Increase vs Treasury Prime

Account opening

1. developerOpen a real, insured deposit account through the API — application to active account fully programmatic, with sandbox parity so the flow is tested before launch

   weight 3 · round to Increase
   Increase✓fullcommunity7/10

   Increase documents FDIC-insured deposit accounts at partner banks (increase-docs-13), full Sandbox parity for testing before launch (increase-docs-6), and API-driven account/entity workflows including compliance validations and programmatic account number issuance (increase-docs-12, increase-docs-7). Community evidence corroborates the white-label bank-partner insured account model (increase-comm-1). Missing for 10: explicit end-to-end documentation of the entity/application submission and account-activation API calls (KYC/KYB flow) and independent confirmation that sandbox behavior exactly mirrors production account approval outcomes.

   • [claimed-docs] “Access multi-million-dollar FDIC insurance at participating IntraFi network banks directly in Increase.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase makes Entity validations available via the API for each version of the data. You should follow up with your customer when the valid…”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can instantly create multiple Account Numbers for a single Account and manage them programmatically.”
   • [community] “Accounts are with First Internet Bank or Blue Ridge Bank, not Increase itself: https://increase.com/terms - it's white-label banking API, no…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime~partialclaimed7/10

   Docs show a clear API-driven account opening flow (Person → Business → Account Application) with KYC/KYB integration, plus a Developer Sandbox with API keys and Postman collection for pre-launch testing (treasury-prime-docs-4, treasury-prime-docs-5, treasury-prime-docs-1, treasury-prime-docs-12). However, there is no explicit documentation confirming FDIC/NCUA deposit insurance status or an end-to-end 'application to active account' status confirmation step, and no independent/hands-on corroboration of sandbox-to-production parity. Missing for 10: explicit insured-deposit language, documented account-activation/status lifecycle, and third-party verification of sandbox parity.

   • [claimed-docs] “create a free Developer Sandbox account. This provides access to the Developer Sandbox where you can create and manage API keys, and safely …”
   • [claimed-docs] “To apply to open a new bank account 1. Create a Person Application 2. Create a Business Application ... 5. Create an Account Application”
   • [claimed-docs] “Programs can seamlessly integrate their bank-approved third-party KYC/KYB vendor into the account opening process.”
   • [claimed-docs] “you can do your testing as in command line or using our Postman Collection to speed up your initial exploration of our APIs.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Fbo structures

1. finance leadThe account structure is transparent — whether funds sit in FBO pools or individual accounts, where FDIC insurance actually attaches, and who can see the ledger, all documented plainly

   weight 3 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialcommunity5/10

   Increase documents some structural transparency — accounts are held at partner banks (First Internet Bank/Blue Ridge Bank) rather than Increase itself, and FDIC insurance is available via participating IntraFi network banks — plus features like unique Account Numbers per counterparty for reconciliation. However, there's no explicit documentation of FBO pooled vs individual account structure, or of who can access/view the ledger. Missing for 10: explicit FBO-pool vs individual-account structural documentation, detailed FDIC insurance attachment mechanics, and ledger visibility/access-control documentation.

   • [claimed-docs] “Access multi-million-dollar FDIC insurance at participating IntraFi network banks directly in Increase.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can instantly create multiple Account Numbers for a single Account and manage them programmatically.”
   • [claimed-docs] “With Increase, you can issue each investor a unique Account Number. This allows for automatic reconciliation of any received funds from that…”
   • [community] “Accounts are with First Internet Bank or Blue Ridge Bank, not Increase itself: https://increase.com/terms - it's white-label banking API, no…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The evidence covers account creation, KYC, ACH/wire/book transfers, and statements, but nowhere documents FBO pool vs individual account structure, where FDIC insurance attaches, or who can view the ledger. This is a fair and material question for a banking-as-a-service platform, so the axis applies, but no supporting evidence exists.

   ⚑ flag

Virtual accounts

1. developerIssue unique account and routing numbers at scale — virtual accounts for reconciliation, per-customer collection accounts, and sub-accounts under a master structure

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialclaimed6/10

   Increase's docs confirm the core capability: instantly creating multiple Account Numbers per Account, programmatically, and explicitly for per-investor/per-customer reconciliation across payment rails — matching the virtual-account/reconciliation use case well. However, evidence does not clearly address 'sub-accounts under a master structure' at scale (e.g., hierarchical account structures beyond multiple account numbers on one account), nor bulk/scale provisioning details or limits. missing for 10: explicit documentation of hierarchical sub-account/master-account structures, bulk-issuance scale limits, and independent/hands-on validation of the reconciliation workflow at scale.

   • [claimed-docs] “You can instantly create multiple Account Numbers for a single Account and manage them programmatically.”
   • [claimed-docs] “With Increase, you can issue each investor a unique Account Number. This allows for automatic reconciliation of any received funds from that…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase lets you place a hold on an Account to reserve funds for known future activity. Holds reduce the available balance without moving m…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   Evidence confirms Treasury Prime supports creating bank accounts via Person/Business/Account Applications and listing accounts, but there is no mention of issuing unique routing numbers, virtual accounts for reconciliation, or sub-account/master-account hierarchies anywhere in the docs pack. Since Treasury Prime is a banking-as-a-service platform, this capability is a fair and expected axis, but no evidence substantiates it here.

   • [claimed-docs] “Get a list of all the available accounts using the `account` endpoint.”
   • [claimed-docs] “To apply to open a new bank account 1. Create a Person Application 2. Create a Business Application ... 5. Create an Account Application”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Yield

1. finance leadIdle balances can earn — interest-bearing accounts or documented sweep options, with the rate mechanics and who keeps the spread spelled out

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers transfers, holds, FDIC insurance via IntraFi network, and compliance, but contains no mention of interest-bearing accounts, sweep programs, rate mechanics, or spread-sharing arrangements for idle balances.

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   No evidence pack item mentions interest-bearing accounts, sweep programs, yield/rate mechanics, or spread-sharing arrangements for idle balances; documentation covers account opening, ACH/wire/book transfers, KYC, and statements only.

   ⚑ flag

Agent access

1. ai-native userPoint an agent at llms.txt or agent-oriented docs

   weight 2 · round to Treasury Prime
   Increase✓fullprobed8/10

   Increase directly hosts an llms.txt file (HTTP 200 confirmed) and full markdown-formatted documentation (documentation.md) alongside a machine-readable OpenAPI spec, giving agents multiple structured entry points. Missing for 10: independent/community confirmation that agents actually consume these files successfully in practice.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/llms.txt # Increase > Increase builds modern banking APIs that enable technology companies…”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/documentation.md # Increase Documentation ## Products ### Cards - [3D Secure](https://inc…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime✓fullprobed9/10

   A probe confirms Treasury Prime hosts a valid llms.txt file returning HTTP 200 with structured links to its developer docs, directly satisfying the story of pointing an agent at an llms.txt/agent-oriented doc index. Missing for 10: no independent third-party confirmation of agent usage or OpenAPI spec discoverability (openapi.json probes 404).

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.treasuryprime.com/llms.txt # Treasury Prime Developer Documentation - [Getting Started](https://do…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.treasuryprime.com/openapi.json, https://docs.treasuryprime.com/swagger.json, https://do…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userRun the product headlessly / in CI for automation

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialprobed5/10

   Increase is a REST/API-first banking platform with a documented OpenAPI spec, sandbox with simulation APIs, and a CLI (increase-cli), all of which support headless/CI-style automation. However, there is no explicit evidence of CI-specific tooling (e.g., GitHub Actions, CI recipes), automated testing pipelines, or documentation framing the CLI/API for CI/automation workflows specifically. missing for 10: CI/CD integration examples, automated testing docs in CI, evidence the CLI is designed for pipeline/scripted use beyond ad hoc manual invocation.

   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
   • [probe] “official CLI documented at https://github.com/Increase/increase-cli”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime~partialprobed4/10

   Treasury Prime is an API-first banking platform, so its REST API can be called headlessly/in CI via HTTP Basic Auth (sandbox + ping/account endpoints, command-line or Postman testing), which supports automation-style usage. However there is no evidence of CI-specific tooling, an official SDK/CLI, webhooks for async automation, or a public OpenAPI spec (probe found 404s), so full headless/CI suitability is not demonstrated. Missing for 10: official CLI/SDK for CI pipelines, documented OpenAPI/machine-readable spec, CI examples or automation guides, and evidence of non-interactive auth flows beyond basic API key testing.

   • [claimed-docs] “Call the `ping` endpoint using HTTP Basic Auth, providing your API Key ID as the username, and the API Secret Key as the password.”
   • [claimed-docs] “you can do your testing as in command line or using our Postman Collection to speed up your initial exploration of our APIs.”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.treasuryprime.com/openapi.json, https://docs.treasuryprime.com/swagger.json, https://do…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userConnect an agent via an official MCP server

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   Increase is a banking-API platform, so publishing an official MCP server for agent connectivity is a fair question, but the evidence pack shows only REST API docs, an OpenAPI spec, a CLI, and webhooks—no mention of an MCP server or MCP integration anywhere.

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   Treasury Prime is a banking-as-a-service API platform; no evidence of an official MCP server or agent-connectivity offering is present in the evidence pack, only REST API docs.

   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.treasuryprime.com/llms.txt # Treasury Prime Developer Documentation - [Getting Started](https://do…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.treasuryprime.com/openapi.json, https://docs.treasuryprime.com/swagger.json, https://do…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

4. ai-native userUse an official CLI

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialprobed5/10

   There is a probe indicating an official GitHub repo for an Increase CLI (increase-cli), suggesting a first-party CLI exists, but no docs pack content describes its features, installation, or AI-native/agentic usage. Missing for 10: detailed documentation of the CLI's capabilities, examples of agentic/AI-native use, and independent corroboration of its functionality.

   • [probe] “official CLI documented at https://github.com/Increase/increase-cli”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   Treasury Prime is a banking-as-a-service API platform; no evidence of an official CLI tool exists—only mentions of API testing via command line (curl) or Postman, not a dedicated CLI product. No CLI documentation, package, or download is referenced anywhere in the evidence.

   • [claimed-docs] “you can do your testing as in command line or using our Postman Collection to speed up your initial exploration of our APIs.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

5. ai-native userDrive the product through a documented public API

   weight 3 · round to Increase
   Increase✓fullprobed9/10

   Increase is fundamentally API-first: full documented REST endpoints for transfers, accounts, webhooks, sandbox/simulation, and OpenAPI spec are published (increase-docs-1..15, increase-probe-3), plus an official CLI (increase-probe-4) and llms.txt discovery endpoint aimed at AI-native consumption. Community feedback corroborates strong API design quality relative to peers (increase-comm-3,5,7). Missing for 10: independent hands-on report specifically confirming AI-agent-driven API usage rather than general developer usage.

   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /ach_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase can reach out to your application so that you can take action (such as sending an email alert about the transaction to your user) a…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/llms.txt # Increase > Increase builds modern banking APIs that enable technology companies…”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/documentation.md # Increase Documentation ## Products ### Cards - [3D Secure](https://inc…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
   • [probe] “official CLI documented at https://github.com/Increase/increase-cli”
   • [community] “User considering Increase for freelancer payments noted appeal: "it says 'ACH transfers', 'Wire transfers', and 'Real-Time Payments'. That c…”
   • [community] “"I think this is better than Stripe's abstract everything approach even for people who are not into payments. Stripe has built a very leaky …”
   • [community] “Increase employee explains value-add: "The actual mechanics of integrating with, say, FedACH... doesn't have a REST API" - Increase builds a…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime✓fullprobed8/10

   Treasury Prime is fundamentally an API-first banking platform with extensive documented REST endpoints (accounts, ACH, wires, book transfers, KYC, applications), Basic Auth API keys, a free Developer Sandbox, and a Postman collection for testing — clearly enabling programmatic, AI-native usage. Missing for 10: a discoverable machine-readable OpenAPI/swagger spec (probe returned 404s) and independent/hands-on corroboration beyond vendor docs.

   • [claimed-docs] “create a free Developer Sandbox account. This provides access to the Developer Sandbox where you can create and manage API keys, and safely …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Call the `ping` endpoint using HTTP Basic Auth, providing your API Key ID as the username, and the API Secret Key as the password.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Get a list of all the available accounts using the `account` endpoint.”
   • [claimed-docs] “you can do your testing as in command line or using our Postman Collection to speed up your initial exploration of our APIs.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.treasuryprime.com/llms.txt # Treasury Prime Developer Documentation - [Getting Started](https://do…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.treasuryprime.com/openapi.json, https://docs.treasuryprime.com/swagger.json, https://do…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

6. ai-native userIssue scoped/least-privilege API credentials for an agent

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   No evidence of scoped or least-privilege API key/credential issuance for agents (e.g., granular permission scopes, per-agent API keys, or role-based access controls); evidence covers transfers, webhooks, sandbox, and general API design but nothing about credential scoping. Missing for 10: scoped API key creation, permission/role-based access controls, agent-specific credential issuance documentation.

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   Evidence shows Treasury Prime issues API Key ID/Secret Key pairs via HTTP Basic Auth for sandbox and production access, but there is no mention of scopes, roles, permission levels, or least-privilege credential configuration, nor anything AI-agent-specific.

   • [claimed-docs] “create a free Developer Sandbox account. This provides access to the Developer Sandbox where you can create and manage API keys, and safely …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Call the `ping` endpoint using HTTP Basic Auth, providing your API Key ID as the username, and the API Secret Key as the password.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

7. ai-native userBuild against official SDKs

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   Evidence shows an OpenAPI spec, a CLI, and llms.txt/docs, but nothing in the pack documents official client SDKs (e.g., Python, Ruby, Node libraries) that AI-native developers could build against beyond the CLI tool.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
   • [probe] “official CLI documented at https://github.com/Increase/increase-cli”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers REST API endpoints, a Postman collection, and a sandbox, but contains no mention of official client SDKs in any language, and OpenAPI spec probes all returned 404s. Missing for 10: any documented official SDK (e.g., Python, Node, Java client libraries), SDK installation/usage guides, or GitHub SDK repos.

   • [claimed-docs] “you can do your testing as in command line or using our Postman Collection to speed up your initial exploration of our APIs.”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.treasuryprime.com/openapi.json, https://docs.treasuryprime.com/swagger.json, https://do…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

8. ai-native userSubscribe to events via webhooks

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase✓fullclaimed8/10

   Increase's docs explicitly describe a webhooks system for subscribing to events (transaction updates, real-time decisions) so applications can programmatically react, and this is corroborated by the docs.md overview mentioning real-time webhooks for card authorizations. Missing for 10: no explicit webhook subscription management API details (e.g., listing/creating subscriptions) or independent third-party confirmation of webhook reliability.

   • [claimed-docs] “Increase can reach out to your application so that you can take action (such as sending an email alert about the transaction to your user) a…”
   • [claimed-docs] “When a user tries to use their card and Increase has to decide to approve the authorization or not... we'll create a Real-Time Decision obje…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers onboarding, KYC, ACH, wires, book transfers, and account statements, but contains no mention of webhooks or event subscription mechanisms anywhere in the docs or probes. Since webhook support is a plausible and common feature for a banking-as-a-service API platform, its complete absence from the evidence means the story is unmet rather than out-of-scope.

   ⚑ flag

Agentic features

1. ai-native userSet up automations that run autonomously in the background

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialclaimed5/10

   Increase's webhook system and Real-Time Decision objects let a developer's application react automatically to transfers, card authorizations, and compliance events without manual polling (increase-docs-5, increase-docs-15), and holds/approval workflows (increase-docs-8, increase-docs-14) support autonomous background processes. However, there is no evidence of a dedicated automation/rules engine, scheduled or recurring transfer automation, or any AI-agent-specific orchestration—only generic webhook callbacks. Missing for 10: native scheduling/recurring automation features, AI-agent-specific automation tooling, and independent evidence of autonomous background automation working reliably in production.

   • [claimed-docs] “Increase can reach out to your application so that you can take action (such as sending an email alert about the transaction to your user) a…”
   • [claimed-docs] “When a user tries to use their card and Increase has to decide to approve the authorization or not... we'll create a Real-Time Decision obje…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Optionally, transfers can be held for approval by another team member.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase lets you place a hold on an Account to reserve funds for known future activity. Holds reduce the available balance without moving m…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

2. ai-native userOperate the product with natural-language commands

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   Evidence shows Increase is a REST/JSON banking API with docs, OpenAPI spec, and a CLI, but nothing indicates a natural-language command interface, chat/agent layer, or NL-to-API translation capability.

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

Api quality

1. ai-native userExplore an interactive API reference with runnable examples

   weight 2 · round to Treasury Prime
   Increase—none0/10

   Evidence shows only static markdown documentation and a raw OpenAPI spec, with no mention of an interactive API reference or runnable/try-it-out examples anywhere in the pack.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/documentation.md # Increase Documentation ## Products ### Cards - [3D Secure](https://inc…”
   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /ach_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime~partialprobed4/10

   Docs mention a Postman Collection and sandbox for testing API calls, which offers some runnable-example capability, but there's no evidence of an interactive in-browser API reference (e.g., Swagger/OpenAPI explorer) — a probe for openapi.json/swagger.json returned 404s. missing for 10: interactive embedded API reference UI, OpenAPI/Swagger spec, in-browser runnable code snippets.

   • [claimed-docs] “you can do your testing as in command line or using our Postman Collection to speed up your initial exploration of our APIs.”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.treasuryprime.com/openapi.json, https://docs.treasuryprime.com/swagger.json, https://do…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userDownload a machine-readable API spec (OpenAPI or equivalent)

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase✓fullprobed9/10

   The evidence pack directly confirms a machine-readable OpenAPI spec is publicly downloadable at https://increase.com/openapi.json (HTTP 200, contains 'openapi' key), plus an llms.txt and full documentation.md index for AI-native discovery. Missing for 10: no independent/community confirmation of spec usage or completeness details beyond the probe check.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/llms.txt # Increase > Increase builds modern banking APIs that enable technology companies…”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/documentation.md # Increase Documentation ## Products ### Cards - [3D Secure](https://inc…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   Probe explicitly checked common OpenAPI/swagger paths and all returned 404, and no docs reference a downloadable machine-readable spec (only a Postman Collection is mentioned, which is not OpenAPI/equivalent).

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.treasuryprime.com/openapi.json, https://docs.treasuryprime.com/swagger.json, https://do…”
   • [claimed-docs] “you can do your testing as in command line or using our Postman Collection to speed up your initial exploration of our APIs.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

3. ai-native userTest against a sandbox environment without touching production data

   weight 1 · round drawn
   Increase✓fullclaimed8/10

   Increase's official docs state every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox, including Simulation APIs only available there, letting developers test transfers, cards, webhooks, etc. without touching production/real money. missing for 10: independent hands-on confirmation of sandbox fidelity and no explicit mention of test-data isolation guarantees beyond docs.

   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime✓fullclaimed8/10

   Treasury Prime provides a free Developer Sandbox for creating API keys and testing endpoints (ping, accounts) separately from production, plus a documented "Testing in Sandbox" guide with a Postman Collection for exploration. This directly enables development/testing without touching production data. Missing for 10: independent/hands-on confirmation of sandbox fidelity and explicit documentation of sandbox-to-production promotion workflow.

   • [claimed-docs] “create a free Developer Sandbox account. This provides access to the Developer Sandbox where you can create and manage API keys, and safely …”
   • [claimed-docs] “Call the `ping` endpoint using HTTP Basic Auth, providing your API Key ID as the username, and the API Secret Key as the password.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Get a list of all the available accounts using the `account` endpoint.”
   • [claimed-docs] “you can do your testing as in command line or using our Postman Collection to speed up your initial exploration of our APIs.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

4. ai-native userRely on versioned APIs with a documented deprecation policy

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   The evidence pack has extensive API documentation, an OpenAPI spec, and a CLI, but contains no mention of API versioning strategy or a documented deprecation policy for endpoints. Missing for 10: explicit API versioning scheme, deprecation policy documentation, changelog/migration guides for breaking changes.

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   No evidence of API versioning scheme or a documented deprecation policy anywhere in the docs; OpenAPI spec probes all 404, and no changelog or version-lifecycle documentation is cited.

   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.treasuryprime.com/openapi.json, https://docs.treasuryprime.com/swagger.json, https://do…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

1. ai-native userPerform bulk operations across many items at once

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   Increase's docs describe individual transfer creation endpoints (ACH, wire, RTP, checks) and the ability to instantly create multiple account numbers, but there is no evidence of a batch/bulk API endpoint (e.g., submitting many transfers in a single call) or bulk listing/processing operations across many items at once.

   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /ach_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /wire_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can instantly create multiple Account Numbers for a single Account and manage them programmatically.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   No evidence of any batch/bulk endpoints (e.g., bulk ACH, bulk transfers, or list-mutation APIs) in the docs pack; all endpoints described are single-item (single account, single ACH, single wire). Bulk operations are a plausible axis for a banking API platform, so absence of evidence yields 'none'.

   • [claimed-docs] “An ACH credit is used when you wish to send or "push" funds to a recipient. ... An ACH debit is used when you wish to "pull" funds from an e…”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the progress of a wire by checking the `status` attribute on the Wire Transfer object.”
   • [claimed-docs] “A book transfer is an electronic funds transfer between two accounts at the same bank... Book transfers are the fastest and cheapest type of…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userDefine rules that trigger actions automatically on events

   weight 3 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialclaimed4/10

   Increase supports event-driven automation via webhooks and Real-Time Decisions, letting external code react to transaction events, and approval holds add a manual gating rule, but there's no evidence of a built-in rule engine where users define declarative 'if event X then action Y' automation inside Increase itself — it always requires custom code on the receiving end. Missing for 10: native rule/condition builder, in-platform automation logic beyond webhooks, and evidence of complex multi-condition triggers.

   • [claimed-docs] “Increase can reach out to your application so that you can take action (such as sending an email alert about the transaction to your user) a…”
   • [claimed-docs] “When a user tries to use their card and Increase has to decide to approve the authorization or not... we'll create a Real-Time Decision obje…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Optionally, transfers can be held for approval by another team member.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   Treasury Prime's evidence pack covers account opening, KYC, ACH/wire/book transfers, and sandbox testing, but contains no mention of webhooks, event subscriptions, or a rules/automation engine that lets users define triggers for automatic actions. Given BaaS platforms commonly expose event-driven webhooks, this axis is a fair question, but no supporting evidence exists in the pack.

   ⚑ flag

3. ai-native userSchedule recurring jobs or workflows

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The axis applies to this product kind (peer products hold positive or none verdicts on this story), so lack of evidence for an applicable capability is "none", never "na". (na/none harmonized at arena bring-up — see pipeline/scripts/na-harmonize.ts.)

   ⚑ flag

Agent operations

1. ai-native userAn agent can operate an account within policy — scoped credentials that let it read balances and initiate transfers under amount caps and counterparty allowlists, a use the vendor documents by name

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   Increase's docs show general transfer APIs, holds, and optional human approval for transfers, but there is no evidence of a named feature for AI-agent scoped credentials with amount caps and counterparty allowlists — the story's specific banking-agent-access capability is unevidenced.

   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /ach_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Optionally, transfers can be held for approval by another team member.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase lets you place a hold on an Account to reserve funds for known future activity. Holds reduce the available balance without moving m…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The evidence pack shows standard API key auth (API Key ID/Secret) and general account/transfer endpoints, but nothing about scoped credentials, per-transaction amount caps, counterparty allowlists, or any agent/AI-specific access model documented by name. This is a fair axis for a banking API platform, but no evidence supports it.

   • [claimed-docs] “Call the `ping` endpoint using HTTP Basic Auth, providing your API Key ID as the username, and the API Secret Key as the password.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Get a list of all the available accounts using the `account` endpoint.”
   • [claimed-docs] “An ACH credit is used when you wish to send or "push" funds to a recipient. ... An ACH debit is used when you wish to "pull" funds from an e…”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the progress of a wire by checking the `status` attribute on the Wire Transfer object.”
   • [claimed-docs] “A book transfer is an electronic funds transfer between two accounts at the same bank... Book transfers are the fastest and cheapest type of…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Agent visibility

1. ai-native userAn agent can read the full banking picture — accounts, transactions, pending activity, documents — through a clean API or MCP surface without screen-scraping a dashboard

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialprobed6/10

   Increase offers a full REST/JSON API (with OpenAPI spec) covering accounts, account numbers, transfers (ACH/wire/RTP/check), holds, webhooks for real-time events, and sandbox simulation — a clean programmatic surface well-suited to agentic access rather than dashboard scraping. However, there is no explicit MCP server offering, and no direct evidence of a unified 'documents' or transaction-history read endpoint being called out, nor confirmation of an agent-specific integration pattern. missing for 10: dedicated MCP server/tooling, explicit documents/statements API evidence, and independent hands-on confirmation of agent-based read access.

   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /ach_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can instantly create multiple Account Numbers for a single Account and manage them programmatically.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase lets you place a hold on an Account to reserve funds for known future activity. Holds reduce the available balance without moving m…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase can reach out to your application so that you can take action (such as sending an email alert about the transaction to your user) a…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/documentation.md # Increase Documentation ## Products ### Cards - [3D Secure](https://inc…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime~partialprobed5/10

   Treasury Prime offers a clean REST API to list accounts, transactions, ACH/wire/book transfers, and statements, avoiding screen-scraping, and provides an llms.txt for AI discoverability. However, there is no evidence of a documented MCP server, no consolidated 'pending activity' or document-retrieval endpoint explicitly described, and the OpenAPI spec probe returned 404s, suggesting no easily machine-consumable schema for agents. Missing for 10: an official MCP surface or agent-native integration, explicit endpoints for pending transactions/documents, and a working OpenAPI/swagger spec for automated discovery.

   • [claimed-docs] “Get a list of all the available accounts using the `account` endpoint.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the progress of a wire by checking the `status` attribute on the Wire Transfer object.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Generate and retrieve branded monthly account statements for your customers.”
   • [probe] “PROBE llms.txt: HTTP 200 at https://docs.treasuryprime.com/llms.txt # Treasury Prime Developer Documentation - [Getting Started](https://do…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.treasuryprime.com/openapi.json, https://docs.treasuryprime.com/swagger.json, https://do…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Builtin ai

1. ops userThe product ships its own AI for banking operations — natural-language search over transactions, drafted responses to disputes and alerts, anomaly summaries — built in, not bolted on

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   No evidence Increase ships built-in AI features like natural-language transaction search, drafted dispute/alert responses, or anomaly summaries; all evidence covers banking-rail APIs (ACH, wire, RTP, checks), compliance, and webhooks with no AI/NLP capability mentioned.

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   No evidence of any built-in AI features for banking operations—no natural-language transaction search, dispute/alert response drafting, or anomaly summaries are mentioned anywhere in the docs pack, which instead covers standard banking-as-a-service API functionality (accounts, ACH, wires, KYC).

   ⚑ flag

Card issuance

1. developerAccounts come with cards — issue virtual and physical debit cards tied to the account through the same API, with spend controls and digital wallet support

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialprobed4/10

   The docs index (probe-2) lists a 'Cards' product category with a '3D Secure' page, and increase-docs-15 confirms real-time authorization decisioning for card transactions, indicating Increase does issue cards through its API. However, the evidence pack contains no explicit confirmation of virtual vs. physical card issuance, spend control mechanisms, or digital wallet (Apple Pay/Google Pay) provisioning. Missing for 10: documentation on physical card issuance/shipping, spend limit/control APIs, and digital wallet tokenization support.

   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/documentation.md # Increase Documentation ## Products ### Cards - [3D Secure](https://inc…”
   • [claimed-docs] “When a user tries to use their card and Increase has to decide to approve the authorization or not... we'll create a Real-Time Decision obje…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers account opening, KYC, ACH, wire, book transfers, and cash deposits, but contains no mention of debit card issuance, physical/virtual cards, spend controls, or digital wallet support anywhere in the docs or probes.

   ⚑ flag

Disputes

1. ops userCard and ACH disputes are handled properly — Reg E investigation timelines, provisional credit mechanics, and my operational responsibilities documented and tooled

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers transfers, accounts, holds, webhooks, compliance validations, and card authorization decisions, but contains no mention of dispute handling, Reg E investigation timelines, provisional credit mechanics, or documented ops responsibilities for card/ACH disputes. Since Increase issues cards and ACH transfers, this is a fair axis, but no supporting evidence exists.

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   Evidence covers ACH/wire/book transfer mechanics and returns but contains no mention of Reg E dispute investigation timelines, provisional credit mechanics, or documented ops responsibilities for card/ACH disputes.

   ⚑ flag

Balances events

1. developerThe ledger is real-time and event-driven — balance reads that reflect holds and pending activity, and webhooks for every transaction state change so my system mirrors the bank exactly

   weight 3 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialclaimed6/10

   Increase documents holds that reduce available balance without moving money (real-time balance reflecting pending activity) and a webhooks system that fires for transaction events, including real-time decision webhooks for card authorizations. However, evidence doesn't explicitly confirm webhooks cover 'every transaction state change' comprehensively or that balance reads are guaranteed real-time/event-driven at the API level beyond the holds mechanism. missing for 10: explicit documentation of webhook event catalog per transfer/transaction type, confirmation of real-time balance API semantics, independent/hands-on verification that webhooks reliably mirror bank state changes.

   • [claimed-docs] “Increase lets you place a hold on an Account to reserve funds for known future activity. Holds reduce the available balance without moving m…”
   • [claimed-docs] “When a user tries to use their card and Increase has to decide to approve the authorization or not... we'll create a Real-Time Decision obje…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase can reach out to your application so that you can take action (such as sending an email alert about the transaction to your user) a…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The evidence pack shows account, ACH, wire, and book-transfer status fields (e.g., wire 'status' attribute) but contains no mention of webhooks, event notifications, or real-time balance/hold semantics reflecting pending activity — core to this story. missing for 10: webhook/event API docs, balance endpoint showing holds/pending distinctions, any real-time push notification mechanism.

   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the progress of a wire by checking the `status` attribute on the Wire Transfer object.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Get a list of all the available accounts using the `account` endpoint.”
   • [claimed-docs] “An ACH credit is used when you wish to send or "push" funds to a recipient. ... An ACH debit is used when you wish to "pull" funds from an e…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Data quality

1. developerTransaction data is rich enough to build on — counterparty details, rail-specific metadata, stable identifiers, and enrichment that makes a raw bank feed usable in-product

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialclaimed6/10

   Increase provides transfer creation with recipient data, stable Account Numbers for reconciliation, real-time decision/webhook events, entity validation, and rail-specific metadata (ACH, wire, RTP, FedNow, check) — supporting rich transaction context for in-product use. However, evidence doesn't show detailed counterparty enrichment (e.g., merchant category codes, geolocation, standardized counterparty profiles) or explicit transaction-level enrichment beyond basic transfer/account data. missing for 10: explicit counterparty enrichment fields (merchant/category data), documented transaction object schema showing enrichment depth, independent developer confirmation of data richness beyond transfer creation.

   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /ach_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /wire_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Real-Time Payments can be sent at any time during the day and funds will settle instantly.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can instantly create multiple Account Numbers for a single Account and manage them programmatically.”
   • [claimed-docs] “With Increase, you can issue each investor a unique Account Number. This allows for automatic reconciliation of any received funds from that…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase makes Entity validations available via the API for each version of the data. You should follow up with your customer when the valid…”
   • [claimed-docs] “When a user tries to use their card and Increase has to decide to approve the authorization or not... we'll create a Real-Time Decision obje…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Sending FedNow transfers covers how to check reachability with the Routing Number endpoint and fall back to ACH or a wire.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime~partialclaimed4/10

   Docs describe transaction types (ACH credit/debit, wire with status tracking, book transfers) and basic account data, implying some structured metadata exists, but there is no explicit documentation of counterparty detail fields, rail-specific metadata enrichment, or stable identifier schemes that would let a developer build rich in-product transaction views. missing for 10: explicit counterparty/beneficiary data fields, rail-specific metadata (e.g., ACH company entry description, wire OBI/BBI fields), stable identifier documentation, and any enrichment/categorization features.

   • [claimed-docs] “An ACH credit is used when you wish to send or "push" funds to a recipient. ... An ACH debit is used when you wish to "pull" funds from an e…”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the progress of a wire by checking the `status` attribute on the Wire Transfer object.”
   • [claimed-docs] “A book transfer is an electronic funds transfer between two accounts at the same bank... Book transfers are the fastest and cheapest type of…”
   • [claimed-docs] “To return an ACH transfer you originated, use the Update an ACH endpoint.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Statements

1. ops userThe paper obligations are automated — monthly statements generated per account, and tax documents (1099-INT) produced and retrievable through the API

   weight 2 · round to Treasury Prime
   Increase—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack mentions monthly account statements or 1099-INT tax document generation/retrieval via API; the documentation covers transfers, holds, webhooks, and compliance validations but not statements or tax forms. Missing for 10: any mention of statement generation, statement retrieval endpoints, or 1099-INT/tax document APIs.

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime~partialclaimed4/10

   Monthly account statements are documented as generated and retrievable via API ("Generate and retrieve branded monthly account statements"), but there is no evidence of 1099-INT tax document generation or retrieval anywhere in the pack. missing for 10: 1099-INT tax document generation/retrieval via API, any tax-reporting endpoint documentation, independent confirmation of statement/tax automation in production.

   • [claimed-docs] “Generate and retrieve branded monthly account statements for your customers.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Kyc kyb

1. developerCustomer verification is programmatic — KYC for individuals and KYB for businesses with document collection, watchlist screening, and clearly modeled application states

   weight 3 · round to Treasury Prime
   Increase~partialclaimed3/10

   Only compliance-overview.md is cited, noting that 'Entity validations' are available via the API and developers should follow up on data issues — implying some identity verification API exists, but there's no detail on document collection, watchlist/AML screening, or an explicit application state model for KYC/KYB. Missing for 10: explicit KYC vs KYB entity types, document upload/collection API, watchlist screening details, and documented application state machine (e.g. pending_review, requires_information, approved).

   • [claimed-docs] “Increase makes Entity validations available via the API for each version of the data. You should follow up with your customer when the valid…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime~partialclaimed6/10

   Docs confirm a programmatic application flow (Person/Business/Account Application) and third-party KYC/KYB vendor integration, plus an Incremental KYC mode that runs KYC outside account opening — supporting the core 'programmatic verification' story. However, evidence does not show explicit document collection endpoints, watchlist screening details, or a full state-machine model of application statuses. missing for 10: explicit document upload/collection API details, watchlist/OFAC screening specifics, documented application state enumeration and transitions.

   • [claimed-docs] “To apply to open a new bank account 1. Create a Person Application 2. Create a Business Application ... 5. Create an Account Application”
   • [claimed-docs] “Programs can seamlessly integrate their bank-approved third-party KYC/KYB vendor into the account opening process.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Incremental KYC lets you run KYC **without opening an account**.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Review queues

1. ops userWork the onboarding queue — see why an application is pending, supply additional documents, and understand which decisions are mine versus the bank's

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   The evidence shows only an API for Entity validations (increase-docs-12) that developers must poll and follow up on, but no evidence of an ops-facing queue/dashboard where a human operator can see why an application is pending, request/upload documents, or see a clear division between Increase's automated decisions and the bank's own decisions. This is a plausible axis for a banking-onboarding platform, but nothing in the pack demonstrates such an ops workflow tool exists.

   • [claimed-docs] “Increase makes Entity validations available via the API for each version of the data. You should follow up with your customer when the valid…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The evidence pack only documents developer API endpoints for creating Person/Business/Account applications and KYC/KYB integration hooks — it never describes an ops-facing queue UI showing why an application is pending, a way to request/upload additional documents, or any distinction between platform-owned vs. bank-owned decisions. This is a plausible axis for a bank-partner onboarding platform, but nothing in the evidence shows such an ops console or decision-attribution feature.

   • [claimed-docs] “To apply to open a new bank account 1. Create a Person Application 2. Create a Business Application ... 5. Create an Account Application”
   • [claimed-docs] “Programs can seamlessly integrate their bank-approved third-party KYC/KYB vendor into the account opening process.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Incremental KYC lets you run KYC **without opening an account**.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Limits holds

1. ops userSet risk controls per account and per program — transaction and velocity limits, holds on suspicious activity, and account freezes with documented reinstatement paths

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialclaimed4/10

   Increase documents holds on accounts to reserve funds (docs-14), optional approval holds on transfers (docs-8), real-time card authorization decisions (docs-15), and entity/compliance validations (docs-12), which together support some risk-control primitives. However there is no explicit documentation of configurable transaction/velocity limits per account or program, nor documented account-freeze and reinstatement workflows. Missing for 10: explicit velocity/transaction limit configuration, documented account freeze mechanism, and reinstatement path documentation.

   • [claimed-docs] “Increase lets you place a hold on an Account to reserve funds for known future activity. Holds reduce the available balance without moving m…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Optionally, transfers can be held for approval by another team member.”
   • [claimed-docs] “When a user tries to use their card and Increase has to decide to approve the authorization or not... we'll create a Real-Time Decision obje…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase makes Entity validations available via the API for each version of the data. You should follow up with your customer when the valid…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase can reach out to your application so that you can take action (such as sending an email alert about the transaction to your user) a…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   No evidence pack items mention transaction/velocity limits, suspicious-activity holds, account freezes, or reinstatement workflows; documentation covers account opening, KYC, ACH/wire/book transfers, and statements but nothing about risk-control configuration. Missing for 10: any documentation of per-account/program limit settings, hold/freeze mechanisms, or reinstatement procedures.

   • [claimed-docs] “To apply to open a new bank account 1. Create a Person Application 2. Create a Business Application ... 5. Create an Account Application”
   • [claimed-docs] “Programs can seamlessly integrate their bank-approved third-party KYC/KYB vendor into the account opening process.”
   • [claimed-docs] “An ACH credit is used when you wish to send or "push" funds to a recipient. ... An ACH debit is used when you wish to "pull" funds from an e…”
   • [claimed-docs] “To return an ACH transfer you originated, use the Update an ACH endpoint.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Generate and retrieve branded monthly account statements for your customers.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Loss allocation

1. finance leadFraud economics are explicit — who eats ACH return fraud, card disputes, and account takeover losses, with the platform's prevention tooling documented alongside the liability split

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   Evidence covers ACH/wire/RTP transfer mechanics, entity validation, holds, and real-time card decisioning, but nowhere states who bears financial liability for ACH return fraud, card disputes, or account takeover losses. No documented liability split or fraud-loss allocation is present alongside the prevention tooling.

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   Evidence shows ACH return handling mechanics (initiating returns) and general product docs, but nothing addresses who bears financial liability for ACH return fraud, card disputes, or account takeover losses, nor any documented liability split alongside fraud prevention tooling.

   ⚑ flag

Program scaling

1. founderGrowth doesn't hit invisible walls — program-level limits, approval stages, and the path to raising them are documented rather than discovered in an email from the bank

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialclaimed3/10

   Increase documents an approval-hold feature for transfers (a team-member approval stage) and compliance/entity validation, but there is no evidence of documented program-level transaction/volume limits or a defined process for raising them as growth scales. missing for 10: explicit documentation of program-level limits (transaction/volume caps), and a documented escalation/raise-limit process.

   • [claimed-docs] “Optionally, transfers can be held for approval by another team member.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase makes Entity validations available via the API for each version of the data. You should follow up with your customer when the valid…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The evidence covers API onboarding, KYC, account opening, ACH/wire/book transfers, and statements, but nothing addresses program-level transaction/volume limits, approval stages, or a documented process for raising limits as growth occurs.

   ⚑ flag

Ach

1. developerOriginate ACH through the API — credits and debits, same-day windows, and the unhappy paths (returns, NOCs, reversals) modeled as first-class objects with webhooks

   weight 3 · round to Treasury Prime
   Increase~partialclaimed4/10

   Docs confirm ACH transfer origination via POST /ach_transfers, approval holds, and webhooks for real-time events, showing the core API-first-class credit path with async notifications. However, the evidence pack contains no mention of debit-side ACH, same-day ACH windows, or return/NOC/reversal objects as first-class API entities with webhooks, which are central to the story. missing for 10: same-day ACH window support, explicit ACH debit examples, return/NOC/reversal object modeling and their webhook events.

   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /ach_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase can reach out to your application so that you can take action (such as sending an email alert about the transaction to your user) a…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Optionally, transfers can be held for approval by another team member.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime~partialclaimed5/10

   Docs confirm ACH credits and debits (push/pull) and returns handled via an 'Update an ACH endpoint' pattern suggesting first-class transfer objects, but there's no evidence of same-day ACH windows, NOC (notification of change) handling, reversals, or webhook events tied to ACH lifecycle changes. missing for 10: same-day ACH window support, NOC objects/webhooks, reversal handling, explicit webhook event documentation for ACH status changes.

   • [claimed-docs] “An ACH credit is used when you wish to send or "push" funds to a recipient. ... An ACH debit is used when you wish to "pull" funds from an e…”
   • [claimed-docs] “To return an ACH transfer you originated, use the Update an ACH endpoint.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Checks

1. ops userChecks still work — programmatic check issuance and check deposit with image capture, because real businesses still receive and send paper

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialclaimed5/10

   Increase supports programmatic check issuance (Check Transfers via API, with printing/mailing/tracking handled by Increase) per increase-docs-4, but there is no evidence in the pack of check deposit or image capture (e.g., check deposit/RDC endpoints) functionality. missing for 10: check deposit API/image capture documentation, evidence of inbound check image submission, independent confirmation of check deposit workflow.

   • [claimed-docs] “Check Transfers let you send a physical check without operating a printer or a mailroom. Increase prints and mails the check on your behalf,…”
   • [claimed-docs] “With Increase, you can issue each investor a unique Account Number. This allows for automatic reconciliation of any received funds from that…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers ACH, wire, FedNow, book transfers, cash deposits, and account statements, but contains no mention of check issuance or check deposit/RDC (remote deposit capture with image capture) anywhere in the docs.

   ⚑ flag

Instant rails

1. developerThe faster rails are there when I need them — domestic wires, RTP, and FedNow origination and receipt through the same API, with per-rail capabilities documented

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase✓fullcommunity8/10

   Docs show wire transfers (POST /wire_transfers), RTP with instant settlement and reachability checks, and FedNow origination with reachability/fallback logic, all through the same REST API, plus receipt support via multi-rail Account Numbers (wire, RTP, ACH, check) confirming both origination and receipt paths. Missing for 10: explicit FedNow receipt-specific docs and independent hands-on confirmation of FedNow/RTP receipt flows beyond the account-number mention.

   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /wire_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Real-Time Payments can be sent at any time during the day and funds will settle instantly.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can use the Routing Numbers API to confirm whether an institution supports Real-Time Payments.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Sending FedNow transfers covers how to check reachability with the Routing Number endpoint and fall back to ACH or a wire.”
   • [claimed-docs] “With Increase, you can issue each investor a unique Account Number. This allows for automatic reconciliation of any received funds from that…”
   • [community] “User considering Increase for freelancer payments noted appeal: "it says 'ACH transfers', 'Wire transfers', and 'Real-Time Payments'. That c…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime~partialclaimed6/10

   Docs confirm wire transfer status tracking and FedNow instant settlement (24/7/365) through the API, and ACH/book transfer rails are documented, suggesting multi-rail origination exists. However, there's no explicit mention of RTP (Real-Time Payments) origination/receipt, no clear per-rail capability comparison table, and no confirmation of wire/FedNow receipt (only origination-side details are shown). missing for 10: explicit RTP documentation, per-rail capability matrix, wire/FedNow receipt confirmation, and independent corroboration beyond vendor docs.

   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the progress of a wire by checking the `status` attribute on the Wire Transfer object.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Instant Settlement: Payments settle within seconds, 24/7/365”
   • [claimed-docs] “An ACH credit is used when you wish to send or "push" funds to a recipient. ... An ACH debit is used when you wish to "pull" funds from an e…”
   • [claimed-docs] “A book transfer is an electronic funds transfer between two accounts at the same bank... Book transfers are the fastest and cheapest type of…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

International

1. founderMoney can cross borders — international wires or SWIFT, FX with transparent rates, and the coverage map of currencies and corridors documented

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   All evidence describes US domestic rails only (ACH, domestic wire, RTP, FedNow, checks) with no mention of SWIFT, international wires, FX rates, or a currency/corridor coverage map. Missing for 10: any documentation of cross-border wire/SWIFT support, FX rate transparency, or supported currencies/corridors.

   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /wire_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Real-Time Payments can be sent at any time during the day and funds will settle instantly.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Sending FedNow transfers covers how to check reachability with the Routing Number endpoint and fall back to ACH or a wire.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Access multi-million-dollar FDIC insurance at participating IntraFi network banks directly in Increase.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   Evidence covers only US-domestic rails (ACH, domestic wires, FedNow, book transfers, cash deposits); there is no mention of international wires/SWIFT, FX rates, or a currency/corridor coverage map.

   ⚑ flag

1. ai-native userDo everything through the API that I can do in the UI

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase✓fullprobed8/10

   Increase's docs explicitly state that 'Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox,' and the extensive first-party API coverage (transfers, approvals, holds, entity validation, webhooks, account numbers) mirrors dashboard functionality, indicating strong API/UI parity by design as an API-first banking platform. missing for 10: independent/hands-on confirmation that literally every dashboard feature (e.g., admin/user management, reporting UI) has a 1:1 API equivalent, and no explicit statement of full parity outside Sandbox context.

   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /ach_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You make a `POST /wire_transfers` call with the details of how much you'd like to send and data about the recipient.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can instantly create multiple Account Numbers for a single Account and manage them programmatically.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Optionally, transfers can be held for approval by another team member.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Increase lets you place a hold on an Account to reserve funds for known future activity. Holds reduce the available balance without moving m…”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/openapi.json — contains "openapi" key”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime~partialprobed6/10

   Treasury Prime's docs show broad API coverage across core banking workflows (account opening, KYC, ACH, wires, book transfers, statements, cash deposits), consistent with an API-first BaaS platform, but there is no explicit claim of full UI/API feature parity and the OpenAPI/swagger spec could not be located (404s), making it hard to verify completeness. missing for 10: explicit parity statement, discoverable OpenAPI spec, independent confirmation that dashboard-only actions (e.g. admin/dashboard configuration) are also API-exposed.

   • [claimed-docs] “To apply to open a new bank account 1. Create a Person Application 2. Create a Business Application ... 5. Create an Account Application”
   • [claimed-docs] “Programs can seamlessly integrate their bank-approved third-party KYC/KYB vendor into the account opening process.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Incremental KYC lets you run KYC **without opening an account**.”
   • [claimed-docs] “An ACH credit is used when you wish to send or "push" funds to a recipient. ... An ACH debit is used when you wish to "pull" funds from an e…”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can track the progress of a wire by checking the `status` attribute on the Wire Transfer object.”
   • [claimed-docs] “A book transfer is an electronic funds transfer between two accounts at the same bank... Book transfers are the fastest and cheapest type of…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Generate and retrieve branded monthly account statements for your customers.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Enable customers to add funds to their accounts using cash at 90,000+ retail locations nationwide”
   • [probe] “PROBE openapi: all candidate paths 404 (https://docs.treasuryprime.com/openapi.json, https://docs.treasuryprime.com/swagger.json, https://do…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

2. ai-native userExport all of my data in open formats and leave

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   The evidence shows Increase exposes account, transfer, and entity data via a REST/JSON API and webhooks, but there is no documented bulk data-export feature, open-format data dump, or migration/offboarding tooling that would let a customer pull all their data and leave. Banking data portability is a fair axis for a financial API platform, so absence of such evidence is 'none' rather than 'na'.

   • [claimed-docs] “Every API and dashboard feature is available in Sandbox. ... you can use special Simulation APIs, which are only available in Sandbox.”
   • [claimed-docs] “You can instantly create multiple Account Numbers for a single Account and manage them programmatically.”
   • [probe] “PROBE docs-md: HTTP 200 at https://increase.com/documentation.md # Increase Documentation ## Products ### Cards - [3D Secure](https://inc…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   Treasury Prime is a banking-as-a-service API; there is no evidence of a data export/portability feature for account or transaction data in open formats, nor any documented account-closure/data-export process. This is a fair axis for a data-holding platform, but nothing in the evidence shows such capability.

   ⚑ flag

1. ai-native userChoose where my data is stored (region/residency)

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   Increase is a banking/payments API; the evidence pack contains no mention of data residency/region selection controls for stored data. Missing for 10: any documentation of regional data storage options, residency guarantees, or geographic controls over where account/customer data is held.

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack addresses data residency, regional storage options, or any data-location controls; Treasury Prime's docs focus entirely on banking/API functionality with no mention of data residency choices.

   ⚑ flag

2. ai-native userControl data retention and deletion

   weight 2 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers Increase's banking/payments API features (transfers, webhooks, sandbox, compliance validations) but contains no mention of data retention policies, data deletion controls, or any privacy-posture controls for customers to manage their own data lifecycle. As a platform handling sensitive financial and entity data, this axis is a fair question, but no evidence shows Increase offers retention/deletion controls.

   ⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   No evidence in the pack addresses data retention or deletion controls for AI-native users; the documentation covers banking APIs, KYC, ACH/wire transfers, and account statements but nothing about data lifecycle management or deletion policies.

   ⚑ flag

Charter clarity

1. founderExactly who holds the charter — whether the platform is a bank, a direct program with a named partner bank, or middleware between me and someone else's sponsor — and what happens to my customers if the platform fails

   weight 3 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialcommunity5/10

   Community evidence confirms Increase is a middleware/BaaS layer with named partner banks (First Internet Bank, Blue Ridge Bank) holding customer funds, and docs mention FDIC insurance via IntraFi network banks, giving founders some clarity on the sponsor-model structure. However, the evidence pack lacks explicit first-party documentation on failure scenarios (what happens to customer funds/accounts if Increase itself fails), lacks a clear charter/entity org chart, and doesn't address pass-through deposit insurance mechanics in depth. missing for 10: first-party docs on platform-failure contingency for customers, explicit charter/entity disclosure page, detail on pass-through insurance mechanics beyond one line, independent verification of bank-failure handling.

   • [community] “Accounts are with First Internet Bank or Blue Ridge Bank, not Increase itself: https://increase.com/terms - it's white-label banking API, no…”
   • [claimed-docs] “Access multi-million-dollar FDIC insurance at participating IntraFi network banks directly in Increase.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   None of the evidence addresses which bank holds the charter, how Treasury Prime's middleware role relates to a named sponsor bank, or what happens to end customers if Treasury Prime fails — the docs only cover API mechanics (KYC, ACH, wires, account opening) with no sponsor-bank disclosure or failure/continuity language.

   ⚑ flag

Compliance tooling

1. ops userThe compliance workload is tooled — transaction monitoring, sanctions screening, case management for alerts, and SAR-filing support with a clear split of duties between me, the platform, and the bank

   weight 2 · round to Increase
   Increase~partialclaimed3/10

   Evidence shows Increase provides entity validation data via API and flags data issues for follow-up (compliance-overview.md), implying some compliance tooling and a duty split with the platform, but there's no evidence of dedicated transaction monitoring, sanctions screening, case management for alerts, or SAR-filing support tools. missing for 10: transaction monitoring tooling, sanctions screening workflow, alert case management UI, SAR filing support, explicit ops-role division documentation.

   • [claimed-docs] “Increase makes Entity validations available via the API for each version of the data. You should follow up with your customer when the valid…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   Evidence only covers KYC/KYB during account opening; there is no mention of transaction monitoring, sanctions screening, alert case management, or SAR-filing support, nor any description of duty splits between ops/platform/bank for these compliance functions.

   • [claimed-docs] “Programs can seamlessly integrate their bank-approved third-party KYC/KYB vendor into the account opening process.”
   • [claimed-docs] “Incremental KYC lets you run KYC **without opening an account**.”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

Reconciliation

1. finance leadThe platform ledger reconciles to the bank core — documented daily reconciliation between what the API reports and what the bank holds, the failure that sank Synapse-era programs

   weight 3 · round drawn
   Increase—none0/10

   The evidence pack shows Increase's transfer/account APIs and general banking features, but contains no documentation of a formal daily ledger-to-bank-core reconciliation process (the Synapse-failure-mode issue) — no reconciliation reports, balance-attestation, or audit mechanism between Increase's API records and the partner bank's (First Internet Bank/Blue Ridge Bank) core ledger is mentioned. Missing for 10: documented reconciliation cadence/process, bank-core balance verification API or report, any third-party audit or attestation of ledger accuracy.

   • [claimed-docs] “With Increase, you can issue each investor a unique Account Number. This allows for automatic reconciliation of any received funds from that…”
   • [community] “Accounts are with First Internet Bank or Blue Ridge Bank, not Increase itself: https://increase.com/terms - it's white-label banking API, no…”

   proof ↗⚑ flag

   Treasury Prime—none0/10

   The evidence pack covers account opening, KYC, ACH/wire/book transfers, and statements, but there is no mention of ledger-to-bank-core reconciliation, daily reconciliation reports, or any process for verifying API-reported balances against actual bank holdings — the exact failure mode referenced in the story. Nothing in the docs addresses reconciliation guarantees or audit processes for sponsor-bank programs.

   ⚑ flag