Japan FSA Registered Fintech (crypto exchanges, stablecoin intermediaries, funds transfer, bank-API agents, prepaid)

Where this market publishes its structure

• FSA Crypto-asset Exchange Service Providers, English list (en_kasoutuka, 30 Sep 2026) machine-readable, 27 providers, English name + corporate number + assets handled; 2 linked (bitflyer, coincheck), Coinbase Japan held
• FSA Crypto-asset Exchange Service Providers, Japanese master (menkyoj/kasoutuka) machine-readable, 27 rows; Japanese names attached by corporate number
• FSA Electronic Payment Instrument Exchange Service Providers (denshikessaisyudan, 27 Aug 2026) machine-readable, 2 stablecoin intermediaries (SBI VC Trade, Coincheck); 1 linked
• FSA Funds Transfer Service Providers (menkyoj/shikin_idou, 30 Sep 2026, Japanese) machine-readable, 84 providers, type 1/2/3; 2 linked
• FSA Electronic Payment Services Operators (menkyoj/dendai, 31 Aug 2026, Japanese) machine-readable, 124 bank-API intermediaries; 3 linked
• FSA Prepaid Payment Instrument Issuers, third-party type (menkyoj/daisan, 30 Sep 2026, Japanese) machine-readable, 787 issuers, mostly retailers / railways; 2 linked
• FSA own-business prepaid issuers (menkyoj/jika) not machine-readable: not read by choice: retailers' own gift cards, end-users of prepaid, outside the market
• Website column on any FSA list not machine-readable: the FSA lists publish no website; identity via corporate number -> Wikidata P3225 (435 of 1,024 rows resolved)

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 2026-10-22 from the 22 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.

undeclared 22 · declares nothing we can read: no number