Softwr

APIs · head to head

MX Technologies vs Strapi

MX Technologies logo

MX Technologies

APIs

US financial data aggregation with heavy transaction cleansing and enrichment

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Strapi logo

Strapi

APIs

Headless CMS with REST and GraphQL APIs

From
$35/month
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: MX Technologies coverage is United States focused, so any product with European or other international users runs a second aggregator and reconciles two data models, which removes most of the single vendor argument.; Strapi cloud pricing is per project, not per account, so a second project doubles the bill
  • They diverge on capability: MX Technologies covers Account aggregation, Strapi covers REST API.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which MX Technologies and Strapi actually diverge.

Attributes where MX Technologies and Strapi differ
AttributeMX TechnologiesStrapi
Starting priceOn request$35/month
Pricing modelquotesubscription
PlatformsAPI, WebNode.js, Cloud, Self-hosted, Docker
FoundedUnknown2015

Identical on both: 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 MX Technologies

  • Account aggregation
  • Transaction cleansing
  • Categorisation
  • Merchant resolution
  • Account verification
  • Balance and funds checks
  • Data enhancement APIs
  • Consent and connection management

Only in Strapi

  • REST API
  • GraphQL API
  • Content management
  • PostgreSQL
  • MySQL
  • MongoDB
  • AWS
  • Webhooks

What people use each for

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

MX Technologies

  • A credit union building a personal finance view in its own app that needs its own transaction descriptions made readablenot Strapi
  • A lender using cash flow underwriting that needs categorised income and expense data rather than raw transaction stringsnot Strapi
  • A bank wanting account verification and balance checks before initiating ACH debits to reduce returnsnot Strapi
  • A fintech that already aggregates data elsewhere and licenses only the enrichment layer to clean what it hasnot Strapi

Strapi

  • Running a self hosted headless CMS with a REST or GraphQL APInot MX Technologies
  • Giving editors a content admin panel over a custom content modelnot MX Technologies

Where each one falls short

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

MX Technologies

  • Coverage is United States focused, so any product with European or other international users runs a second aggregator and reconciles two data models, which removes most of the single vendor argument.
  • Nothing is published on price and contracts are enterprise shaped, so a small fintech cannot estimate cost or start building without a sales process, unlike self-serve competitors.
  • Data enhancement is the differentiator and is licensed separately from aggregation, so the quoted aggregation price is not the price of the product people actually buy it for.
  • Categorisation and merchant resolution are statistical and get business to business and unusual transactions wrong more often than consumer retail, so lending decisions built on categorised data need their own review layer.
  • As the United States moves to regulated API access, connection quality depends on what each institution exposes, and the long tail of small banks and credit unions remains the weakest part of any aggregator including this one.

Strapi

  • Cloud pricing is per project, not per account, so a second project doubles the bill
  • Starter at $35 a month allows 100,000 API requests, and overage is $1.50 per 25,000
  • Extra bandwidth is $30 per 100 GB and extra asset storage $0.60 per GB
  • Backups start at the Pro plan, weekly, and only become daily at Business
  • An uptime SLA is Business only, at $450 a month per project
  • Additional environments cost $60 a month on Pro and $300 a month on Business

Pricing, plan by plan

MX Technologies

On request
  • MX Platform$undefined/year
    • Priced by connected users, API calls and modules
    • Data enhancement licensed separately from aggregation
    • Enterprise contracts aimed at financial institutions

Strapi

$35/month
  • Starter$35/month
    • 100k API requests
    • 50 GB asset storage
    • 50 GB asset bandwidth
  • Pro$90/month
    • 1M API requests
    • 250 GB asset storage
    • 500 GB asset bandwidth
  • Business$450/month
    • 10M API requests
    • 1000 GB asset storage
    • 1000 GB asset bandwidth

Which should you pick?

Choose MX Technologies if

  • You need account aggregation.
  • You work on API, Web.
  • You also want transaction cleansing.
MX Technologies review

Choose Strapi if

  • You need rest api.
  • You work on Node.js, Cloud, Self-hosted, Docker.
  • You also want graphql api.
Strapi review

Questions people ask

Is MX Technologies or Strapi better?
Neither clearly leads. MX Technologies starts at On request and Strapi at $35/month, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, MX Technologies or Strapi?
MX Technologies starts at On request and Strapi at $35/month.
Does MX Technologies or Strapi run on more platforms?
MX Technologies runs on API, Web. Strapi runs on Node.js, Cloud, Self-hosted, Docker.
What is MX Technologies best used for?
MX Technologies is most often used for a credit union building a personal finance view in its own app that needs its own transaction descriptions made readable, a lender using cash flow underwriting that needs categorised income and expense data rather than raw transaction strings, a bank wanting account verification and balance checks before initiating ach debits to reduce returns, a fintech that already aggregates data elsewhere and licenses only the enrichment layer to clean what it has. Of those, a credit union building a personal finance view in its own app that needs its own transaction descriptions made readable and a lender using cash flow underwriting that needs categorised income and expense data rather than raw transaction strings are not what Strapi is typically brought in for.
What can MX Technologies do that Strapi cannot?
MX Technologies covers Account aggregation, Transaction cleansing, Categorisation, Merchant resolution. Strapi covers REST API, GraphQL API, Content management, PostgreSQL.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

MX Technologies: What does MX do that Plaid does not?

It sells transaction cleansing, categorisation and merchant resolution as a first class product, including on data you already hold, which is why financial institutions rather than startups are its core customers.

Strapi: How much do API request overages cost?

Additional API requests beyond the plan limit cost $1.50 per 25000 requests. Extra asset storage costs $0.60 per GB, and additional bandwidth costs $30 per 100 GB.

Source
MX Technologies: Does it cover Europe?

No. MX is United States focused. European coverage requires a different provider such as Tink.

Strapi: Is yearly billing available?

Yes, yearly billing saves up to 17% compared to monthly billing on Strapi Cloud plans.

Source
MX Technologies: Is pricing published?

No. Contracts are quoted by connected users, call volume and modules, with enhancement licensed separately from aggregation.

Strapi: What is included with the Pro plan?

The Pro plan costs $90 per month per project and includes 1M API requests, 250 GB asset storage, 500 GB bandwidth, multi-environment support, weekly backups, and manual backups.

Source
MX Technologies: Does it use screen scraping?

It uses direct bank APIs where institutions expose them and credential based connections elsewhere. The credential path is being deprecated across the industry, and coverage quality now tracks which banks have real APIs.

Share

Related pages

More on MX Technologies

More on Strapi

Keep looking

Other head to heads