teams managing primarily contractors praise Deel's payment automation and global coverage. However, companies scaling employee headcount cite support responsiveness issues, payroll accuracy problems, and compliance blind spots in markets where Deel lacks owned entities.

Best For

Startups are hiring primarily contractors with occasional employee conversions. High-volume hiring teams (100+ international workers) requiring API-first integrations. 

3. Remote

‍

Remote markets itself as the "employee experience-first" EOR, emphasizing benefits quality, onboarding simplicity, and global employment brand over operational cost optimization. The company owns entities in 80+ countries and partners for additional coverage. This creates better consistency than Deel but less statutory depth than compliance-focused alternatives like Gloroots.

Key Features

• Direct entity ownership in 80+ countries, total coverage across 170+ markets
• Global payroll with multi-currency support and automated tax compliance
• Benefits administration with region-specific health insurance, pensions, and statutory coverage
• Employee self-service portal for contracts, payslips, and benefits management

Pros

• Employee experience quality consistently rated above competitors, with onboarding that feels consumer-grade rather than HR-software clunky
• Benefits packages are competitive in high-cost markets (UK, Germany, Canada, Australia)
• Owned entities in priority markets reduce partner-related compliance gaps

Cons

• Higher base pricing ($599/employee/month+) eliminates Remote from consideration for budget-conscious early-stage teams
• Limited regional specialization with no equivalent to Gloroots' India GCC expertise or localized statutory advisory
• Support responsiveness declines as customer size increases, where dedicated CSMs are reserved for enterprise contracts
• Feature depth sacrificed for UX simplicity, where finance teams cite limited reporting granularity

Pricing

Remote's EOR services start at $599 per month per employee with transparent tier pricing based on country complexity and benefits level. 

What Do Remote Users Say?

Customers consistently praise the employee onboarding experience and benefits quality, particularly in EU markets where statutory requirements are complex. However, finance and HR ops teams note limitations in reporting flexibility and cost forecasting as headcount scales.

Best For

Remote-first companies (50-500 employees) prioritize employee satisfaction and benefits quality over cost minimization. 

4. Papaya Global

Papaya Global positions itself as an enterprise-grade global payroll and workforce management platform with EOR capabilities. The company owns entities in select markets while partnering for broader coverage across 160+ countries. Papaya differentiates through its payroll consolidation engine, designed for multinational corporations managing complex, multi-country payment operations at scale.

The platform emphasizes finance-team workflows, audit compliance, and regulatory reporting over employee experience or startup accessibility.

Key Features

• EOR and payroll services across 160+ countries with a hybrid entity ownership model
• Global payroll engine consolidating multiple countries into unified payment runs
• Automated tax compliance and statutory reporting for finance teams
• Workforce management tools, including time tracking and expense management

Pros

• Enterprise-grade payroll consolidation reduces the finance team's workload for companies operating in 10+ countries
• Strong audit and compliance reporting capabilities meeting SOC 2 and GDPR requirements
• ERP integration depth appeals to companies with existing finance tech stacks
• Entity ownership in key corporate markets (US, UK, Germany, Israel)

Cons

• Pricing targets enterprise budgets, eliminating Papaya from consideration for startups and mid-market teams
• Partner reliance in many countries creates variable service quality similar to Deel's model
• Employee experience quality rated below Remote and Gloroots in G2 reviews
• Implementation timelines longer than competitors, often requiring 4-6 weeks for full deployment
• Limited regional specialization outside Western markets, lacking an equivalent to Gloroots' India GCC depth

Pricing

Papaya Global uses custom enterprise pricing starting around $599 per month per employee, with costs varying based on country mix, payroll complexity, and integration requirements. Smaller teams report difficulty accessing transparent pricing without enterprise sales conversations.

What Do Papaya Global Users Say?

Enterprise finance teams praise payroll consolidation and audit-ready reporting. However, HR ops and smaller companies cite implementation complexity, higher costs, and support responsiveness issues compared to more agile competitors.

Best For

Enterprise organizations (500+ employees) operating in 10+ countries requiring consolidated global payroll and finance-grade reporting. 

5. Rippling

‍

Rippling approaches EOR as one component of a unified HR, IT, and finance platform rather than a standalone global employment solution. The company built its reputation on all-in-one workforce management for US companies, then expanded internationally through partner networks covering 90+ countries.

Rippling's differentiator lies in system consolidation: managing employee devices, software licenses, payroll, benefits, and compliance from a single interface. However, this breadth comes with trade-offs in EOR depth and international compliance expertise.

Key Features

• EOR services in 90+ countries through a partner network model
• Unified platform managing HR, IT, payroll, and device management
• Automated employee onboarding and offboarding workflows syncing across systems
• Benefits administration with US-focused depth

Pros

• Platform consolidation reduces vendor sprawl for companies wanting unified HR and IT management
• Strong US payroll and benefits administration superior to international-first EOR providers
• Automated workflows reduce manual work during employee lifecycle changes
• IT device management is unique among EOR competitors, appealing to tech companies

Cons

• Partner-heavy international model creates compliance gaps and inconsistent service quality outside the US
• EOR functionality feels secondary to the core HR/IT platform, lacking depth of dedicated providers like Gloroots or Remote
• Pricing complexity where base platform costs ($8/employee/month) exclude meaningful EOR services, add-ons escalate quickly
• Limited country-specific expertise in complex markets like India, Brazil, or Germany
• Support quality for international employment issues rated below specialized EOR providers
• Entity ownership is unclear in most international markets, raising compliance accountability questions

Pricing

Rippling advertises base pricing from $499 per employee per month, but this covers only basic HR features. True all-in pricing for global EOR often exceeds $500-600/month per international employee once compliance, benefits, and support tiers are included.

What Do Rippling Users Say?

US-focused companies praise platform consolidation and IT management capabilities. However, teams expanding internationally cite frustration with international EOR limitations, partner-network compliance gaps, and support quality below dedicated EOR specialists.

Best For

US-based tech companies (50-500 employees) with primarily domestic workforce wanting unified HR and IT management. 

6. RemoFirst

‍

‍

RemoFirst competes primarily on price, offering EOR services starting at $199/month across 185+ countries. That's the widest coverage among Oyster alternatives. However, geographic breadth comes at a cost. RemoFirst relies heavily on third-party partnerships for entity infrastructure and payroll execution, creating compliance exposure that only surfaces during audits or regulatory changes.

Key Features

• EOR coverage in 185+ countries via partner network
• Global payroll with multi-currency payments
• Contractor and employee management from a unified platform
• Basic benefits administration and compliance documentation

Pros

• Aggressive pricing makes international hiring accessible for bootstrapped startups
• Widest geographic coverage among mid-tier EOR providers
• Fast setup timelines for standard employment scenarios
• Contractor payment infrastructure reduces multi-vendor complexity for mixed workforces

Cons

• Partner-heavy compliance model externalizes risk, where accountability becomes murky when employment disputes or regulatory issues arise
• Minimal local expertise in complex markets like India, Brazil, or German,y where statutory nuances require in-country advisory
• Support quality is inconsistent, where customer success teams lack depth to navigate payroll exceptions or misclassification questions
• Benefits packages are basic compared to Remote or Gloroots, often statutory minimums rather than competitive offerings

Pricing

RemoFirst's headline rate of $199 per month per employee applies globally with limited variation by country complexity. This pricing reflects a cost-optimized service model. Customers should expect self-service compliance research and reactive (not proactive) support.

What Do RemoFirst Users Say?

RemoFirst users' feedback centers on value for money and geographic reach, with early-stage companies citing RemoFirst as their entry point into international hiring. However, teams scaling beyond 20-30 employees commonly migrate to providers with stronger compliance infrastructure.

Best For

Early-stage startups (fewer than 25 international employees) are testing global hiring hypotheses. Cost-sensitive teams hiring in low-regulation markets where compliance risk is minimal. 

7. Multiplier

Multiplier targets tech companies requiring API-first integrations with existing HRIS, payroll, and finance systems. The platform owns entities in 40+ priority markets and partners for extended coverage, balancing operational control with geographic reach. Multiplier's differentiator lies in developer-friendly infrastructure rather than HR service depth.

Key Features

• EOR services in 150+ countries with owned entities in tech hubs (US, UK, Germany, India, Singapore)
• Robust API for payroll, employee data, and compliance automation
• Global payroll with real-time FX rates and multi-currency support
• Contractor management with classification screening

Pros

• API quality enables headless EOR workflows for companies building custom HR tech stacks
• Tech hub coverage prioritizes markets where engineering teams concentrate (Bangalore, Berlin, London, Singapore)
• Finance system integrations reduce manual data entry and month-end reconciliation work
• Equity management handles stock options and RSUs across jurisdictions, relevant for startups with global cap tables

Cons

• Custom pricing lacks transparency and requires sales conversations to understand true costs
• Support model assumes technical sophistication with less hand-holding than managed service providers
• Benefits packages are standard rather than competitive, focusing on compliance minimums
• Regional expertise is limited outside tech-forward markets

Pricing

Multiplier uses custom pricing based on employee count, country mix, and integration requirements. Market feedback suggests per-employee costs range $400-$500/month for full EOR services with API access. This is competitive with mid-tier providers but without transparent rate cards.

What Do Multiplier Users Say?

Technical teams praise API reliability and integration depth, while HR ops teams note gaps in proactive compliance guidance. Companies with existing HR tech investments value Multiplier's flexibility. Those seeking managed service simplicity often find the platform under-supportive.

Best For

Tech companies (50-500 employees) with engineering resources to build on EOR APIs. Organizations with existing HRIS investments (BambooHR, Workday, Rippling) requiring integration depth. 

Why Should You Consider Alternatives to Oyster?

Evaluating alternatives to Oyster is rarely about dissatisfaction it is about fit. As teams scale, expand into complex markets, or tighten financial controls, operational misalignments tend to surface that warrant a reassessment.

1. Pricing unpredictability at scale: 

Oyster’s $699 per employee/month pricing sits at the premium end. Teams report mid-contract price changes, undisclosed compliance fees, and benefits add-ons that introduce budget volatility, especially for 50+ global employees.

2. Inconsistent support in high-complexity markets: 

Strong performance in low-regulation, English-speaking countries contrasts with weaker execution in markets like India, Brazil, or parts of the EU, where delayed resolutions and shallow statutory guidance increase risk.

3. Country coverage depth vs. headline numbers: 

While Oyster lists 180+ countries, true entity ownership is concentrated in roughly 40–50 markets. Partner-led coverage can result in uneven service quality and compliance blind spots in regions like Southeast Asia or Eastern Europe.

4. Scalability limits beyond mid-market teams: 

The platform is optimized for teams of roughly 10–200 employees. Larger organizations often require bespoke SLAs, deeper compliance advisory, and finance-grade reporting not supported by standardized models. Enterprise-focused EOR providers build differently for this segment.

5. Contractor-to-employee conversion friction: 

Contractor management is not native, creating risk during worker classification changes, benefits enrollment delays, and payroll continuity issues for companies scaling blended global workforces.

In short, Oyster remains a capable EOR, but growing organizations must assess whether its pricing model, support depth, and scalability align with their next phase of global expansion, not just their current state.

Take your HR Solutions Global
Onboard 2x faster across 140+ countries with Gloroots.
Talk to our experts

How to Choose the Right Oyster Alternative?

Selecting the right alternative to Oyster requires moving past surface-level comparisons and focusing on operational realities that determine long-term success. Use the checklist below to validate whether a provider can support your hiring roadmap without introducing hidden risk.

Here is the checklist for choosing the right alternative to Oyster:

1. Compliance Depth: Entity Ownership vs. Partner Networks

Not all global coverage models carry the same compliance risk. EOR providers typically operate using one of the following two structures:

Owned-Entity Model

• The EOR owns and operates local legal entities in-country and assumes full employer responsibility. 
• Employment contracts, payroll taxes, statutory filings, and regulatory updates are handled directly, with compliance risk fully absorbed by the provider. 

Partner-Network Model

• The EOR relies on third-party local partners to employ workers on its behalf. 
• While this enables rapid country expansion, it fragments accountability and introduces variability in service quality and compliance execution. 
• Compliance gaps often surface during audits or contractor-to-employee transitions, particularly in high-risk jurisdictions.

Best practice: Prioritize owned-entity coverage for your core hiring countries. Use partner-network models only for limited, low-risk, or exploratory hires.

2. Pricing Transparency: All-In Costs, Not Base Rates

Advertised pricing often excludes benefits, compliance services, FX fees, or support tiers. Providers like Deel and Remote may appear lower-cost until add-ons are factored in.

Request sample invoices and validate:

• What drives cost variation between countries?
• Are FX fees transparent or bundled?
• How much do benefits upgrades cost?
• What compliance services are included versus billed separately?

Gloroot’s Transparent pricing models reduce forecasting risk and month-end surprises.

3. Support Model: Self-Service vs. Managed Service

Platform features matter less than support quality when issues arise. Differentiation appears during payroll errors, regulatory changes, misclassification reviews, and statutory deadlines.

Evaluate:

• Whether you receive a dedicated Customer Success Manager or shared support
• Guaranteed response times for payroll issues
• Proactive versus reactive regulatory updates
• Access to local employment law experts

Hybrid support models outperform ticket-only approaches.

4. Country-Specific Expertise: Generic vs. Localized

Global EOR platforms often deliver baseline compliance that satisfies statutory requirements but fails to account for regional complexity. This approach works in simple markets but increases risk in countries with nuanced labor laws and enforcement practices.

• Generic EORs apply standardized compliance frameworks with minimal local optimization
• Complex markets like India require deeper handling of PF, ESIC, gratuity, bonuses, and statutory leave
• Providers with in-country legal and HR teams deliver more reliable, audit-ready execution

Choosing a localized compliance model reduces operational friction and ensures regulatory changes are handled proactively, not reactively.

5. Scalability: 10 Employees vs. 100 vs. 500

An EOR that works at 10 employees may fail at 100 or beyond. As scale increases, payroll exceptions, benefits administration, and compliance oversight compound.

Assess:

• Service tier thresholds for dedicated support
• Pricing stability as headcount grows
• Finance-grade reporting and country-level cost visibility
• API and HRIS integration readiness

In short, the right Oyster alternative is the provider whose compliance ownership, cost transparency, support depth, and scalability align with your future global hiring plans, not just your current needs.

What Are The Common Mistakes To Avoid When Choosing Oyster Alternatives?

Below are the most frequent mistakes teams make when evaluating Oyster alternatives. Each one appears manageable early on, but often leads to expensive EOR migrations later.

1. Optimizing for Price Over Compliance Risk

• Low-cost EORs reduce fees by relying on partner networks, limited benefits, and reactive compliance
• This model shifts legal and regulatory risk to your business, not the provider
• Misclassification, payroll tax errors, and labor disputes can quickly outweigh upfront savings
• Always evaluate total risk exposure, not just per-employee pricing

2. Ignoring Service-Level Agreements and Support Depth

• “24/7 support” often means self-service tools or delayed ticket responses
• Many providers reserve dedicated customer managers for enterprise contracts only
• Slow response times during payroll or compliance issues can escalate routine problems into crises
• Clear SLAs and access to experienced support teams are critical

3. Underestimating Country-Specific Regulatory Complexity

• Employment laws vary significantly by country and cannot be handled with generic frameworks
• Complex markets require in-country expertise for payroll, benefits, terminations, and audits
• Outsourced or third-party compliance models fragment accountability
• Local legal and HR depth reduces operational and regulatory risk
• Prioritize EOR providers with demonstrated depth in your priority markets over platforms with impressive country counts but shallow execution.

4. Choosing Platforms Without Entity Ownership Verification

• Broad country coverage often hides reliance on third-party partners
• Partner models introduce inconsistent employee experience and compliance blind spots
• Accountability gaps surface during disputes or audits
• Providers should clearly disclose owned entities, partner usage, and risk controls

5. Overlooking Long-Term Scalability and Integration Needs

• Early-stage teams tolerate manual workflows and limited reporting
• At scale, lack of integrations, granular reporting, and proactive compliance becomes a liability
• Mid-growth EOR switching disrupts payroll, contracts, and employee experience
• Choose a platform aligned with your 18–24 month hiring roadmap, not just current needs

These mistakes are avoidable with a structured evaluation approach. The right EOR alternative supports scalable growth, compliance confidence, and long-term operational stability.

Why Choose Gloroots?

Gloroots is built for companies that view global hiring as a long-term employment strategy, not a short-term workaround. Teams moving from Oyster choose Gloroots to eliminate pricing surprises, reduce compliance risk in complex markets, and gain operational clarity as they scale.

How Gloroots supports global teams:

• Compliance-first infrastructure with owned entities and country-specific legal playbooks that reduce misclassification and regulatory exposure
• Proactive compliance monitoring to keep contracts, payroll, and statutory filings current as labor laws change
• Transparent pricing from $299 per employee per month with no hidden fees, mid-contract escalations, or surprise add-ons
• Line-item invoicing and finance-grade reporting, including country-level cost breakdowns, GL mapping, and audit-ready exports
• Deep India specialization and GCC enablement covering PF, ESIC, gratuity, bonus structuring, and localized onboarding for major tech hubs
• Hybrid service model combining self-service workflows with assigned Customer Success Managers and responsive payroll support SLAs
• Support for contractor-to-employee transitions with reduced classification risk and payroll continuity

Gloroots replaces opaque pricing, generic compliance, and ticket-based support with clarity, accountability, and in-country depth, giving growing teams confidence as they scale internationally.

‍

Hire Globally Without Compliance Surprises

Scale your international workforce with Gloroots’ compliance-first EOR model. Get transparent pricing, deep in-country expertise, and dedicated support that grows with your team, without hidden fees or regulatory risk.

Book a Demo

‍