Mortgage
MortgagesMortgage TechnologyMortgage
Providers using this tag (144)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Strong 2 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 16 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 21 Limited public surface area
Emerging 46 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 59 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (28)
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 →
Developing 12 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 7 Limited public surface area
Emerging 9 Early or largely undocumented
Companies reaching this through an API (6)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Mortgage” 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.
| Market | Share of the market's providers |
|---|---|
| Consumer Lending Licensing (UK, US, Canada credit licence registers) | 20% |
| Real Estate and Proptech | 20% |
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 137 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Mortgage, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contract Governance | 5.8 | 6.5 | -0.7 | 137 |
| Access Clarity | 22.6 | 23.9 | -1.3 | 137 |
| Discoverability | 55.8 | 57.9 | -2.1 | 137 |
| Contract Quality | 14.1 | 17.2 | -3.1 | 137 |
| Operational Transparency | 9.1 | 13 | -3.9 | 137 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 18.4 | 23.2 | -4.8 | 137 |
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) | 5% | 13% | -8 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 4% | 12% | -8 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 12% | 11% | +1 |
| Security | 99% | 98% | +1 |
| Arazzo workflows | 3% | 2% | +1 |
| Governance rules | 9% | 16% | -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 Freddie Mac 61.1
- 2 Total Expert 60.1
- 3 Notarize 54
- 4 Ocrolus 53.9
- 5 PEXA 53.9
- 6 Landmark Information Group 52.4
- 7 Truework 46.7
- 8 Hometrack 45.3
- 9 First American Financial 43.6
- 10 ATTOM 43.3
- 1 nCino 57.6
- 2 Landmark Information Group 47
- 3 PEXA 45.7
- 4 Total Expert 42.4
- 5 Notarize 41.6
- 6 Ocrolus 40
- 7 Truework 36.5
- 8 Hometrack 35.5
- 9 Paragon Bank 35.5
- 10 Interhyp 33.2
Coverage caveat. 132 of 137 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.