APIs · head to head
Akoya vs Tuum
Akoya
APIs
Bank-owned, token-based open finance network that replaces screen scraping for US financial data
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
Tuum
APIs
Modular core banking platform from Estonia, formerly branded Modularbank
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
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.; Tuum it is a smaller, younger company than Mambu, so it has fewer live reference deployments and a shorter track record to evaluate risk against.
- They diverge on capability: Akoya covers FDX standard APIs, Tuum covers Modular product structure.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Akoya and Tuum actually diverge.
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 Tuum
- Modular product structure
- Low-code integration middleware
- Cloud-agnostic deployment
- Multi-currency real-time accounts
- Cards and lending modules
- Faster migration timeline
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 Tuum
- A tax preparation product retrieving tax forms and cost basis directly from the institution rather than asking users to upload PDFsnot Tuum
- A lender that needs a permissioning trail defensible under CFPB section 1033 rather than a credential-sharing arrangementnot Tuum
- A bank that wants to meet data sharing obligations through one network connection instead of building and policing its own developer interfacenot Tuum
Tuum
- A bank wanting to migrate specific banking products to the cloud within months rather than replacing its entire core at oncenot Akoya
- A fintech in the DACH region or Middle East wanting a European core banking vendor with regional expansion focusnot Akoya
- An institution wanting low-code middleware to connect new modules to an existing legacy core rather than a full rebuildnot Akoya
- A company researching "Modularbank" that needs to confirm it is the same company now branded Tuumnot 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.
Tuum
- It is a smaller, younger company than Mambu, so it has fewer live reference deployments and a shorter track record to evaluate risk against.
- The 2022-era rebrand from Modularbank to Tuum means older funding records, case studies and press coverage appear under a different name, complicating due diligence for anyone unaware of the change.
- Pricing is entirely unpublished, requiring a sales conversation to budget against competing composable core vendors.
- Its geographic expansion into DACH and the Middle East is comparatively recent, so support depth and local regulatory expertise in those markets are less proven than in its home Baltic and Nordic base.
- As with any core banking platform, choosing Tuum is a multi-year infrastructure commitment; switching cores after implementation is a major undertaking regardless of how modular the initial adoption was.
Pricing, plan by plan
Akoya
On request- Akoya Data Access$undefined/year
- Usage-based pricing quoted by data product and call volume
- Separate commercial terms for data recipients and for financial institutions joining the network
- No published rate card
Tuum
On request- Tuum$undefined/year
- Subscription and module-based pricing, not published
- Custom quote required via sales
Which should you pick?
Choose Tuum if
- You need modular product structure.
- You work on Web, API.
- You also want low-code integration middleware.
Questions people ask
- Is Akoya or Tuum better?
- Neither clearly leads. Akoya starts at On request and Tuum at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Akoya or Tuum?
- Akoya starts at On request and Tuum at On request.
- Does Akoya or Tuum run on more platforms?
- Akoya runs on Web. Tuum runs on Web, API.
- 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 Tuum is typically brought in for.
- What can Akoya do that Tuum cannot?
- Akoya covers FDX standard APIs, Token-based access, Investment data, Accounts, balances and transactions. Tuum covers Modular product structure, Low-code integration middleware, Cloud-agnostic deployment, Multi-currency real-time 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.
Tuum: Is Tuum the same company as Modularbank?
Yes, Modularbank rebranded to Tuum; it is the same company and platform.
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.
Tuum: Where is it strongest geographically?
Its base is Estonia and the Nordic and Baltic region, with newer expansion into DACH and the Middle East.
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.
Tuum: Is pricing published?
No, subscription and module pricing require a sales conversation.
Akoya: Does it help with CFPB section 1033?
It is designed around it, providing tokenised permissioned access and consumer revocation rather than credential sharing.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Akoya vs Yodlee
- Akoya vs MX Technologies
- Akoya vs Ozone API
- Akoya vs Aiia
- Akoya vs Tink
- Akoya vs Salt Edge
- Akoya vs Trustly
- Akoya vs Lithic
- Akoya vs Token.io
- Akoya vs Bud Financial
- Akoya vs Tribe Payments
- Akoya vs Method Financial
- Akoya vs Asyncapi
- Akoya vs AWS API Gateway
- Akoya vs Microsoft Azure API Management
- Akoya vs Basis Theory
- Akoya vs Boomi API Management
- Akoya vs Codat
- Akoya vs Mambu
- Akoya vs Vodeno
- Akoya vs Fintech Farm
- Akoya vs Skaleet
- Akoya vs Weavr
- Akoya vs Temenos Transact
- Akoya vs 10x Banking
- Akoya vs Unit
- Akoya vs Griffin
- Akoya vs Swan
- Akoya vs i2c
- Akoya vs Solaris
- Akoya vs Tyk
- Akoya vs Volt
- Akoya vs WSO2 API Manager
- Akoya vs Zimpler
- Akoya vs 3scale
- Tuum vs Yodlee
- Tuum vs MX Technologies
- Tuum vs Ozone API
- Tuum vs Aiia
- Tuum vs Tink
- Tuum vs Salt Edge
- Tuum vs Trustly
- Tuum vs Lithic
- Tuum vs Token.io
- Tuum vs Bud Financial
- Tuum vs Tribe Payments
- Tuum vs Method Financial
- Tuum vs Asyncapi
- Tuum vs AWS API Gateway
- Tuum vs Microsoft Azure API Management
- Tuum vs Basis Theory
- Tuum vs Boomi API Management
- Tuum vs Codat
- Tuum vs Mambu
- Tuum vs Vodeno
- Tuum vs Fintech Farm
- Tuum vs Skaleet
- Tuum vs Weavr
- Tuum vs Temenos Transact
- Tuum vs 10x Banking
- Tuum vs Unit
- Tuum vs Griffin
- Tuum vs Swan
- Tuum vs i2c
- Tuum vs Solaris
- Tuum vs Tyk
- Tuum vs Volt
- Tuum vs WSO2 API Manager
- Tuum vs Zimpler
- Tuum vs 3scale