Softwr

APIs · head to head

Akoya vs Thunder Client

Akoya logo

Akoya

APIs

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

From
On request
Rated
-
Thunder Client logo

Thunder Client

APIs

Lightweight REST API client built as VSCode extension

From
Free
Rated
-

The short version

  • Only Thunder Client 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.; Thunder Client paid plans are billed annually only: Starter is $3 per user per month and capped at a maximum of 10 seats, Business is $7 per user per month with 500 monthly collection runs per user, and Enterprise is $16 per user per month for unlimited runs
  • They diverge on capability: Akoya covers FDX standard APIs, Thunder Client covers REST Client.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Akoya and Thunder Client actually diverge.

Attributes where Akoya and Thunder Client differ
AttributeAkoyaThunder Client
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquotefreemium
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWebVSCode extension, Web
FoundedUnknown2021

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 Thunder Client

  • REST Client
  • Environment variables
  • Response testing
  • VSCode
  • GitHub
  • Webhook support
  • VSCode extension support
  • Web 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 Thunder Client
  • A tax preparation product retrieving tax forms and cost basis directly from the institution rather than asking users to upload PDFsnot Thunder Client
  • A lender that needs a permissioning trail defensible under CFPB section 1033 rather than a credential-sharing arrangementnot Thunder Client
  • A bank that wants to meet data sharing obligations through one network connection instead of building and policing its own developer interfacenot Thunder Client

Thunder Client

  • API Developmentnot Akoya
  • API Gatewaynot Akoya
  • API Testingnot Akoya
  • API Documentationnot Akoya
  • Microservicesnot 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.

Thunder Client

  • Paid plans are billed annually only: Starter is $3 per user per month and capped at a maximum of 10 seats, Business is $7 per user per month with 500 monthly collection runs per user, and Enterprise is $16 per user per month for unlimited runs

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

Thunder Client

Free
  • FreeFree
    • REST client
    • Collection management
    • Local testing
  • Pro$8/monthly
    • Cloud sync
    • Team collaboration
    • Advanced features

Which should you pick?

Choose Akoya if

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

Choose Thunder Client if

  • You need rest client.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on VSCode extension, Web.
  • You also want environment variables.

Questions people ask

Is Akoya or Thunder Client better?
Neither clearly leads. Akoya starts at On request and Thunder Client at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Akoya or Thunder Client?
Thunder Client has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Akoya and Free for Thunder Client.
Does Akoya or Thunder Client run on more platforms?
Akoya runs on Web. Thunder Client runs on VSCode extension, Web.
Can I use Thunder Client for free?
Yes. Thunder Client 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 Thunder Client is typically brought in for.
What can Akoya do that Thunder Client cannot?
Akoya covers FDX standard APIs, Token-based access, Investment data, Accounts, balances and transactions. Thunder Client covers REST Client, Environment variables, Response testing, VSCode.

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.

Thunder Client: How much does Thunder Client cost?

Thunder Client publishes a free plan at no cost, then Starter at $3, Business at $7 and Enterprise at $16, all priced annually.

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.

Thunder Client: Is Thunder Client free?

Yes, there is a free plan. It is used through the Thunder Client extension for VS Code, available from the marketplace, with limits applied compared with the paid tiers.

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.

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

Other head to heads