Market Research
Providers using this tag (71)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 2 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 5 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 11 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 12 Limited public surface area
Emerging 17 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 23 Almost no public developer surface
Unrated 1 Not yet scored
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 →
Exemplar 1 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Thin 1 Limited public surface area
Emerging 1 Early or largely undocumented
Score breakdown
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 63 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Market Research, 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 | 34.5 | 26.5 | +8 | 63 |
| Discoverability | 61.9 | 58.1 | +3.8 | 63 |
| Contract Governance | 9 | 6.3 | +2.7 | 63 |
| Contract Quality | 20.1 | 17.6 | +2.5 | 63 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 25.4 | 23.2 | +2.2 | 63 |
| Operational Transparency | 13.4 | 13.7 | -0.3 | 63 |
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) | 30% | 14% | +16 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 28% | 12% | +16 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 20% | 11% | +9 |
| Security | 98% | 98% | 0 |
| Arazzo workflows | 3% | 2% | +1 |
| Governance rules | 17% | 14% | +3 |
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 SimilarWeb 68.7
- 2 Wappalyzer 68.1
- 3 Minds 58.4
- 4 SocialListeningAPI 57.4
- 5 Forsta 55.7
- 6 BuiltWith 54.9
- 7 Morning Consult 54.7
- 8 Cint 52.9
- 9 Clozd 51.1
- 10 Listen Labs 49.6
- 1 Minds 63
- 2 Clozd 59.5
- 3 Listen Labs 52.2
- 4 SimilarWeb 50
- 5 Wappalyzer 50
- 6 BuiltWith 48
- 7 IBISWorld 47.1
- 8 SurveyMonkey 45.7
- 9 Cint 44.8
- 10 SocialListeningAPI 36.6
Coverage caveat. 53 of 63 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 5 October 2026, across 29093 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.