Comparison
Mandact vs. AP2
AP2 solves agent payments: signed intent, cart and payment mandates for checkout — since April 2026 under the neutral governance of the FIDO Alliance, with v0.2 including autonomous human-not-present payments. Mandact solves agent actions: cancellations, data releases, bookings, procurement — with a European identity root and an evidence chain. AP2 payment mandates are encapsulated in Mandact as a payment.* subtype; FIDO's neutral governance makes this docking easier, not harder.
| Dimension | Mandact (OMP) | Google AP2 |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage | Action catalogue with 123 types in 17 domains | Commerce lifecycle (intent → cart → payment) |
| Identity root | EUDI wallet / Swiss E-ID / organisational register | Implementation-dependent |
| Evidence layer | Two-sided, hash-chained chain; qualified eIDAS timestamps prepared (active once a QTSP is connected) | Signed mandates, no eIDAS anchoring |
| Revocation | Status endpoint live, effective from the next check | Mandate validity per specification |
| Escalation/step-up | Part of the protocol (MD-401, timeout, single use) | Not a core component |
| Relationship | payment.* encapsulates AP2 mandates as a subtype | Docking point, not a competitor |
Verdict
Complementary, not competing: AP2 is the payment rail, Mandact the mandate layer above and beside it. Combining both covers the complete agent transaction — from initiating a contract through paying to proving.