Softwr

APIs · head to head

Akoya vs Bruno

Akoya logo

Akoya

APIs

Bank-owned, token-based open finance network that replaces screen scraping for US financial data

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Bruno logo

Bruno

APIs

Open-source IDE for API exploration with git-friendly collections

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Bruno has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Akoya coverage reaches several thousand institutions but does not match aggregators that can still scrape, so applications needing the long tail of small credit unions will run a second data provider alongside it.; Bruno native Git integration, the feature that distinguishes it from cloud API clients, is Pro only at $6 per user per month
  • They diverge on capability: Akoya covers FDX standard APIs, Bruno covers API Testing.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Akoya and Bruno actually diverge.

Attributes where Akoya and Bruno differ
AttributeAkoyaBruno
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquotefreemium
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWebWindows, MacOS, Linux
FoundedUnknown2022

Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (APIs).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Akoya

  • FDX standard APIs
  • Token-based access
  • Investment data
  • Accounts, balances and transactions
  • Statements and tax forms
  • Customer identity
  • Consumer permission management
  • Single integration

Only in Bruno

  • API Testing
  • Environment management
  • Git-friendly storage
  • GitHub
  • Git repositories
  • Local file system
  • Windows support
  • MacOS support

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Akoya

  • A wealth management platform that needs Fidelity brokerage holdings and tax lots, which cannot be scraped since Fidelity closed that route in October 2023not Bruno
  • A tax preparation product retrieving tax forms and cost basis directly from the institution rather than asking users to upload PDFsnot Bruno
  • A lender that needs a permissioning trail defensible under CFPB section 1033 rather than a credential-sharing arrangementnot Bruno
  • A bank that wants to meet data sharing obligations through one network connection instead of building and policing its own developer interfacenot Bruno

Bruno

  • Sending and testing HTTP requests from a local clientnot Akoya
  • Keeping API collections in Git rather than a vendor cloudnot Akoya
  • Offline API development without an accountnot Akoya
  • Importing and syncing OpenAPI specificationsnot Akoya

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Akoya

  • Coverage reaches several thousand institutions but does not match aggregators that can still scrape, so applications needing the long tail of small credit unions will run a second data provider alongside it.
  • The network is owned by large banks, so roadmap and coverage priorities reflect owner interests rather than those of the fintechs consuming the data, and a recipient has no leverage over which institutions are added next.
  • Data availability is decided institution by institution, meaning a bank may expose balances but not transactions or investments, and recipients must verify field-level coverage per institution rather than assume the FDX model is fully populated.
  • Pricing is unpublished and usage based, which makes it difficult to compare against aggregator pricing during a build-versus-buy decision and forces a sales cycle before you can model cost.
  • The token model requires the institution to have implemented its side, so newly onboarded institutions arrive on the institution timetable, not yours, and a launch dependent on a specific bank can slip badly.

Bruno

  • Native Git integration, the feature that distinguishes it from cloud API clients, is Pro only at $6 per user per month
  • OpenAPI syncs are capped at 5 a month on the free tier
  • SSO, SCIM and user management require Ultimate at $11 per user per month
  • Private workspaces are a paid feature
  • Advertised prices are annual rates

Pricing, plan by plan

Akoya

On request
  • Akoya Data Access$undefined/year
    • Usage-based pricing quoted by data product and call volume
    • Separate commercial terms for data recipients and for financial institutions joining the network
    • No published rate card

Bruno

Free
  • Open SourceFree
    • Core API Client
    • Limited Git integration
    • 2 Workspaces
  • Pro$6/month
    • Core API Client
    • Native Git integration
    • Unlimited Workspaces
  • Ultimate$11/month
    • Core API Client
    • Full Git integration
    • Unlimited Workspaces

Which should you pick?

Choose Akoya if

  • You need fdx standard apis.
  • You also want token-based access.
Akoya review

Choose Bruno if

  • You need api testing.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Windows, MacOS, Linux.
  • You also want environment management.
Bruno review

Questions people ask

Is Akoya or Bruno better?
Neither clearly leads. Akoya starts at On request and Bruno at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Akoya or Bruno?
Bruno has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Akoya and Free for Bruno.
Does Akoya or Bruno run on more platforms?
Akoya runs on Web. Bruno runs on Windows, MacOS, Linux.
Can I use Bruno for free?
Yes. Bruno has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Akoya starts at On request.
What is Akoya best used for?
Akoya is most often used for a wealth management platform that needs fidelity brokerage holdings and tax lots, which cannot be scraped since fidelity closed that route in october 2023, a tax preparation product retrieving tax forms and cost basis directly from the institution rather than asking users to upload pdfs, a lender that needs a permissioning trail defensible under cfpb section 1033 rather than a credential-sharing arrangement, a bank that wants to meet data sharing obligations through one network connection instead of building and policing its own developer interface. Of those, a wealth management platform that needs fidelity brokerage holdings and tax lots, which cannot be scraped since fidelity closed that route in october 2023 and a tax preparation product retrieving tax forms and cost basis directly from the institution rather than asking users to upload pdfs are not what Bruno is typically brought in for.
What can Akoya do that Bruno cannot?
Akoya covers FDX standard APIs, Token-based access, Investment data, Accounts, balances and transactions. Bruno covers API Testing, Environment management, Git-friendly storage, GitHub.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Akoya: Who owns Akoya?

A group of large US banks. It was spun out of Fidelity, which is why Fidelity data access runs through it.

Bruno: What is included in Bruno's free tier?

The Open Source plan includes the core API client, limited Git integration, and up to 2 workspaces at no cost. A 14-day free trial of the Ultimate plan is also available without requiring a credit card.

Source
Akoya: Is Akoya screen scraping?

No. It uses FDX standard APIs with OpenID Connect tokens, so credentials are never shared with or stored by the data recipient.

Bruno: What is the difference between Bruno Pro and Ultimate plans?

Pro ($6/month) includes native Git integration and unlimited workspaces. Ultimate ($11/month) adds SSO/SCIM support, audit logs, 24-hour support (vs. 48-hour), and an account manager. Ultimate supports unlimited OpenAPI syncs while Pro is limited to 5 per month.

Source
Akoya: Can we use Akoya alone instead of an aggregator?

Usually not. Its investment and large-institution coverage is excellent, but the long tail of smaller institutions is thinner, so most teams run both.

Bruno: How much does Bruno Pro save compared to other API tools?

The vendor claims Ultimate saves teams more than 70% versus Postman, though this comparison is promotional rather than a specific cost metric.

Source
Akoya: Does it help with CFPB section 1033?

It is designed around it, providing tokenised permissioned access and consumer revocation rather than credential sharing.

Share

Related pages

More on Akoya

More on Bruno

Keep looking

Other head to heads