niche · -1.2 market domain

Regulatory

Score 18.3 / 100 49 providers +14 via APIs 22 APIs Search apis.io →

Providers using this tag (49)

Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.

Exemplar 1 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Developing 8 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 14 Limited public surface area
Emerging 7 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 19 Almost no public developer surface

APIs with this tag (22)

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 →

Strong 3 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 4 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 8 Limited public surface area
Emerging 4 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 3 Almost no public developer surface

Companies reaching this through an API (14)

These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Regulatory” 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.

Bloomberg Financial Solutions Bloomberg Sustainable Finance Products Clean Harbors Fox Rothschild iBanFirst Independence Blue Cross MetricStream Murex Pagar.me Refinitiv Eikon The Bank of London Twelve Data USPTO Zavu

Score breakdown

Frequency
50.1
log-scaled weighted occurrences
Breadth
1.1
spread across providers
Quality lift
24.7
mean composite of providers using it
Cohesion
3.5
strength of nearest seed neighbor

Related tags

Environmental 6 co-occurrences Quality Management 6 co-occurrences Intellectual Property 5 co-occurrences ESG 7 co-occurrences Compliance 30 co-occurrences Governance 7 co-occurrences Financial Data 6 co-occurrences Legal 6 co-occurrences

Where this tag comes from

Provider tag49
Api tag22
Openapi tag2
Openapi op tag10

Cohort brief

Auto-generated

The 48 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Regulatory, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.

Providers
48
of 49 in the catalog
Mean Kin Score
23.9
+1.7 vs catalog 22.2
Mean Agent Readiness
11.1
-0.9 vs catalog 12
Spread
2.4–76.1
median 23.5 · σ 17
How the 48 split by band
Exemplar 1Strong 0Developing 8Thin 14Emerging 7Minimal 18
Facet averages, against the whole catalog
FacetThis cohortCatalogDifferenceScored
Contract Governance 9.7 6.5 +3.2 48
Access Clarity 27.1 23.9 +3.2 48
Discoverability 60.8 57.9 +2.9 48
Contract Quality 19.1 17.2 +1.9 48
Developer Ergonomics 23.2 23.2 0 48
Operational Transparency 11.8 13 -1.2 48

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.

What this cohort publishes
ArtifactThis cohortCatalogDifference
MCP server (any) 4% 13% -9
MCP server (first-party) 4% 12% -8
Agent Skills 0% 0% 0
OAuth scopes 10% 11% -1
Security 100% 98% +2
Arazzo workflows 0% 2% -2
Governance rules 27% 16% +11

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.

Top by Kin Score
  1. 1 Veeva 76.1
  2. 2 SingleFile 52.6
  3. 3 EU Open Data Portal 50.3
  4. 4 Qualio 50
  5. 5 Google Cloud Assured Workloads 45.4
  6. 6 AgeChecker.Net 43.2
  7. 7 Harbor Compliance 41.3
  8. 8 HMRC UK Tax Authority 41.2
  9. 9 Rhizome Ai 40.4
  10. 10 Meddra 39.2
Top by Agent Readiness
  1. 1 Veeva 43
  2. 2 Rhizome Ai 40.7
  3. 3 SingleFile 34.5
  4. 4 Regulations.gov 30.8
  5. 5 AgeChecker.Net 30.2
  6. 6 Meddra 29.3
  7. 7 SEC EDGAR 29.2
  8. 8 Qualio 27
  9. 9 FDIC 26.5
  10. 10 Google Cloud Assured Workloads 24.6
All 49 members of this roster resolve to a provider in the catalog; 48 carry a score (98%). The figures above describe the scored members only.
Coverage caveat. 42 of 48 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.

MCP server

One button, every client — Claude, Cursor, VS Code and the rest.

https://apis.io/mcp

Tools for tags

7 MCP tools reach this
  • find_tagsBrowse and filter every tag in the catalog.
  • get_cohortThis tag as a scored cohort — every provider carrying it, with scores.
  • cohort_statsPRO — the distribution across this tag: mean, median, band split, adoption rates.
  • cohort_rankingsPRO — the leaderboard, on composite AND agent-readiness axes.
  • apis_io_searchSTART HERE — APIs, providers and tags for one query, each with its total.
  • resolveTurn a domain, URL or GitHub org into the provider it belongs to.
  • find_cohortsEvery scored population of providers in the catalog.
All 92 tools →

Call it yourself

curl for this page
This tag
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/tags/regulatory"
All tags
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/tags?limit=25"
As a scored cohort
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/cohorts/tag/regulatory"
The distribution (Pro)
curl "https://apis.io/api/v1/cohorts/tag/regulatory/stats" \
  -H "X-API-Key: $APIS_IO_KEY"

Discovery needs no key. Ratings and market analysis are Pro.

Get an API key

Free tier, no form to fill in. Signing in shares your email address with us — we store it to create your key and to recognise you if you sign in with another provider. See our Privacy Policy and Terms.

A second provider on the same verified email joins the account you already have.