DACH and Netherlands Financial Supervisor Registers (BaFin, FINMA, DNB)

Where this market publishes its structure

• BaFin company database (portal.mvp.bafin.de/database/InstInfo, CSV export) machine-readable, 5,701 firms; 2,264 German in-scope with a current permission; names + LEI (900 rows resolved via Wikidata P1278); 7 linked
• DNB public register (dnb.nl/en/public-register, page's own search endpoint + public detail pages) machine-readable, 1,864 rows in 7 registers; 308 Dutch-established institutions with URL + LEI; 8 linked; the CSV / XML bulk download and plain clients get Akamai 403
• FINMA authorised institutions lists (finma.ch beh.xlsx, fintech.xlsx, bourses.xlsx) machine-readable, 256 Swiss banks, securities firms, FinTech licensees and FMIs; names only; 4 linked; HEAD answers 400, GET with a browser UA reads (2026-10-21)
• Austrian FMA company database (fma.gv.at) not machine-readable: 403 to every client (2026-10-21); not bypassed
• BaFin ZahlInstInfo machine-readable, an agent register (agents of payment institutions), not licensees: not an edge source
• EBA Payment Institutions Register machine-readable, read by eu-psd2-payment-institutions; not re-read

Own = declares at least one integration itself; covered = visible only because an aggregator, standards body, regulator or partner contract names it; distribution-only = listed only on cloud marketplaces it sells through, a channel reported beside, never counted as its own declared integrations; undeclared = nothing we can read, so no number; declares_compatibility = providers with a `compatible` shape vote, report only (kin, 2026-10-13): never counted as own, never in depth or position.

Taxonomy how this market maps onto apis.io

Derived 2026-10-23 from the 42 providers in this market we could resolve in the catalog. The percentage is the share of those providers carrying each one; it describes the market, not the tag or industry. Tag groups have no page of their own yet, so they are listed unlinked.

share of resolved cohort carrying it; tags >=0.20 & >=3 members (max 12, junk dropped), tag_groups >=0.20 (cooccurrence, non-cross-cutting; max 8), industries >=0.20 (max 6), areas >=0.10 (max 6; areas are keyword-matched and sparse), capabilities L1 >=0.20 (max 8); derive-market-taxonomy.py

Leaders by position (provisional)

Provisional: grouped by position, depth compared within a position only. Distribution (cloud marketplaces) and iPaaS bridges are counted beside position, never inside it. Unknown-builder listings are left out of position shares and counted here.

gravity 1 · other companies invest to build on it

builds-on 1 · publishes apps on other platforms' stores

regulated 19 · named in a regulator's register or partners' contracts

standard 1 · listed by a voluntary standard's own directory

mixed 3 · no single mode dominates

distribution 3 · only sells through cloud marketplaces

undeclared 14 · declares nothing we can read: no number

Top workflows by market votes

Workflows (Arazzo) and their phrasing are generated by API Evangelist, ranked by market votes (integration edges in the graph, weighted by channel).

In-market workflows only: a step on the market provider's side maps to this market's business capabilities (), and the partner is not a generic export/notify app. Other workflows are counted as bridges (including any whose steps do not resolve to a capability yet). Methodology. In-market: 10; bridges: 0.