Compliance
Providers using this tag (797)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 19 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 56 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 164 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 146 Limited public surface area
Emerging 270 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 139 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 3 Not yet scored
APIs with this tag (288)
Ranked by the provider's API Evangelist rating — the Kin Score is scored per provider, not per API, so every API of a provider shares its band. How the rating works →
Exemplar 34 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 58 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 72 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 63 Limited public surface area
Emerging 46 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 15 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (142)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Compliance” but do not classify their business under it. Listed unranked and kept out of the count above, because one tagged operation is not a statement about what a company does.
Show all 142 companies ↓
Score breakdown
Where this tag sits
797 providers carry this tag directly, and 927 counting the 8 narrower tags below — 130 more to reach.
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Markets provisional
Kin Score markets whose measured providers carry this tag. Share is the fraction of the market's measured providers that carry it — it describes the market, not this tag.
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 773 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Compliance, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Access Clarity | 35.6 | 23.9 | +11.7 | 773 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 29.4 | 23.2 | +6.2 | 773 |
| Operational Transparency | 18.1 | 13 | +5.1 | 773 |
| Discoverability | 62.4 | 57.9 | +4.5 | 773 |
| Contract Quality | 21.5 | 17.2 | +4.3 | 773 |
| Contract Governance | 9.9 | 6.5 | +3.4 | 773 |
A facet is averaged over the members that carry it, not over the whole cohort — the “Scored” column is that count. Averaging an absent facet as zero would score our own coverage gaps as the providers’ posture.
| Artifact | This cohort | Catalog | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCP server (any) | 19% | 13% | +6 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 19% | 12% | +7 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 13% | 11% | +2 |
| Security | 99% | 98% | +1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 2% | 2% | 0 |
| Governance rules | 15% | 16% | -1 |
mcp_pct counts any mcp/ artifact including ones API Evangelist derived from the provider OpenAPI; mcp_first_party_pct counts only servers the provider publishes. Prefer the latter.
- 1 Uphold 79.6
- 2 Postman 78
- 3 Paubox 77
- 4 ControlUp 75.6
- 5 Hive Civilization 74.7
- 6 IBANforge 72
- 7 OneTrust 71.7
- 8 Vaquill AI 71.6
- 9 AxonFlow 71.3
- 10 FeedOracle Technologies 70.1
- 1 Vaquill AI 67
- 2 FeedOracle Technologies 63.6
- 3 Paubox 60.9
- 4 Didit 60.3
- 5 SanctionsKit 58
- 6 Topograph 57.3
- 7 Lukka 56
- 8 Saperly 55.8
- 9 Tesser 55.8
- 10 Postman 55.6
Coverage caveat. 681 of 773 scored members had under half their catalog-attributable points satisfied at all (catalog_earned / catalog_max < 0.5). They are INCLUDED in the mean above. A large share here means the cohort mean is partly a measurement of how far our enrichment reached, not only of how these providers publish.Generated from the catalog build of 24 October 2026, across 31984 providers, using the same computation served by the APIs.io cohort API. Briefs are published for rosters of 5 or more scored providers; below that a distribution is not meaningful.
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.