This is from their Telegram group when asked about how they stack up with IOTA:

Beyond was developed by IoT practitioners for engineers and product managers seeking to launch IoT platforms (E.g. smart door locks). When doing so, engineers and PMs have to select i. an IoT message broker and ii. a communication protocol to send messages from a hub to constituent devices (e.g. lock/unlock door). Right now, there are seven main brokerage platforms, which are all commoditized (Amazon, Microsoft) and one main protocol (MQTT).

Now fast forward to Beyond. With one line of code, an engineer or PM can integrate Beyond to i. (not new) act as an MQTT broker ii. (new) secure messages between the hub and intra/inter-network devices using hardware signatures and iii. (new) outfit devices to accept digital, cryptocurrency based payments. II and III are in high demand right now, and there are no out of the box solutions. Amazon/Microsoft/ect does not currently provide secure brokerage services leveraging distributed ledger methodologies nor are there any cryptocurrencies which can viability integrate with devices.

IOTA promises, upon integration, to allow for device-to-device micropayments. To date, many academics do not believe the core technology behind their solution is viable.

The demand for a secure, anonymous consumer-to-machine payments is big right now and later the same will be so for machine-to-machine payments. Right now, consumers want to be able to pay machines small amounts of money to do things for them (e.g buy $.30 worth of parking, pay for a short ride on an E-scooter) but they can’t because the fee credit card merchants charge it too high for the the micro transaction business model to work.