Income Checker vs The Work Number: Bank-Based vs Employment Database Verification
The Work Number by Equifax is one of the oldest names in income and employment verification. It maintains a database of payroll records contributed by employers, and it sells access to that data for tenant screening, mortgage lending, and background checks. It is a very different approach from bank-based income analysis, and those differences matter for landlords.
This comparison lays out how each method works, what it costs, and where each one falls short. If you are deciding between employer database verification and bank-sourced income analysis, this should help you make a practical choice.
How The Work Number works
The Work Number is a centralized database run by Equifax. Here is the basic flow:
- An employer contributes payroll data to The Work Number database. This happens automatically through payroll processors like ADP, Paychex, and others.
- When a verifier (landlord, lender, screener) requests a report, The Work Number checks if the applicant's employer is in the database.
- If the employer participates, the report returns employment dates, job title, and salary information from payroll records.
- If the employer does not participate, the verification fails or falls back to a manual process where someone contacts the employer directly.
The Work Number is a Consumer Reporting Agency (CRA). Reports are governed by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which means you take on compliance obligations when you use it.
How bank-based income analysis works
Bank-based income analysis skips the employer entirely. Instead:
- You send the applicant a secure link.
- The applicant connects their bank account through an encrypted, read-only connection via Plaid.
- The provider pulls deposit and transaction data directly from the bank.
- You receive a report with estimated monthly income based on deposit patterns.
The data comes from the bank, not the employer. The applicant authorizes the connection, but the data itself is not something they can edit or selectively share. For a deeper explanation, see what bank-based income reports are and how they work.
Side-by-side comparison
| Factor | The Work Number (Equifax) | Income Checker (bank-based) |
|---|---|---|
| Data source | Employer payroll records in Equifax database | Bank deposit data via Plaid |
| Coverage | Only employers that contribute data (~2.5M employers) | Any applicant with a US bank account |
| Self-employed coverage | No (no employer to report) | Yes (sees all deposits regardless of source) |
| Gig worker coverage | Minimal (gig platforms may not participate) | Yes (Uber, DoorDash, freelance deposits all visible) |
| CRA status | Yes (FCRA applies) | No (transaction-based analysis, not a consumer report) |
| Approximate cost per report | ~$105 per verification (2026 pricing) | $14.99 per verification or less on a plan |
| Published pricing | No (varies by reseller and volume) | Yes (view pricing) |
| Self-serve access | Typically through a screening provider | Yes (sign up and run a verification today) |
| Speed | Instant if employer is in database; days/weeks if not | Minutes after applicant connects their bank |
| Applicant consent | Required (FCRA permissible purpose) | Required (applicant authorizes bank connection) |
| What you learn | Salary, job title, employment dates (if employer participates) | Estimated monthly income, deposit patterns, account info |
The coverage problem
The Work Number's biggest limitation is database coverage. It only works when the applicant's employer contributes payroll data. Equifax claims roughly 2.5 million employer contributors, which sounds like a lot until you consider:
- Small businesses often do not participate. A local restaurant, a small construction company, a family-owned shop. If your applicant works for a business with 10 employees, there is a good chance that employer is not in The Work Number.
- Self-employed applicants are invisible. Freelancers, independent contractors, sole proprietors. No employer means no payroll record means no data in The Work Number.
- Gig workers fall through the cracks. Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and other gig platforms may not contribute to the database. Even if some do, workers with income from multiple platforms get incomplete coverage.
When The Work Number cannot find the employer, the process falls back to manual verification: someone contacts the employer by phone, fax, or email. That process takes days or weeks and often fails entirely when the employer does not respond. For more on why employer-based verification stalls, see why employer verification is slow and what to do instead.
Bank-based analysis does not have a coverage problem. If the applicant has a bank account and receives deposits, the data is there. It does not matter who the employer is, how many income sources the applicant has, or whether anyone participates in a database.
The cost difference
The Work Number's pricing has increased steadily. As of January 2026, the per-verification fee is approximately $105. That is per applicant, per report.
For a landlord screening 5 applicants for one vacancy, that is $525 in verification fees alone. Add that to credit checks, background checks, and application processing, and screening costs add up fast.
Income Checker charges $14.99 per verification with no subscription required. On the Starter plan ($59/month), you get 10 verifications included, bringing the per-check cost under $6. On the Pro plan ($129/month for 50 verifications), it drops to about $2.58 per check. See all pricing options.
The cost difference is roughly 7x at the per-verification level, and the gap widens on subscription plans.
FCRA compliance: what it means for you
The Work Number is a CRA. When you use CRA data to make a screening decision, you take on FCRA obligations:
- Permissible purpose: You need a legally recognized reason to pull the report.
- Adverse action notices: If you deny an applicant based on the report, you must follow specific disclosure and dispute procedures.
- Dispute resolution: Applicants have the right to dispute information, and you have obligations in that process.
- Record keeping: You must maintain records of how you used the data.
For large property management companies with compliance teams, this is manageable. For a landlord with 5 rental units, FCRA compliance adds legal exposure that most small operators are not equipped to handle.
Income Checker is not a CRA. It provides transaction-based income analysis, not consumer reports. The reports show estimated income based on bank deposit patterns. This is informational analysis, not an employment or credit record. You do not take on FCRA obligations by using it.
This does not mean you can use the data however you want. Fair housing laws still apply. But the specific compliance burden of FCRA does not attach to bank-based income analysis the way it does to CRA reports.
Where The Work Number still has value
The Work Number is not the wrong tool for every situation. It works well when:
- The applicant works for a large employer that contributes to the database (Fortune 500 companies, government agencies, hospital systems). In those cases, the data is instant and includes job title, salary, and employment dates.
- You need formal employment verification for legal or contractual reasons, not just income analysis.
- You are a large property management company already using a screening provider that bundles Work Number access into a broader package.
If most of your applicants are W-2 employees at large companies, The Work Number can deliver fast, detailed employment data. The problem is that applicant pools rarely consist entirely of that profile.
Where bank-based analysis wins for small landlords
For landlords managing 1-10 properties, bank-based income analysis has practical advantages:
Cost. At $14.99 per check (or less on a plan), you can verify every applicant without the report fee driving your screening budget. At $105 per report, The Work Number forces you to be selective about who you verify, which means you might skip verification on applicants who seem "fine" and get burned.
Coverage. Your applicant pool probably includes W-2 employees, gig workers, freelancers, people with side income, and people between jobs with savings. Bank-based analysis sees all of it. The Work Number sees only the W-2 income from participating employers.
Speed. The Work Number is fast when it works. When the employer is not in the database, it is slow. Bank-based analysis is consistently fast: the applicant connects their bank in a few minutes, and you get the report.
Simplicity. No FCRA compliance paperwork. No adverse action notice requirements specific to CRA data. Sign up, send a link, get a report. For a breakdown of what this costs compared to other methods, see the real cost of income verification compared.
Making the choice
If you manage hundreds of units and your screening provider already includes Work Number access, there may be no reason to change. The Work Number gives you payroll-sourced data that bank-based analysis cannot replicate (exact salary, job title, start date).
If you are a small landlord looking for a practical, affordable way to check applicant income without a compliance burden, bank-based analysis is the better fit. It costs less, covers more applicant types, and does not require you to navigate FCRA.
You can also use both: The Work Number for the employment record when you need it, and bank-based analysis for the income picture. They answer different questions, and for some landlords, having both answers is worth it.
Try Income Checker | View an example report | Learn how bank-based income analysis works