Compare Kontomatik
and Tink

Max available bank coverage in Poland
18
10
Total coverage: countries / banks
8/80
18/3400
Individual / corporate account coverage
Responsiveness
12s
0,5s / 2s / no commitment - based on plan
Configurable UI
White label
Widget CSS personalisation
Possibility to put consents before the widget
Available datasets (JSON) Personal Account data / Account details / Transactions
Yes / Yes / Yes
Yes / Yes / Yes
Full PESEL field availability
Mobile friendly (SDK)

Coverage

Both companies are present in Poland - Tink covers individual accounts in 10 banks and no corporate accounts in redirect flow only. Kontomatik, as the oldest and leading AISP provider in Poland, covers 19 banks in embedded flow. In the redirect flow Kontomatik covers individual accounts in 9 banks and corporate accounts in 6 banks.

Internationally, Tink is in the lead with 3,400 banks covered across 18 countries. It is present in Western Europe, the Nordics and Baltic countries and lacks a wide presence in CEE and Southern Europe. Kontomatik offers access to accounts in 80 banks from 8 countries. Outside of Poland they are present in Czechia, the Baltics, Spain, Portugal and the Philippines.

Here’s a full list of supported bank accounts in Poland:

Kontomatik

PKO BP, Santander Bank Polska, mBank, Bank Millennium S.A., ING Bank Śląski, Bank Pekao S.A., Alior Bank, BNP Paribas (GOonline), Bank Pocztowy, Crédit Agricole, Getin Bank, Nest Bank, Inteligo, Kasa Stefczyka, Plus Bank, Bank Ochrony Środowiska (BOŚ), eSKOK and Optima. Source

Tink

Alior Bank, BNP Paribas, Bank Millennium, Bank Pekao, Credit Agricole, ING Bank Śląski, PKO BP, Santander, mBank and Revolut. Source

Widget customisation

Tink allows for some degree of customisation of Tink Link - a fully whitelabel solution, basic CSS customisation, configurable UI and the possibility to move consents between different screens. Kontomatik offers much less advanced customisation possibilities, as their clients can only change colours of certain widget elements.

Response time

Exact response will vary between each download as it depends on the bank’s performance and the load of the data. Tink, however, depending on the purchased plan guarantees latency no higher than 0.5 or 2 seconds (no guarantees in the lowest plan). Kontomatik offers no such guarantees and claims that the global median for their response time is 12s, but can be anywhere between a few seconds and a few minutes.

Data availability

Both providers return 3 basic datasets: Identity, account information and transactions. In addition, Tink provides clients with information about loans and investments. Kontomatik, outside of 3 basic datasets, returns data on credit cards connected to the account and can match them with certain transactions made with them.

Out of the two, only Kontomatik is able to retrieve the PESEL number of the account holder. Keep in mind that the PESEL number is not available at all in the redirect flow. Kontomatik, however, is only able to retrieve it in full from only a portion of the banks (4) covered with their redirect flow.They are able to return it in a masked form or not in full from another 2 banks and in no form whatsoever from the rest of the banks.

Mobile friendliness

Out of the two, only Tink offers a mobile SDK. That means that Tink Link will work well in native mobile apps, whereas Kontomatik will work well only on mobile websites.

Table of content

  • Coverage
  • Kontomatik
  • Tink
  • Widget customisation
  • Response time
  • Data availability
  • Mobile friendliness