niche · -0.9 capabilitymarket resourcedomainschema

Data Protection

Score 18.8 / 100 72 providers +6 via APIs 17 APIs Search apis.io →
Business capabilities this tag reaches
Business Continuity Management 1

Providers using this tag (72)

Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.

Exemplar 5 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 4 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 9 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 17 Limited public surface area
Emerging 22 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 11 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 4 Not yet scored

APIs with this tag (17)

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 4 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 2 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 4 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 4 Limited public surface area
Emerging 3 Early or largely undocumented

Companies reaching this through an API (6)

These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Data Protection” 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.

Confluence IBM NetApp Oracle Enterprise Manager Trellix VMware

Score breakdown

Frequency
49.8
log-scaled weighted occurrences
Breadth
0.9
spread across providers
Quality lift
30.4
mean composite of providers using it
Cohesion
0.0
strength of nearest seed neighbor

Related tags

Disaster Recovery 29 co-occurrences Backup 29 co-occurrences SaaS Backup 8 co-occurrences VMware 8 co-occurrences Cloud Backup 6 co-occurrences Backup and Recovery 6 co-occurrences Encryption 10 co-occurrences Backups 7 co-occurrences

Where this tag comes from

Provider tag72
Api tag17
Openapi tag1
Openapi op tag9

Cohort brief

Auto-generated

The 61 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Data Protection, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.

Providers
61
of 72 in the catalog
Mean Kin Score
31.2
+7.1 vs catalog 24.1
Mean Agent Readiness
15.3
+1.2 vs catalog 14.1
Spread
0–86.2
median 30 · σ 20
How the 61 split by band
Exemplar 5Strong 3Developing 8Thin 17Emerging 19Minimal 9
Facet averages, against the whole catalog
FacetThis cohortCatalogDifferenceScored
Developer Ergonomics 35 24.5 +10.5 61
Access Clarity 38.7 30 +8.7 61
Operational Transparency 20.8 13.2 +7.6 61
Contract Governance 12.3 9.7 +2.6 61
Discoverability 61.4 59.1 +2.3 61
Contract Quality 20.9 18.6 +2.3 61

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.

What this cohort publishes
ArtifactThis cohortCatalogDifference
MCP server (any) 14% 18% -4
MCP server (first-party) 15% 16% -1
Agent Skills 0% 0% 0
OAuth scopes 15% 13% +2
Security 94% 99% -5
Arazzo workflows 2% 1% +1
Governance rules 35% 36% -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.

Top by Kin Score
  1. 1 Acronis 86.2
  2. 2 Amazon KMS 76.8
  3. 3 AWS Backup 69.8
  4. 4 Microsoft Defender 67.9
  5. 5 Azure Backup 67.7
  6. 6 Cohesity 66.3
  7. 7 STACKIT 65.3
  8. 8 Pimloc 59.3
  9. 9 Druva 58.5
  10. 10 Slide 53.4
Top by Agent Readiness
  1. 1 Druva 56.2
  2. 2 Acronis 55.2
  3. 3 AWS Backup 46
  4. 4 Amazon KMS 44.6
  5. 5 Coro 44.6
  6. 6 Cohesity 43.5
  7. 7 Veeam 38.3
  8. 8 Eon 35.5
  9. 9 sqlguard-io 33.3
  10. 10 Infinidat 33.3
All 72 members of this roster resolve to a provider in the catalog; 61 carry a score (85%). The figures above describe the scored members only.
Coverage caveat. 49 of 61 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 14 November 2026, across 41591 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.

MCP server

One button, every client — Claude, Cursor, VS Code and the rest.

https://apis.io/mcp

Tools for tags

7 MCP tools reach this
  • find_tagsBrowse and filter every tag in the catalog.
  • get_cohortThis tag as a scored cohort — every provider carrying it, with scores.
  • cohort_statsPRO — the distribution across this tag: mean, median, band split, adoption rates.
  • cohort_rankingsPRO — the leaderboard, on composite AND agent-readiness axes.
  • apis_io_searchSTART HERE — APIs, providers and tags for one query, each with its total.
  • resolveTurn a domain, URL or GitHub org into the provider it belongs to.
  • find_cohortsEvery scored population of providers in the catalog.
All 92 tools →

Call it yourself

curl for this page
This tag
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/tags/data-protection"
All tags
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/tags?limit=25"
As a scored cohort (paid plan)
The distribution (Pro)

Calls without X-API-Key need no key. Calls with it need a paid plan — get a key.

Get an API key

Free tier, no form to fill in. Signing in shares your email address with us — we store it to create your key and to recognise you if you sign in with another provider. See our Privacy Policy and Terms.

A second provider on the same verified email joins the account you already have.