Feature x402 L402
Settlement asset USDC (default) or any ERC-20 with EIP-3009 BTC via Lightning
Identity Wallet signature (EIP-712 over EIP-3009) Macaroon issued by server, paid via LN invoice
Settlement finality ~2s on Base mainnet Sub-second LN HTLC, eventual on-chain anchor Winner
Stable unit of account Yes (USD-denominated) Winner No (BTC-denominated)
Wallet ubiquity for AI agents High — any EVM wallet, CDP, viem, web3.py Winner Lower — needs LN node or hosted LN wallet
Reference facilitator Coinbase CDP Winner Self-host LND/CLN or LSP
On-chain auditability per call Yes (tx hash returned in PAYMENT-RESPONSE) Winner Off-chain inside LN by default
x402 Wins
4
Ties
2
L402 Wins
1

Final Verdict

Pick x402 when you want stable USD pricing, EVM tooling, and on-chain audit per call. Pick L402 when your stack already runs Lightning and you want sub-second BTC settlement with built-in macaroon auth.

Identity model

x402 treats the payer's wallet signature as the identity — the EIP-712 typed-data signature over an EIP-3009 transferWithAuthorization is both the payment and the auth header. L402 issues a macaroon plus a Lightning invoice; the client pays the invoice, then attaches the macaroon as the auth token on subsequent requests.

Settlement

x402 servers either settle directly with an EVM RPC or delegate to a facilitator (Coinbase CDP is the reference). L402 servers settle by detecting paid Lightning invoices, typically against an LND or Core Lightning node.

Pricing predictability

USDC pricing is naturally USD-stable. L402 prices are typically expressed in satoshis, which makes ad-hoc agent budgets harder to reason about across long-running workflows unless the price is denominated and re-quoted in fiat by the server.

Tooling

x402 has client SDKs in Python and TypeScript, a Coinbase facilitator, and discovery via .well-known/x402.json. L402 has aperture (proxy), lightning-charge-style flows, and is most mature inside Lightning-native stacks.

Pro Tips

If your agent already custodies USDC on Base for other reasons, x402 has near-zero marginal cost to integrate.
If your agent is BTC-native (e.g. an L402-aware browser extension), L402 will be lighter to wire up.
Both protocols expose the price in the 402 response — agents can budget-cap before signing.
Don't fight the protocol war; gateway both at the proxy layer if you serve a heterogeneous agent population.
Copied to clipboard!