Insurance
Providers using this tag (682)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Strong 16 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 65 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 79 Limited public surface area
Emerging 252 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 266 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (149)
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 6 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 38 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 37 Limited public surface area
Emerging 55 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 10 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (32)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Insurance” 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
682 providers carry this tag directly, and 775 counting the 20 narrower tags below and the 2 beneath them — 93 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.
| Market | Share of the market's providers |
|---|---|
| Insurance and Insurtech | 100% |
| Payer Interoperability (CAQH CORE, X12, Da Vinci, WEDI) | 24% |
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 659 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Insurance, 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 | 24.2 | 23.9 | +0.3 | 659 |
| Discoverability | 57.7 | 57.9 | -0.2 | 659 |
| Contract Governance | 6.3 | 6.5 | -0.2 | 659 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 18.9 | 23.2 | -4.3 | 659 |
| Operational Transparency | 8.2 | 13 | -4.8 | 659 |
| Contract Quality | 10.8 | 17.2 | -6.4 | 659 |
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) | 7% | 13% | -6 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 6% | 12% | -6 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 12% | 11% | +1 |
| Security | 99% | 98% | +1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 1% | 2% | -1 |
| Governance rules | 8% | 16% | -8 |
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 Candid Health 66.2
- 2 Healthie 66.1
- 3 Canopy Connect 65.9
- 4 hi.health 65.3
- 5 1Fort 64.5
- 6 Guidewire 63.6
- 7 Groupe BPCE 62.5
- 8 Kota 61.4
- 9 IVANS 58.4
- 10 Zocdoc 58.3
- 1 Clearspeed 56.9
- 2 Socotra 53.2
- 3 hi.health 52.7
- 4 Mireye 52.5
- 5 Affinda 51.5
- 6 Zocdoc 50.1
- 7 HealthSherpa 47.9
- 8 Centene 47.7
- 9 PlanSource 46.4
- 10 Levitate 46.3
Coverage caveat. 622 of 659 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.