Softwr

APIs · head to head

Akoya vs Increase

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
Increase logo

Increase

APIs

Direct banking API for ACH, wires, real-time payments, accounts and cards

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • 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.; Increase the published per transaction rates exclude a monthly platform fee that Increase states varies by use case, so the transparent price page cannot produce a total cost and the material part of the deal is still negotiated privately.
  • They diverge on capability: Akoya covers FDX standard APIs, Increase covers ACH origination and receipt.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Akoya and Increase actually diverge.

Attributes where Akoya and Increase differ
AttributeAkoyaIncrease
PlatformsWebAPI, Web

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), 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 Increase

  • ACH origination and receipt
  • Domestic wires
  • Real-time payments
  • Bank accounts
  • Cards
  • Cheques
  • Sandbox and simulations
  • Audit and reconciliation data

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 Increase
  • A tax preparation product retrieving tax forms and cost basis directly from the institution rather than asking users to upload PDFsnot Increase
  • A lender that needs a permissioning trail defensible under CFPB section 1033 rather than a credential-sharing arrangementnot Increase
  • A bank that wants to meet data sharing obligations through one network connection instead of building and policing its own developer interfacenot Increase

Increase

  • A payroll or treasury product that needs to originate same-day ACH and wires under its own control rather than through a payment processornot Akoya
  • A marketplace that must hold seller balances in ledgered accounts with real account and routing numbersnot Akoya
  • A fintech that wants FedNow and RTP payouts so recipients are paid outside banking hoursnot Akoya
  • An engineering team that needs the underlying return codes and settlement timing visible in order to build correct reconciliation and retry logicnot 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.

Increase

  • The published per transaction rates exclude a monthly platform fee that Increase states varies by use case, so the transparent price page cannot produce a total cost and the material part of the deal is still negotiated privately.
  • Free allowances are deliberately small at ten account numbers and five physical cards, so any programme issuing accounts or cards at volume moves to quoted pricing almost immediately.
  • Banking is provided through partner banks, so programme approval, compliance obligations and the ability to launch at all depend on a bank relationship you do not control, and post-Synapse bank risk appetite has tightened considerably.
  • The API deliberately exposes payment rail mechanics rather than smoothing them, which is correct engineering but means a team without payments expertise will build reconciliation and return handling wrongly and only discover it when funds go astray.
  • Coverage is United States only, so a company with international payout needs runs a second provider and reconciles two ledgers, and the single API argument disappears at the first cross border customer.

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

Increase

On request
  • Increase Platform$undefined/month
    • Monthly fee quoted by use case and not published
    • Next-day ACH origination listed at 0.50 US dollars per transaction
    • Same-day ACH origination listed at 2.00 per transaction

Which should you pick?

Choose Akoya if

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

Choose Increase if

  • You need ach origination and receipt.
  • You work on API, Web.
  • You also want domestic wires.
Increase review

Questions people ask

Is Akoya or Increase better?
Neither clearly leads. Akoya starts at On request and Increase at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Akoya or Increase?
Akoya starts at On request and Increase at On request.
Does Akoya or Increase run on more platforms?
Akoya runs on Web. Increase runs on API, Web.
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 Increase is typically brought in for.
What can Akoya do that Increase cannot?
Akoya covers FDX standard APIs, Token-based access, Investment data, Accounts, balances and transactions. Increase covers ACH origination and receipt, Domestic wires, Real-time payments, Bank accounts.

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.

Increase: Does Increase publish its pricing?

Partly. Per transaction fees for ACH, wires, RTP, FedNow and cards are listed publicly. The monthly platform fee is not, and it is described only as varying by use case.

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.

Increase: Who holds the deposits?

Partner banks, not Increase itself. That relationship determines your programme approval, your compliance obligations and your risk if the bank changes appetite.

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.

Increase: Is it international?

No. Increase covers United States rails only, so cross border payouts require a second provider.

Akoya: Does it help with CFPB section 1033?

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

Increase: How is it different from a middleware BaaS platform?

It exposes the rails rather than abstracting them, showing real return codes and settlement timing. That suits teams who understand payments and punishes teams who do not.

Share

Related pages

More on Akoya

More on Increase

Keep looking

Other head to heads