Latin America
LatAmLatin America
Providers using this tag (182)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Strong 13 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 25 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 23 Limited public surface area
Emerging 46 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 75 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (3)
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 →
Thin 2 Limited public surface area
Emerging 1 Early or largely undocumented
Companies reaching this through an API (1)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Latin America” 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
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 168 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Latin America, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Discoverability | 59.8 | 59.1 | +0.7 | 168 |
| Contract Quality | 17.7 | 18.6 | -0.9 | 168 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 23.3 | 24.5 | -1.2 | 168 |
| Contract Governance | 7.5 | 9.7 | -2.2 | 168 |
| Operational Transparency | 10.6 | 13.2 | -2.6 | 168 |
| Access Clarity | 26.6 | 30 | -3.4 | 168 |
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) | 11% | 18% | -7 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 11% | 16% | -5 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 11% | 13% | -2 |
| Security | 100% | 99% | +1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 1% | 1% | 0 |
| Governance rules | 29% | 36% | -7 |
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 Clarafintech 65.1
- 2 Airtm 61.1
- 3 Truora 60.8
- 4 NovoPayment 60.5
- 5 Ripio 59.8
- 6 Unico 58.5
- 7 Buk 57.1
- 8 Koin 57
- 9 AgendaPro 56.8
- 10 Caliza 56
- 1 Airtm 50.4
- 2 Samu 47.9
- 3 Skydropx 44.1
- 4 Buk 43.6
- 5 Clarafintech 42.8
- 6 AlterEstate 41.7
- 7 Caliza 40.3
- 8 AgendaPro 39.9
- 9 Simetrik 39.6
- 10 Koin 37.8
Coverage caveat. 153 of 168 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.