Provider transparency and financial data aggregation: unlocking access for investors

In today’s digital financial landscape, access to data is power. Investors, financial advisors, and institutions rely on accurate, up-to-date financial information to make informed decisions. However, financial data accessibility has long been a challenge due to fragmented systems, restrictive provider policies, and proprietary barriers.

As the demand for real-time financial aggregation grows, provider transparency—specifically within the financial aggregation ecosystem—has become a critical factor. Transparency determines how easily investors can access their financial data across multiple platforms, whether through investment tracking apps, personal finance tools, or financial advisory platforms.

The role of financial aggregation firms

Financial aggregation firms serve as the connective tissue in modern financial services. They enable secure data-sharing between banks, brokerages, wealth management platforms, and fintech applications, allowing investors to view their entire financial picture in one place.

Some of the major financial aggregation firms leading this space include:

• Plaid – A leading aggregator that connects financial accounts with apps, enabling services like budgeting, payments, and wealth tracking. Plaid is used by fintech leaders like Venmo, Robinhood, and Acorns.

• Yodlee (Envestnet Yodlee) – A veteran in the aggregation space, Yodlee powers financial data insights for banks, wealth managers, and fintech firms.

• Morningstar By All Accounts – Specializes in investment and wealth management aggregation, serving financial advisors, asset managers, and institutions.

• MX – A fintech innovator focused on open banking and AI-driven financial insights to enhance consumer decision-making.

• Finicity (a Mastercard company) – A major player in open banking, Finicity enables secure financial data-sharing for lenders, fintech apps, and banks.

• Akoya – A Fidelity-backed API-based financial data-sharing network, emphasizing security and investor control.

These aggregators provide a seamless experience for users—but their effectiveness depends on financial institutions’ willingness to support open, transparent data-sharing.

What data is included in investment aggregation?

Investment aggregation enables investors and advisors to access a complete view of their financial portfolios by pulling data from multiple sources. The types of aggregated data include:

1. Provider Information

• The financial institutions, custodians, and brokerage firms where investment accounts are held.

• Examples: Fidelity, Charles Schwab, Vanguard, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, TIAA.

2. Accounts

• The specific investment accounts linked to an investor’s portfolio.

• Types of accounts aggregated:

  • Brokerage accounts (individual, joint)

  • Retirement accounts (401(k), IRA, Roth IRA, SEP IRA)

  • Trust and custodial accounts

  • Employer-sponsored investment plans

  • Hedge fund and private equity accounts

3. Holdings

• The individual assets within an investment account, including:

  • Security name (e.g., Apple Inc., Vanguard S&P 500 ETF)

  • Ticker symbol (e.g., AAPL, VOO)

  • Quantity (number of shares or units held)

  • Cost basis (original purchase price)

  • Market value (current price × quantity)

  • Asset class (stocks, bonds, mutual funds, ETFs, alternatives)

  • Currency (for international assets)

4. Securities Data

• Additional financial details, including:

  • Stock and bond identifiers (CUSIP, ISIN, Sedol)

  • Bond maturity dates

  • Credit ratings (Moody’s, S&P)

  • Fund expense ratios for mutual funds and ETFs

  • Dividend and yield details

5. Transactions

• A record of investment activity, including:

  • Stock purchases and sales

  • Dividend payments and reinvestments

  • Interest payments on bonds

  • Corporate actions (stock splits, mergers)

  • Contributions and withdrawals

  • Advisory and trading fees

By aggregating this data, investors gain a single, real-time snapshot of their entire financial landscape, allowing for smarter decision-making and improved portfolio tracking.

Why some providers invest in transparency

Many financial institutions recognize that investing in transparency is not just about regulatory compliance—it is a strategic move that enhances customer trust, improves operational efficiency, and ensures long-term competitiveness in an increasingly digital financial ecosystem. Below are the key reasons why some providers lead the way in financial data transparency:

1. Enhanced customer experience and retention

Investors today expect real-time, seamless access to their financial data across multiple platforms. A provider that supports secure, API-based aggregation enables customers to connect their investment accounts to financial planning apps, robo-advisors, and wealth management tools without friction.

• Frictionless Integration – Providers that enable direct API connections eliminate the errors and delays associated with manual data entry and unreliable screen scraping.

• Self-Service Financial Management – Investors can track portfolio performance, risk exposure, and asset allocation without waiting for quarterly or monthly statements.

• Higher Retention Rates – A provider that makes data accessibility easier reduces the likelihood of customers switching to competitors with more transparent practices.

For example, Fidelity Investments and Vanguard offer robust API integrations with financial aggregators, allowing investors to access their financial data on-demand via multiple third-party platforms.

2. Compliance with Open Banking regulations

Governments and financial regulators worldwide are pushing for consumer data rights, making financial transparency and open data-sharing mandatory in many regions.

• Dodd-Frank Section 1033 (U.S.) – The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is moving toward a Personal Financial Data Rights Rule, which would give consumers full access to their financial information and allow them to share it with third-party applications.

• PSD2 (Europe’s Open Banking Initiative) – The Revised Payment Services Directive (PSD2) requires banks to provide secure APIs that allow customers to share financial data with authorized third-party providers.

• UK Open Banking Standard – The UK’s Open Banking Implementation Entity (OBIE) mandates that financial institutions offer secure and transparent data-sharing, making it easier for customers to access their financial information.

Providers that embrace these regulatory shifts early position themselves as leaders in transparency and avoid last-minute compliance challenges.

3. Competitive advantage in the digital economy

As fintech apps and personalized financial tools become mainstream, consumers prefer financial institutions that offer seamless data accessibility.

• Differentiation from Competitors – Firms with high transparency scores on Truthifi attract tech-savvy investors who demand control over their financial data.

• More Data-Driven Insights – Financial firms that open their data ecosystems can leverage machine learning and AI to offer personalized financial insights to clients.

• Fintech Partnerships – Providers who invest in secure API-based aggregation are better positioned to collaborate with fintech firms, expanding their customer base.

For instance, Betterment and SoFi have capitalized on transparency by integrating with multiple financial aggregators, allowing customers to easily track, manage, and optimize their investments.

4. Stronger security and fraud prevention

A common misconception is that more transparency means less security—but in reality, the opposite is true. Secure API-based aggregation significantly reduces fraud risks compared to outdated methods like screen scraping.

• Screen Scraping Risks – Older data-sharing methods require users to input login credentials into third-party applications, increasing the risk of data breaches and fraud.

• API-Driven Security – Providers that implement OAuth-based authentication allow users to share data securely without revealing passwords.

• Regulated Access Controls – Open banking APIs give consumers full control over which apps and services can access their data and for how long.

Akoya, a Fidelity-backed aggregation platform, prioritizes security-first data-sharing, eliminating the need for screen scraping while giving investors full control over their data permissions.

5. Stronger relationships with financial advisors and fintech companies

Advisors, financial planners, and fintech companies rely on accurate, real-time investment data to provide the best possible service. A transparent provider ensures:

• Financial advisors can access clients' investment data without manual updates or delayed statements.

• Robo-advisors can make real-time adjustments based on current holdings and risk assessments.

• Wealth management apps can offer a unified view of investment performance across multiple brokerage accounts.

For example, Charles Schwab and Morgan Stanley have built strong relationships with financial advisors by supporting direct data aggregation for wealth management platforms.

6. Increased operational efficiency & cost savings

Investing in transparency doesn’t just benefit customers—it also streamlines internal operations for financial institutions.

• Fewer Customer Support Requests – When clients have real-time access to investment data, customer service teams receive fewer inquiries about account balances, transactions, and holdings.

• Automated Data Flows – API-driven aggregation eliminates the need for manual data entry, reducing operational costs and minimizing human error.

• Scalability – As digital banking and investment platforms continue to grow, transparency allows firms to scale their services without costly infrastructure overhauls.

For instance, Bank of America has integrated open banking APIs into its data-sharing framework, reducing friction in account aggregation and wealth management services.

The bottom line: transparency is a win-win

Providers that prioritize transparency in financial data aggregation don’t just benefit their customers—they future-proof their businesses.

• 💡 Increased customer satisfaction & loyalty

• 🔒 Enhanced security through API-driven authentication

• 🚀 Regulatory compliance & proactive alignment with open banking standards

• 📈 Stronger partnerships with fintech and wealth management platforms

• 💰 Operational efficiency and long-term cost savings

As Truthifi’s Provider Transparency Score becomes a benchmark for evaluating accessibility, providers investing in openness and API-driven data-sharing will gain a competitive edge, setting a new industry standard for financial transparency.

Why some providers don't invest in transparency

Despite the increasing demand for open financial data access, some financial institutions hesitate or actively resist investing in transparency. These providers often limit aggregation support, restrict API access, or rely on outdated data-sharing methods for several key reasons:

1. Fear of losing customer control & retention risks

Some financial institutions, particularly large banks and brokerage firms, operate within a walled-garden approach, making it difficult for customers to move assets or integrate accounts with third-party financial tools.

• Customer Lock-In Strategy – By restricting data-sharing, some providers discourage clients from easily transferring investments or comparing financial products elsewhere.

• Reduced Competition – When investors have limited ability to track performance across multiple providers, they may remain with their existing institution rather than exploring competitors with better returns or lower fees.

• Diminished Cross-Selling Opportunities – Many firms use closed ecosystems to promote proprietary financial products (e.g., in-house mutual funds, ETFs, or wealth management services) instead of allowing investors to compare better alternatives elsewhere.

For example, some traditional banks and brokerages limit API-based aggregation, making it harder for investors to consolidate account data in external financial planning apps.

2. Revenue loss from data-dependent business models

For some institutions, data is a monetizable asset rather than a customer right. These firms may restrict data access to protect revenue streams tied to:

• Proprietary Portfolio Tools – Many banks and brokerage firms provide exclusive investment analysis tools, which become less valuable if customers can access similar insights via third-party aggregators.

• Advisory Fees & Account Management Services – Transparency enables self-directed investing, which could reduce demand for fee-based advisory services.

• Data Monetization – Some financial firms sell anonymized transaction data to third-party analytics companies, creating a revenue stream they wouldn’t have if investors could freely access their data.

For example, Commonwealth Investor 360 has been known for aggregation challenges, possibly due to data control strategies that prioritize internal analytics and advisory fees over open access.

3. Security, compliance, and fraud concerns

While open banking and data-sharing increase consumer access, they also introduce potential security risks that some providers may be unwilling to manage.

• Risk of Unauthorized Data Access – Poorly regulated or insecure third-party applications could introduce vulnerabilities, data breaches, or fraudulent transactions.

• Credential-Sharing Risks – Many legacy aggregation methods require users to input their login credentials into third-party apps, which can expose investors to phishing attacks and fraud.

• Regulatory Complexity – Global financial data laws are inconsistent across regions, making it difficult for multinational firms to implement universal aggregation policies.

For instance, Ally Invest does not support financial aggregation, likely due to a combination of security concerns, data control priorities, and compliance risks.

4. Legacy technology & infrastructure challenges

Many older financial institutions operate on outdated IT systems that were not designed for modern API-based data-sharing. Implementing transparent aggregation would require:

• Expensive System Upgrades – Many institutions rely on legacy mainframe systems that lack modern API capabilities, making integration with aggregators costly.

• Data Standardization Issues – Financial data is stored in varied formats across institutions, making it challenging to provide consistent aggregation across different account types.

• Operational Disruptions – Some firms fear that adopting real-time aggregation APIs could introduce errors, downtime, or integration failures, affecting existing account management processes.

For example, smaller banks and regional investment firms often struggle to adopt open banking due to the high costs associated with system upgrades and API development.

5. Preference for proprietary aggregation solutions

Instead of integrating with open financial aggregators, some firms develop their own closed aggregation systems, which allow them to:

• Retain Control Over Data Presentation – Firms can curate the investor experience rather than allowing third-party apps to control how financial data is displayed.

• Limit Competition – By keeping data within internal aggregation platforms, firms can restrict access to rival financial services.

• Monetize Aggregation as a Premium Service – Some institutions charge for internal portfolio aggregation tools, discouraging open data-sharing with external apps.

For example, certain wealth management firms require advisors to use their in-house data aggregation systems, which may be less flexible and slower than open API-based solutions.

The tradeoff: transparency vs. control

While restricting transparency may protect short-term business interests, it creates long-term challenges for providers, such as:

• ❌ Diminished Customer Trust – Investors may gravitate toward providers that support open banking and data access.

• ❌ Regulatory Pressure – As laws like Dodd-Frank 1033 push for consumer data rights, firms that resist transparency may face compliance risks.

• ❌ Technological Disadvantage – Firms that fail to adopt modern API-based aggregation may struggle to compete with fintech-driven investment platforms.

However, for firms with legacy infrastructure, proprietary aggregation tools, or data-driven revenue models, the short-term incentives to restrict data-sharing often outweigh the benefits of financial transparency.

What can I do if my provider has not committed to digital transparency?

If your financial institution does not support open data-sharing or limits access to financial aggregators, you may face challenges in tracking, managing, and optimizing your investments. However, there are several actions you can take to improve your data accessibility and push for greater transparency:

1. Contact your provider and request API-based data access

Many financial institutions are slow to adopt transparency simply because they believe customers are not demanding it. If your provider does not support secure API-based aggregation, reach out to them via:

📞 Customer Support Hotline – Ask whether they offer direct API connections or plan to integrate with major financial aggregators.
📩 Email or Online Chat – Send a formal request asking about data portability options.
📢 Social Media – Engaging on Twitter, LinkedIn, or Reddit can pressure providers to respond publicly.

👉 Example Message:
"Hi [Provider Name], I use financial planning tools that require API-based account aggregation. However, I am unable to link my investment accounts. Does your institution support secure data-sharing with Plaid, Yodlee, or another aggregator? If not, are there plans to offer this feature?"

2. Use manual account import options in aggregation tools

If automatic aggregation is blocked, many personal finance apps and portfolio trackers offer manual import features, such as:

• CSV File Uploads – Some platforms allow users to download transactions from their provider and upload them manually.

• Manual Entry – While time-consuming, this method ensures you can still track your portfolio’s performance.

3. Consider transferring to a more transparent provider

If your provider continues to block aggregation access, it may be time to move your investments to a firm that prioritizes digital transparency. The following providers are highly ranked for open data-sharing and API support:

✅ Fidelity Investments – Strong API integrations, backing of Akoya for secure data-sharing
✅ Charles Schwab – Offers direct aggregation support for financial advisors and consumers
✅ Vanguard – Supports secure API access with multiple aggregators
✅ Robinhood – Provides direct connections to fintech apps

Steps to Transfer Accounts:

• Compare account transfer options – Check if your new provider offers ACAT (Automated Customer Account Transfer) services.

• Check for account transfer fees – Some providers charge fees when moving investment accounts; however, many transparent providers will reimburse these fees.

• Confirm aggregator compatibility – Before switching, verify that your new provider supports Plaid, Yodlee, or MX.

💡 Pro Tip: Some providers offer transfer bonuses when switching accounts (e.g., Schwab and Fidelity often provide incentives for transferring assets).

4. Advocate for Open Banking and consumer data rights

If your provider is unwilling to change, consider supporting broader financial transparency initiatives, such as:

• Follow Regulatory Changes – Stay updated on Dodd-Frank Section 1033, which could soon mandate financial data accessibility in the U.S.

• Engage with Consumer Advocacy Groups – Organizations like The Financial Data Exchange (FDX) and Consumer Reports advocate for open banking policies.

• Encourage Fintech-Led Solutions – Support fintech companies that push for open data-sharing and challenge legacy providers resistant to transparency.

5. Explore alternative aggregation workarounds

If your provider does not allow direct API integration, consider workarounds like:

• Using Account Aggregators with Proxy Methods – Some tools, like Mint and Empower, can still pull partial account data even if full aggregation is blocked.

• Requesting Aggregation via Financial Advisors – Some wealth management firms have direct partnerships with providers that may not support consumer-level aggregation.

• Automating Account Exports – Some banks and brokers allow you to schedule periodic email exports of financial statements, which can be manually imported into aggregation tools.

Final thoughts on improving access

If your provider has not committed to digital transparency, you still have several options:

✔️ Request aggregation support directly from your provider
✔️ Use manual data imports if API access is blocked
✔️ Consider switching to a transparency-friendly financial institution
✔️ Advocate for regulatory changes and open banking policies
✔️ Find alternative workarounds to track your financial data

In an era where data accessibility is critical for financial decision-making, providers that refuse to embrace transparency risk losing customers to competitors who offer secure, API-driven aggregation. Taking proactive steps can help you stay in control of your financial future and ensure you have full access to your investment data.

The future of financial data transparency

As open banking regulations expand, financial institutions must embrace API-driven aggregation to remain competitive. Investors increasingly demand full access to their financial data, and providers who resist transparency risk falling behind in the evolving digital financial ecosystem.