Gulf and Southeast Asia Open Finance

Where this market publishes its structure

• MAS Financial Institutions Directory (eservices.mas.gov.sg/fid, Banking + Payments sectors, detail pages) machine-readable, 704 institutions; 466 read (money-changing-only dropped); own Website on each detail page; 30 providers linked
• Bank Indonesia payment-system licence register (bi.go.id Daftar Lembaga Berizin, 'Unduh' XLSX) machine-readable, 572 licensed rows in scope, 67 revoked (context only); 11 providers linked
• OJK LPBBTI directory (licensed P2P lending, Juli 2026 PDF) machine-readable, 94 platforms; 1 link (amartha)
• Bank Negara Malaysia list of regulatees (payment systems) machine-readable, 26 named institutions, names only; 10 with a Wikidata P856; 0 links
• SAMA licensed entities / open banking lists (sama.gov.sa) not machine-readable: connection timeout / JS-rendered portal; register pages 404; SharePoint _api returns the HTML shell (2026-10-19)
• Fintech Saudi directory (fintechsaudi.com) not machine-readable: an initiative directory, not a licence register; not read
• CBUAE licensed financial institutions + Open Finance (Al Tareq) participants not machine-readable: centralbank.ae HTTP 403 to non-browser clients; altareq.ae no answer (2026-10-19)
• Bank Indonesia SNAP participant list not machine-readable: the SNAP page publishes no participant register
• APIX marketplace (apixplatform.com) not machine-readable: login-gated error page; a marketplace, not a register

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 2026-10-19 from the 58 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 2 · other companies invest to build on it

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

regulated 34 · named in a regulator's register or partners' contracts

standard 2 · listed by a voluntary standard's own directory

long-tail 1 · reached only through iPaaS bridges

distribution 6 · only sells through cloud marketplaces

undeclared 12 · 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: 64; bridges: 0.