Softwr

APIs · head to head

Akoya vs Pusher

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
Pusher logo

Pusher

APIs

Realtime messaging API for building live features into apps

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Pusher 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.; Pusher the free Sandbox plan is capped at 100 concurrent connections, which is quickly outgrown by production apps.
  • They diverge on capability: Akoya covers FDX standard APIs, Pusher covers Pub/sub channels.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Akoya and Pusher actually diverge.

Attributes where Akoya and Pusher differ
AttributeAkoyaPusher
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquotefreemium
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWebweb, ios, android, api

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 Pusher

  • Pub/sub channels
  • Presence channels
  • Client libraries
  • Webhooks
  • 24/7 monitoring
  • Priority 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 Pusher
  • A tax preparation product retrieving tax forms and cost basis directly from the institution rather than asking users to upload PDFsnot Pusher
  • A lender that needs a permissioning trail defensible under CFPB section 1033 rather than a credential-sharing arrangementnot Pusher
  • A bank that wants to meet data sharing obligations through one network connection instead of building and policing its own developer interfacenot Pusher

Pusher

  • Adding live chat to a web or mobile appnot Akoya
  • Showing realtime presence of online usersnot Akoya
  • Pushing live notifications or dashboard updatesnot Akoya
  • Building collaborative features without managing WebSocket serversnot 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.

Pusher

  • The free Sandbox plan is capped at 100 concurrent connections, which is quickly outgrown by production apps.
  • Pricing jumps sharply between tiers (e.g. $49 to $99 to $299), leaving few options for teams with moderate but growing usage.
  • Priority support with faster response times costs an additional $3,000/month on top of plan pricing.

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

Pusher

Free
  • SandboxFree
    • 200k messages/day
    • 100 concurrent connections
    • Standard support
  • Startup$49/month
    • 1M messages/day
    • 500 concurrent connections
  • Pro$99/month
    • 4M messages/day
    • 2,000 concurrent connections
  • Business$299/month
    • 10M messages/day
    • 5,000 concurrent connections
    • Premium support

Which should you pick?

Choose Akoya if

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

Choose Pusher if

  • You need pub/sub channels.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on web, ios, android, api.
  • You also want presence channels.
Pusher review

Questions people ask

Is Akoya or Pusher better?
Neither clearly leads. Akoya starts at On request and Pusher at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Akoya or Pusher?
Pusher has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Akoya and Free for Pusher.
Does Akoya or Pusher run on more platforms?
Akoya runs on Web. Pusher runs on web, ios, android, api.
Can I use Pusher for free?
Yes. Pusher 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 Pusher is typically brought in for.
What can Akoya do that Pusher cannot?
Akoya covers FDX standard APIs, Token-based access, Investment data, Accounts, balances and transactions. Pusher covers Pub/sub channels, Presence channels, Client libraries, Webhooks.

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.

Pusher: What does Pusher cost?

Pusher Channels offers a free Sandbox plan (200k messages/day, 100 connections) and paid plans starting at $49/month for Startup, scaling up through Pro, Business, and several higher tiers up to $1,199/month, plus custom Enterprise pricing.

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.

Pusher: Can I change or cancel my plan?

Yes, customers can log into the dashboard and adjust their plan at any time, including upgrading, downgrading, or cancelling.

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.

Pusher: How is usage metered?

Usage is measured by concurrent connections and messages per day; a message counts both the publish and each delivery, so publishing one message to 50 subscribers counts as 51 messages.

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 Pusher

Keep looking

Other head to heads