Open Banking
Providers using this tag (267)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 5 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 22 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 71 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 104 Limited public surface area
Emerging 36 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 29 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (108)
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
Strong 11 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 29 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 28 Limited public surface area
Emerging 29 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 10 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (9)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Open Banking” 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
267 providers carry this tag directly, and 274 counting the 5 narrower tags below and the 1 beneath them — 7 more to reach.
Related tags
Where this tag comes from
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 265 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Open Banking, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contract Quality | 35.3 | 17.6 | +17.7 | 265 |
| Developer Ergonomics | 40.2 | 23.2 | +17 | 265 |
| Discoverability | 67.9 | 58.1 | +9.8 | 265 |
| Access Clarity | 32 | 26.5 | +5.5 | 265 |
| Operational Transparency | 18.5 | 13.7 | +4.8 | 265 |
| Contract Governance | 10.7 | 6.3 | +4.4 | 265 |
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) | 9% | 14% | -5 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 9% | 12% | -3 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 45% | 11% | +34 |
| Security | 100% | 98% | +2 |
| Arazzo workflows | 4% | 2% | +2 |
| Governance rules | 13% | 14% | -1 |
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 Plaid 86.1
- 2 Klarna 71.8
- 3 MX Technologies 71
- 4 Token.io 70
- 5 Qonto 67.6
- 6 Trustly Group 65.4
- 7 iDenfy 62.7
- 8 Tink 62.3
- 9 Wealth Reader 61.8
- 10 Citizens Financial Group 61.6
- 1 Memo Bank 58.4
- 2 Qonto 57
- 3 Token.io 53.6
- 4 Lean Technologies 53.2
- 5 iBanFirst 53
- 6 Dwolla 52.9
- 7 Citi 52.3
- 8 Plaid 52.2
- 9 Chariot 51
- 10 GoCardless 50.3
Work with this as data
Every tag here is available over the APIs.io API and to AI agents over MCP.