Financial Services
Providers using this tag (1261)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 22 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 61 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 140 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 164 Limited public surface area
Emerging 411 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 456 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (57)
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 3 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 2 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 16 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 11 Limited public surface area
Emerging 22 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 3 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (10)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Financial Services” 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.
Score breakdown
Where this tag sits
1261 providers carry this tag directly, and 2525 counting the 8 narrower tags below and the 34 beneath them — 1264 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 1153 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Financial Services, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Discoverability | 58.6 | 59.1 | -0.5 | 1153 |
| Contract Governance | 9 | 9.7 | -0.7 | 1153 |
| Access Clarity | 28.9 | 30 | -1.1 | 1153 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 22.4 | 24.5 | -2.1 | 1153 |
| Operational Transparency | 10.9 | 13.2 | -2.3 | 1153 |
| Contract Quality | 14.8 | 18.6 | -3.8 | 1153 |
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) | 10% | 18% | -8 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 10% | 16% | -6 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 17% | 13% | +4 |
| Security | 99% | 99% | 0 |
| Arazzo workflows | 1% | 1% | 0 |
| Governance rules | 25% | 36% | -11 |
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 Xero 87.1
- 2 Stripe 82
- 3 Upstox 77.4
- 4 Alpaca 77
- 5 Adyen 73.6
- 6 Amazon B2B Data Interchange 73.1
- 7 Cymetica 72.6
- 8 Blnk Finance 71.3
- 9 Forage 71.2
- 10 Stax 71.1
- 1 Mollie 73.2
- 2 Cymetica 73
- 3 Alpaca 69
- 4 Xero 61.3
- 5 Clear Street 60.8
- 6 nCino 60.4
- 7 Upstox 59.8
- 8 arcandledger-com 58.9
- 9 Stripe 58.5
- 10 uetr.ai - UETR and SWIFT Payment Tracking 58.3
Coverage caveat. 1073 of 1153 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.