Stocks
StockEquitiesStocks
Providers using this tag (107)
Ranked by API Evangelist rating — Exemplar and Strong are expanded by default.
Exemplar 3 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 11 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 28 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 31 Limited public surface area
Emerging 19 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 15 Almost no public developer surface
APIs with this tag (101)
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 9 Complete, well-documented, and agent-ready
Strong 19 Solid coverage with minor gaps
Developing 25 Usable, with meaningful gaps to close
Thin 26 Limited public surface area
Emerging 13 Early or largely undocumented
Minimal 9 Almost no public developer surface
Companies reaching this through an API (53)
These companies publish an API, specification or operation carrying “Stocks” 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 |
|---|---|
| Capital Markets and Trading | 48% |
| Private Markets and Fund Administration (ILPA, broker-dealer registration, options market-data vendors) | 34% |
Cohort brief
Auto-generatedThe 102 providers in the APIs.io catalog tagged Stocks, scored on the Kin Score. Every figure below is computed from the catalog — nothing here is written.
| Facet | This cohort | Catalog | Difference | Scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Developer Ergonomics | 41.9 | 24.5 | +17.4 | 102 |
| Access Clarity | 42.4 | 30 | +12.4 | 102 |
| Contract Quality | 28.1 | 18.6 | +9.5 | 102 |
| Operational Transparency | 22.5 | 13.2 | +9.3 | 102 |
| Discoverability | 65 | 59.1 | +5.9 | 102 |
| Contract Governance | 14 | 9.7 | +4.3 | 102 |
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) | 34% | 18% | +16 |
| MCP server (first-party) | 35% | 16% | +19 |
| Agent Skills | 0% | 0% | 0 |
| OAuth scopes | 20% | 13% | +7 |
| Security | 99% | 99% | 0 |
| Arazzo workflows | 2% | 1% | +1 |
| Governance rules | 55% | 36% | +19 |
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 Alpaca 77
- 2 Financial Modeling Prep 69
- 3 Twelve Data 66.9
- 4 SiftingIO 65.3
- 5 Dinari 63.1
- 6 Adanos Market Sentiment API 63
- 7 ThetaData 61.3
- 8 EODHD 60.7
- 9 Bargo Congress Trades API 59.5
- 10 Market Data 59.3
- 1 Alpaca 69
- 2 Massive (formerly Polygon.io) 59.9
- 3 Twelve Data 58.9
- 4 LinqAlpha 55.5
- 5 EODHD 54.4
- 6 Aisles Inc. 54.1
- 7 drillr 54
- 8 Morningstar 53.7
- 9 Alpha Vantage 51.4
- 10 Financial Modeling Prep 50.8
Coverage caveat. 67 of 102 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.