Methodology behind the WealthTech Integration Score.
The WealthTech Integration Score evaluates how well applications connect across the advisor technology ecosystem. Scores are based on three weighted criteria: breadth of integrations, depth of data exchange, and usability for developers and firms.
This page explains how scores are calculated, what they measure, and what they don’t.
Scores are calculated using a consistent methodology applied to all applications. Participation in the Recognition Program, sponsorship, or any commercial relationship with Ezra Group does not influence scores.
Vendors cannot pay for a higher score. The methodology is the same whether a vendor engages with Ezra Group or not.
The WealthTech Integration Score is built on a 10-point scale using three weighted components:
| Tier | Score Range | Color |
|---|---|---|
| Superior | 8.0 – 10.0 |  |
| Excellent | 6.0 – 7.9 |  |
| Average | 4.0 – 5.9 |  |
| Needs Improvement | 0.0 – 3.9 |  |
Breadth measures how many integrations an application has, regardless of depth.
We kept this weight deliberately low to prevent vendors from gaming the system by creating large numbers of shallow connections. A long list of SSO integrations won’t carry a score.
Breadth is a relative measure within each category. The application with the most integrations in a category becomes the denominator for all others. This means scores can shift even without changes to your own integrations—if the category leader adds new connections, everyone’s breadth component adjusts accordingly.
This design reflects how buyers think: integration strength is contextual. A CRM with 40 integrations competes against other CRMs, not against custodial platforms with different ecosystem expectations.
Integrations with widely-used platforms carry additional weight. Our key applications list includes the major custodians (Schwab, Fidelity, Pershing), leading CRMs (Redtail, Salesforce, Wealthbox), planning tools (eMoney, MoneyGuide, RightCapital), and other platforms with strong advisor adoption—Albridge, Black Diamond, Morningstar Advisor Workstation, Orion, Tamarac, and others.
This list is based on industry surveys including T3, Kitces, and Financial Planning Magazine, along with advisor adoption data. It’s revisited annually by Ezra Group and Kitces. Vendors who believe a platform should be considered for the key applications list are welcome to submit feedback.
Depth measures the collective strength of your integration footprint — the real operational weight behind every connection, taken together. This is the largest component of the score because it reflects what actually matters to advisors and operations teams: whether data moves between systems, and how much manual work disappears as a result.
Each integration is rated from 1 to 5:
Users can access the integrated application with a single click. Credentials pass through, but no data is shared. This is the most common integration type because it's easy to implement.
Users can perform functions from one application while inside the other—typically viewing reports or embedded content via iframes. Data is displayed but not transferred.
Data moves from one application to the other. Direction depends on which application is the logical source. Contact data typically flows out of CRMs; risk scores flow out of risk tolerance tools.
Data moves both directions. Client data entered in a CRM transfers to a planning tool, which can send data back. Almost always implemented via GET and POST API calls.
Data transfers both directions, and the receiving application does something beyond storing or displaying it—triggering a workflow, rendering data in a way unique to the integration, or enabling functionality that neither application offers alone. Achieving Level 5 typically requires development investment from both vendors. Claims of Level 5 are reviewed by Ezra Group before approval.
We don’t use a simple average. Each integration is weighted by its depth, so deeper integrations offset shallower ones.
Usability measures API access and the resources vendors provide to developers and firms building integrations.
This includes:
Strong API access and developer support make integrations easier to build, maintain, and troubleshoot, which determines whether theoretical connectivity becomes real-world reliability.
The specific weighting across these factors is not published.
Scores map to four tiers, which appear as color codes in the Kitces/Ezra Group AdvisorTech Directory:
| Criteria | Weight | What It Measures |
|---|---|---|
| Breadth | 25% | How many applications are integrated, and whether they include platforms popular among wealth managers |
| Depth | 50% | How robust each integration is—SSO only, or real data exchange? |
| Usability | 25% | Developer support, API quality, security certifications, documentation |
Integration data comes from two sources:
Vendors can log into the Product Portal to review and update their integration data. All submissions are reviewed by an Ezra Group administrator before scores update. Level 5 claims require explanation and are verified before approval.
For vendors who have not submitted data, Ezra Group compiles integration information from public sources—vendor websites, partner announcements, API documentation, and industry research. This data is verified where possible but may be incomplete.
Scores update after vendor submissions are reviewed and approved by an Ezra Group administrator. This typically takes a few days.
Breadth components may also shift when other applications in your category add or remove integrations, since breadth is calculated relative to the category leader. These recalculations happen periodically as data is updated across the ecosystem.
If you’re planning announcements around a score improvement, submit your data updates in advance and confirm approval before external communications.
Scores are most useful for comparing applications within the same category. Cross-category comparisons aren’t apples-to-apples—a CRM with a 7.5 isn’t necessarily “better integrated” than a planning tool with a 7.0, because each category has different ecosystem expectations and a different breadth denominator.
Use scores as one input during evaluation, not as a final verdict. A platform with a lower score might still be the right fit if its integrations align with your specific tech stack.
After two decades working with wealth management firms, we kept running into the same problem: integration information was hard to find, hard to verify, and often didn’t match reality until after contracts were signed.
Vendors weren’t always forthcoming about which integrations were deep and which were just SSO. There was no consistent way to compare connectivity across the range of platforms a firm might evaluate.
We built the WealthTech Integration Score to give the industry an objective methodology for comparing integration strength—one that would hold up to scrutiny from both buyers and vendors.
The scoring algorithm was developed over months of contacting hundreds of vendors, gathering integration data, and refining the formula to generate fair, defensible evaluations.
The WealthTech Integration Score covers applications that serve RIAs, broker-dealers, TAMPs, aggregators, and other advisory firms. If your product serves this segment, it will be included.
Like Consumer Reports, there is no opt-out. Once assigned to a category, your application is measured against others in that category. This ensures buyers get comprehensive coverage, not just vendors who self-select into scoring.
Categories align with the Kitces/Ezra Group AdvisorTech Map and Directory. Ezra Group and Kitces leadership meet periodically to review market trends, vendor feedback, and buyer input, and may adjust methodology, scores, or categorizations accordingly.
Submit your request through the feedback form. Category changes affect both the Integration Score and the Kitces AdvisorTech Directory.
We built this methodology to be fair and defensible, but we know vendors will have questions—about how their score was calculated, whether their data is current, or how specific integrations were rated.
We welcome that feedback. If something looks wrong, tell us. If you think an integration was miscategorized or overlooked, we want to know.
Changing an applications category can recalculate scores for all products of the “new category” and “old category” if the product becomes the highest number of integrations with key apps and non-key apps. Please proceed with caution in making changes to the application category. The updated calculations take effect after you submit changes of the form.
