Markets · bedrock market · provisional

HR and Payroll

Platform market (app stores) plus connector coverage. The Kin Score Market layer reads each provider in its market: who it integrates with, how deep those integrations go, and where the market publishes its own structure. Methodology.

25providers measured
20 (80.0%)declare their own
0 (0.0%)covered by others only
2 (8.0%)distribution only (sell through, not integrations)
3 (12.0%)undeclared
6declare compatibility (report only, not weighted)
2in-market workflows shown (4 bridges)
Provisional. Provisional and unweighted: the Market layer is not part of the composite or agent readiness. Leader lists are read within a position, never as one ranking. A provider that declares nothing we can read is shown as undeclared, with no number: we never infer integrations.

Where this market publishes its structure

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 25 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.

TagsHuman Resources 76%, Payroll 64%, Employee Benefits 40%, Applicant Tracking 36%, Benefits 36%, HRIS 28%, HCM 28%, Recruiting 24%, Workforce 24%, Workforce Management 20%
Tag groupsHuman Resources 88%, Scheduling 76%, Insurance 40%, Staffing 32%, HRIS 28%
IndustriesHuman Resources & Payroll 96%
CapabilitiesHuman Capital Management 88%

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 5 · other companies invest to build on it

ProviderDepthIntegrationsIn / outUnknown builderDistributioniPaaS bridgeMix
Workday 70.9 487 348 / 139 0 1 34 partner-built 85%, provider-built 10%, ipaas-bridge 4%
ADP 51.8 306 228 / 78 0 2 1 partner-built 89%, provider-built 10%
BambooHR 51.8 208 156 / 52 0 0 5 partner-built 75%, provider-built 21%, ipaas-bridge 2%, builds-on-platform 1%
Greenhouse 51.8 413 385 / 28 3 0 0 partner-built 94%, provider-built 5%, unknown 1%
Paychex 51.8 188 136 / 52 0 0 1 partner-built 73%, provider-built 25%, ipaas-bridge 1%, builds-on-platform 1%

builds-on 9 · publishes apps on other platforms' stores

ProviderDepthIntegrationsIn / outUnknown builderDistributioniPaaS bridgeMix
Gusto 53.2 4 0 / 4 0 0 0 contract 25%, builds-on-platform 75%
DailyPay 51.7 3 0 / 3 0 0 0 builds-on-platform 100%
Rippling 43.5 10 0 / 10 0 0 2 ipaas-bridge 20%, contract 10%, standard 20%, builds-on-platform 50%
Remote 42.6 9 0 / 9 0 0 2 ipaas-bridge 22%, contract 11%, standard 22%, builds-on-platform 44%
Charthop 37.0 9 0 / 9 0 0 3 ipaas-bridge 33%, standard 11%, builds-on-platform 56%
Connecteam 35.8 7 0 / 7 0 1 2 ipaas-bridge 29%, builds-on-platform 57%, distribution 14%
Lever 29.6 8 0 / 8 0 0 4 ipaas-bridge 50%, standard 12%, builds-on-platform 38%
Namely 29.6 4 0 / 4 0 0 2 ipaas-bridge 50%, builds-on-platform 50%
Sense Talent Labs 17.2 thin 1 0 / 1 0 0 0 builds-on-platform 100%

coverage 3 · reaches banks, carriers, systems or channels (an aggregator)

ProviderDepthIntegrationsIn / outUnknown builderDistributioniPaaS bridgeMix
Finch 52.8 292 0 / 292 0 0 0 coverage 100%
Merge 49.4 124 0 / 124 0 1 2 ipaas-bridge 2%, coverage 93%, builds-on-platform 5%, distribution 1%
Kombo 47.1 155 0 / 155 0 0 0 coverage 100%

core 2 · builds the connectors its customers need

ProviderDepthIntegrationsIn / outUnknown builderDistributioniPaaS bridgeMix
UKG 52.3 330 115 / 215 0 1 0 partner-built 37%, provider-built 61%, builds-on-platform 1%
Deel 47.7 39 0 / 39 17 0 3 provider-built 41%, ipaas-bridge 8%, standard 5%, builds-on-platform 3%, unknown 44%

mixed 1 · no single mode dominates

ProviderDepthIntegrationsIn / outUnknown builderDistributioniPaaS bridgeMix
Paylocity 35.6 429 0 / 429 425 0 1 unknown 99%

distribution 2 · only sells through cloud marketplaces

ProviderDepthIntegrationsIn / outUnknown builderDistributioniPaaS bridgeMix
Bindbee 19.2 thin 2 0 / 2 0 2 0 distribution 100%
Worklittle 9.6 thin 1 0 / 1 0 2 0 distribution 100%

undeclared 3 · declares nothing we can read: no number

ProviderDepthIntegrationsIn / outUnknown builderDistributioniPaaS bridgeMix
Kota undeclared-----
Nursa undeclared-----
Smart Pension undeclared-----

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 (BC-300), 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: 2; bridges: 4.

WorkflowBetweenVotesWeightedArazzo
Okta
Workday ↔ Okta 2 0.8 workflow generated by API Evangelist
Greenhouse
Workday ↔ Greenhouse 1 0.4 workflow generated by API Evangelist

Generated 2026-10-24 from API Evangelist's own files; nothing on this page is a model's judgement. Provisional and unweighted; not part of the Kin Score composite or agent readiness. Read the Market layer methodology. Disagree with an edge? Every edge cites its evidence and can be corrected through the normal correction path.