emerging · -1.7 market domain

HCM

Score 20.7 / 100 34 providers +4 via APIs 22 APIs Search apis.io →
Variants seen in the corpus: Human Capital ManagementHCM

Providers using this tag (34)

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

Strong 3 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 10 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 7 Limited public surface area
Emerging 8 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 6 Almost no public developer surface

APIs with this tag (22)

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 →

Strong 2 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 10 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Emerging 10 Early or largely undocumented

Companies reaching this through an API (4)

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

HR & People Oracle Roper Technologies SAP

Score breakdown

Frequency
46.5
log-scaled weighted occurrences
Breadth
0.8
spread across providers
Quality lift
33.4
mean composite of providers using it
Cohesion
14.8
strength of nearest seed neighbor

Where this tag sits

Human Resources broader

Related tags

Time and Attendance 8 co-occurrences Benefits 13 co-occurrences Talent Management 7 co-occurrences Payroll 28 co-occurrences Workers 8 co-occurrences Workforce Management 13 co-occurrences Time Off 5 co-occurrences Human Resources 25 co-occurrences

Where this tag comes from

Provider tag34
Api tag22

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.

MarketShare of the market's providers
HR and Payroll28%

Cohort brief

Auto-generated

The 32 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged HCM, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.

Providers
32
of 34 in the catalog
Mean Kin Score
33.7
+11.5 vs catalog 22.2
Mean Agent Readiness
20.9
+8.9 vs catalog 12
Spread
2.9–62.3
median 36.8 · σ 16.2
How the 32 split by band
Exemplar 0Strong 3Developing 10Thin 7Emerging 8Minimal 4
Facet averages, against the whole catalog
FacetThis cohortCatalogDifferenceScored
Contract Quality 32.6 17.2 +15.4 32
Operational Transparency 25.6 13 +12.6 32
Developer Ergonomics 33.2 23.2 +10 32
Discoverability 67.1 57.9 +9.2 32
Contract Governance 14.3 6.5 +7.8 32
Access Clarity 29.6 23.9 +5.7 32

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) 9% 13% -4
MCP server (first-party) 9% 12% -3
Agent Skills 0% 0% 0
OAuth scopes 47% 11% +36
Security 100% 98% +2
Arazzo workflows 22% 2% +20
Governance rules 47% 16% +31

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 Workday Business Processes 62.3
  2. 2 Namely 56.4
  3. 3 Workday 55.9
  4. 4 Harri 52.6
  5. 5 Workday Benefits 51
  6. 6 PeopleSoft 49.8
  7. 7 Workday Advanced Compensation 48.6
  8. 8 KolayIK 48.3
  9. 9 Workday Extend 46.5
  10. 10 Workday Integration 45.6
Top by Agent Readiness
  1. 1 Workday Recruiting 37.4
  2. 2 Workday Advanced Compensation 35.9
  3. 3 Harri 35.8
  4. 4 ADP 35.7
  5. 5 Workday 34.4
  6. 6 Workday Benefits 34.2
  7. 7 Workday Business Processes 33.4
  8. 8 SAP Fieldglass 31.9
  9. 9 Workday Extend 30
  10. 10 Workday Integration 28.9
All 34 members of this roster resolve to a provider in the catalog; 32 carry a score (94%). The figures above describe the scored members only.
Coverage caveat. 22 of 32 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.

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/hcm"
All tags
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/tags?limit=25"
As a scored cohort
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/cohorts/tag/hcm"
The distribution (Pro)
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/cohorts/tag/hcm/stats" \
  -H "X-API-Key: $APIS_IO_KEY"

Discovery needs no key. Ratings and market analysis are Pro.

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.