Fidelity Broker API Integration — Research Briefing

Status: research-only. This document does NOT constitute legal or tax advice. Before filing, contracting, or acting on any item below, consult a securities attorney licensed in your jurisdiction (federal securities law questions) and a FINRA-experienced counsel for broker-dealer / RIA status questions. Last updated: 2026-05-05. Sources as of that date — verify freshness before the meeting.

TL;DR (3 sentences)

Fidelity does not offer a self-service, open API for retail brokerage order execution to unregistered third-party SaaS platforms; the closest official retail-side path is the "Fidelity Access" OAuth data-sharing program, which is currently read-only through aggregators like SnapTrade. Fidelity's institutional Integration Xchange (Wealthscape) and Designated Brokerage programs do support order routing, but they are gated on a relationship-manager contract process that appears to target RIAs, broker-dealers, and family offices — not independent SaaS platforms. The most practical near-term path to connecting a Fidelity account inside Raxx appears to be routing through an aggregator (SnapTrade), but that aggregator path carries a known hard limitation: no trade execution for Fidelity accounts as of the research date.

Decision Matrix

Recommended pre-meeting posture: route Fidelity read-only data through SnapTrade (unblocked today) while attorney explores whether Fidelity institutional partnership is achievable for a small SaaS without RIA/BD registration. Do NOT plan on trade execution via Fidelity for the near term.

1. What Fidelity API Surfaces Exist for Third-Party Integration

1a. Consumer / Retail Side: "Fidelity Access"

• Fidelity operates an OAuth-based secure data sharing system called "Fidelity Access" for retail brokerage accounts.
• Source: https://www.fidelity.com/security/third-party-app-protection
• Source: https://www.fidelity.com/security/fidelity-access-data-security
• The customer authorizes Fidelity directly; no Fidelity username/password is shared with the third-party app.
• Nearly 100% of consumer-directed data sharing routes through these APIs as of Fidelity's 2024 announcement.
• Source: https://newsroom.fidelity.com/pressreleases/update-on-fidelity-s-secure-data-sharing-efforts/s/7a30c2e4-f070-4396-b04c-b773678d59f9
• Capability gap: No publicly documented path for a third-party app to submit orders through Fidelity Access. SnapTrade, which has a documented Fidelity integration via this channel, explicitly states: "does not offer the ability to place trades."
• Source: https://snaptrade.com/brokerage-integrations/fidelity-api

1b. Institutional Side: Wealthscape Integration Xchange (WIX)

• Fidelity's Integration Xchange is described as an "open architecture digital store" launched in 2018, offering 400+ integration points.
• Source: https://clearingcustody.fidelity.com/app/item/RD_9883092/integration-xchange.html
• Source: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20181016005148/en
• Explicitly targets: registered investment advisors, broker-dealers, banks, and family offices.
• Available integration types include: real-time APIs, single sign-on (SSO) into Wealthscape, bulk data feeds, and FIX-based order/trade management.
• Access gate: Requires contacting a Relationship Manager or Fidelity Representative. No public self-service developer portal.
• Source: https://clearingcustody.fidelity.com/app/item/RD_9883092/integration-xchange.html
• Partner examples in the marketplace: Addepar, Envestnet Tamarac, eMoney Advisor, Orion, Black Diamond. These are all enterprise wealth-management software companies, not consumer SaaS.
• Source: https://integrationxchange.wealthscape.com/

1c. Designated Brokerage API

• Fidelity's Designated Brokerage Services include "integration with third-party platforms via API technology" and "nightly transmissions sent directly to proprietary or third-party compliance platforms."
• Source: https://www.fidelity.com/go/designated-brokerage-services
• Focus: compliance monitoring for employer-sponsored accounts (employee trading surveillance), not retail or algo-trading use cases.
• Contact for access: fidelityDBS@fmr.com
• No public pricing or eligibility criteria disclosed.

1d. Fidelity International Developer Portal (FIL)

• Fidelity International (FIL — the non-US entity) has a public developer portal with API catalogue and ToS.
• Source: https://developer.fil.com/
• Source: https://developer.fil.com/api-catalogue
• This is a separate legal entity from Fidelity Investments (FMR LLC, the US entity). Do not conflate the two. FIL ToS and APIs govern UK/international products. Confirm with attorney before assuming FIL access applies to US brokerage accounts.
• FIL API ToS notes a 100 requests/minute rate limit and explicitly prohibits redistribution of API data to third parties without written consent.
• Source: https://developer.fil.com/terms-and-conditions

1e. No Public Self-Service API for Retail Order Execution

• Multiple community and industry sources confirm Fidelity does not have an open public API for retail brokerage order execution.
• Source: https://apitracker.io/a/fidelity (third-party API tracker noting lack of public API)
• GitHub projects (e.g., kennyboy106/fidelity-api) use browser automation via Playwright; these are unofficial, unsupported, and explicitly prohibited by Fidelity ToS (see Section 3).
• Source: https://github.com/kennyboy106/fidelity-api
• Source: https://pypi.org/project/fidelity-api/ (Playwright-based unofficial package)

2. Auth Model

2a. Consumer OAuth via Fidelity Access

• Fidelity Access uses token-based authorization. The customer authenticates directly on Fidelity's site; the third-party receives an access token, not credentials.
• Source: https://www.fidelity.com/security/fidelity-access-data-security
• Changing a Fidelity password does NOT revoke an active Fidelity Access token (OAuth-standard behavior). The customer can revoke via Fidelity's data-sharing dashboard.
• Source: https://www.fidelity.com/security/third-party-app-protection

2b. Credential Sharing: Active Enforcement (September 2024)

• Fidelity announced in September 2024 it would begin blocking platforms that rely on credential sharing (username/password) from accessing or transacting in customer accounts.
• Source: https://newsroom.fidelity.com/pressreleases/update-on-fidelity-s-secure-data-sharing-efforts/s/7a30c2e4-f070-4396-b04c-b773678d59f9
• This action targeted third-party fintech firms (notably Pontera) managing employer-sponsored retirement accounts via credential sharing without plan-sponsor oversight.
• Source: https://www.planadviser.com/fidelity-limit-third-party-401k-access/
• Source: https://investmentnews.com/goria/custodian/schwab-joins-fidelity-in-credential-sharing-crackdown-pontera-escalates-fidelity-blame/262952
• Raxx relevance: Any credential-based or screen-scraping approach to Fidelity would place Raxx in the same category Fidelity is actively blocking. This is both a ToS and a relationship risk.

2c. Institutional Auth (Wealthscape / WIX)

• Integration Xchange integrations use Fidelity's Wealthscape SSO. Auth model details are not publicly disclosed and require engagement with a Relationship Manager.
• FIX-based order routing (if available) would require a separate FIX session agreement — this is standard for institutional order-management systems.

2d. GLBA Implications of Credential Handling

• Any Raxx integration that causes customers to share Fidelity credentials with Raxx (even briefly, even in a vault) implicates GLBA Safeguards Rule obligations.
• The FTC's updated Safeguards Rule (effective June 2023, fully enforced May 2024) classifies data aggregators and fintech apps that access consumer financial account data as "financial institutions" subject to GLBA.
• Source: https://cdp.cooley.com/fintech-faces-expanded-applicability-of-glbas-privacy-and-security-requirements/
• Source: https://specopssoft.com/blog/glba-safeguards-rule-requirements-update/
• Requirements triggered: MFA for all system access, encryption in transit and at rest, annual pen testing or continuous monitoring, designated qualified individual (CIO-equivalent), documented risk assessment, vendor oversight obligations.
• Source: https://fingerprint.com/blog/what-fintechs-need-to-know-about-ftc-safeguards-rule/
• FTC breach notification requirement: >500 customer records of unencrypted nonpublic financial information must be reported to the FTC.
• Source: https://perkinscoie.com/insights/update/ftc-announces-data-breach-reporting-obligation-under-glba-safeguards-rule
• Whether Raxx already triggers GLBA (via Alpaca integration) is a question for a securities/privacy attorney. The OAuth path (customer never hands Fidelity credentials to Raxx) reduces but does not eliminate GLBA exposure.

3. Terms of Service / API License

3a. General Fidelity Website ToS — Automated Access Prohibition

• Fidelity's ToS for its website (applicable to retail Fidelity.com) explicitly prohibits:

  "accessing ... websites using devices or software designed to provide high-speed, automated, or repeated access, including tools intended to facilitate trading in a Fidelity account or automate obtaining, downloading, transferring, or transmitting information, unless such tools are expressly approved in writing by Fidelity."

• Source: https://nb.fidelity.com/public/nb/default/resourceslibrary/articles/termsofuse
• The prohibition is not limited to browser automation; it appears to encompass any unauthorized programmatic access.
• Raxx relevance: Any integration that has not received express written approval from Fidelity is in ToS violation territory. This includes the unofficial Python/Playwright packages.

3b. Full View ToS (eMoney aggregation product)

• Full View (Fidelity's account-aggregation product, powered by eMoney) has a separate ToS. Key restrictions:
• Use limited to "personal use" only; commercial or SaaS use not permitted.
• No API access is provided; web/mobile browser only.
• Data redistribution is prohibited: "You may not copy, reproduce, distribute, or create derivative works from this content."
• Service terminable "at any time without notice."
• Source: https://www.fidelity.com/spend-save/full-view/terms-of-use

3c. FIL (International) Developer API ToS

• Note: FIL = Fidelity International, the non-US entity. See caveat in Section 1d.
• Key clauses:
• Non-exclusive, non-transferable, revocable license to use APIs.
• Prohibition on sublicensing, redistribution, or commercial exploitation of API data without prior written consent.
• Derivative works automatically assigned to FIL.
• Rate limit: 100 requests/minute; exceeding requires written consent.
• Termination: FIL may terminate access "at any time" without providing reasons.
• Liability cap: greater of fees paid in prior year or $50.
• Source: https://developer.fil.com/terms-and-conditions
• Raxx relevance: Even if FIL APIs were applicable to US accounts (which they likely are not), the data redistribution prohibition and $50 liability cap would be materially problematic for a SaaS use case.

3d. Clauses to Surface for Attorney Review

The following clause patterns appear across Fidelity's ToS surface and should be reviewed against Raxx's intended use:

4. Regulatory Posture

4a. Broker-Dealer Registration — Does Raxx Need to Register?

• The SEC defines a "broker" as "any person engaged in the business of effecting transactions in securities for the account of others." The SEC defines a "dealer" as a person buying/selling securities for its own account as part of a regular business.
• Source: https://www.sec.gov/about/divisions-offices/division-trading-markets/division-trading-markets-compliance-guides/guide-broker-dealer-registration
• Critical question: Does Raxx "effect" a transaction when it fires a rule-based order via a customer's authenticated broker session? The SEC guidance indicates that merely routing or facilitating an order can trigger broker registration requirements even if Raxx never holds funds or securities.
• Source: https://www.finra.org/registration-exams-ce/broker-dealers
• The SEC's March 2024 rule expanding dealer registration requirements (targeting proprietary trading firms) has shifted what previously would have been considered outside the definition.
• Source: https://www.sidley.com/en/insights/newsupdates/2024/02/us-sec-expands-dealer-registration-requirements-including-to-certain-private-funds
• The Alpaca comparison: Raxx currently routes orders via Alpaca. Alpaca is itself a registered broker-dealer (FINRA member), and customers open Alpaca accounts directly — Raxx is not the executing broker. A Fidelity integration where the customer holds a Fidelity account and Raxx submits orders to Fidelity via API could look legally identical, BUT this hinges on how the routing mechanism is structured and documented. Confirm with securities attorney.
• Self-description as "not a broker-dealer" or "not an RIA" does not confer exemption; the actual activities determine regulatory classification.
• Source: https://www.finra.org/registration-exams-ce/broker-dealers

4b. Investment Adviser Act — Does Raxx Need to Register as an RIA?

• The Investment Advisers Act of 1940 defines "investment adviser" broadly, including anyone who provides investment advice for compensation.
• Two key potential exemptions for a rules-based SaaS tool:
• Publisher's exclusion: Applies to publications providing impersonal, bona fide, general commentary of regular circulation. The SEC issued a Request for Comment in June 2022 specifically asking whether modern fintech "information providers" (personalized analytics, algorithmic model portfolios) should still benefit from this exclusion.
  • Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/06/22/2022-13307/request-for-comment-on-certain-information-providers-acting-as-investment-advisers
• Broker-dealer "solely incidental" exclusion: A broker-dealer's investment advice that is "solely incidental" to brokerage activity and for which no special compensation is charged falls outside the Advisers Act. Raxx is not a broker-dealer, so this is not directly available to Raxx.
  • Source: https://www.sec.gov/rules/2019/06/commission-interpretation-regarding-solely-incidental-prong-broker-dealer-exclusion
• Raxx's structure-enforcement framing ("we enforce the rules the user already decided on") is directionally aligned with the "tool, not adviser" argument, but the SEC has signaled that personalized automation can still constitute advice even without explicit recommendations.
• Source: https://clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu/2025/06/04/regulating-algorithmic-accountability-in-financial-advising/
• Source: https://tickeron.com/trading-investing-101/how-will-the-secs-new-rules-impact-algorithmbased-trading-platforms/
• Confirmed with attorney required before any Fidelity account integration goes live.

4c. Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI)

• Reg BI applies to broker-dealers making securities recommendations to retail customers. If Raxx is not a registered broker-dealer, Reg BI does not directly apply.
• Source: https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/key-topics/regulation-best-interest
• Nuance: If Raxx's rule templates, default parameters, or strategy suggestions function as de facto recommendations, the SEC's position is that such functionality may trigger Reg BI or Advisers Act compliance regardless of self-classification.
• Source: https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46115
• A Fidelity account integration does not itself change this analysis; the trigger is what Raxx does with the account, not which broker holds it.

4d. SEC Rule 17a-4 — Books and Records

• Rule 17a-4 applies to registered broker-dealers and investment advisers. If Raxx is neither (unregistered SaaS), 17a-4 does not directly apply to Raxx.
• Source: https://www.myrialawyer.com/sec-rule17a-4/
• However: Orders submitted by Raxx that execute in a customer's Fidelity account become part of Fidelity's books-and-records obligations as the executing broker. Fidelity must retain those records.
• If Raxx ever registers as an RIA or BD, 17a-4 would apply to all customer communications and trade-related records Raxx generates.
• An attorney should assess whether the algorithmic order-generation logs Raxx maintains today would be considered "business records" subject to retention requirements under any future registration scenario.
• Source: https://www.innreg.com/blog/sec-rule-204-2

4e. GLBA Safeguards Rule (revisited in regulatory context)

• Raxx as a fintech accessing consumer financial account data is likely a "financial institution" under the FTC's expanded Safeguards Rule interpretation.
• Source: https://cdp.cooley.com/fintech-faces-expanded-applicability-of-glbas-privacy-and-security-requirements/
• Penalties: up to $100,000 per violation; officers/directors up to $10,000 per violation.
• Source: https://breachcraft.io/compliance/glba/
• This applies regardless of which broker Raxx connects to (Alpaca, Fidelity, or others); it is a function of what data Raxx handles, not who the custodian is.

5. Customer Disclosure Requirements

5a. What Raxx Must Disclose When Connecting a Customer's Fidelity Account

The following disclosure obligations appear to apply, pending attorney review:

• GLBA Privacy Notice: A "clear and conspicuous" notice explaining what nonpublic personal information (NPI) Raxx collects from the Fidelity connection, how it is used, and how it is protected. Required annually under GLBA Section 503.
• Source: https://www.innreg.com/blog/glba-privacy-notice
• Data sharing scope: The customer must affirmatively authorize the scope of access (read-only vs. read+trade). OAuth flow must make this clear. Fidelity Access shows the customer which accounts are being shared.
• Source: https://www.fidelity.com/security/fidelity-access-data-security
• Revocation instructions: Customer must be told how to revoke Raxx's access to their Fidelity account (both via Fidelity's dashboard and via Raxx's app).
• No fiduciary/advisory relationship disclaimer: If Raxx is not an RIA, the consent flow should disclaim any advisory, fiduciary, or investment-recommendation relationship. Attorney should draft this language.
• Order-execution authorization: If Raxx is submitting orders to Fidelity, the customer must have explicitly authorized algorithmic order submission, including the scope of permitted order types and position limits.

5b. Comparison to Alpaca Flow

• The existing Alpaca flow involves customers opening an Alpaca account directly (Alpaca is the RIA/BD); Raxx operates as an authorized third party via Alpaca's API. This structure places regulatory responsibility primarily on Alpaca.
• A Fidelity integration where the customer is a Fidelity retail account holder introduces a different dynamic: Fidelity's relationship is with the retail customer, not with Raxx. Raxx is an uninvited third party from Fidelity's perspective unless a formal partnership exists.
• Key difference: Alpaca has a formal developer program with documented API terms for algo-trading platforms. Fidelity does not offer an equivalent for retail accounts. This is a fundamental structural difference that must be resolved before launch.

6. Integration Partnership Options Compared

6a. Direct Fidelity API

• Status: Not publicly available for retail brokerage order execution to unregistered SaaS. Institutional programs (WIX, DBS) require Fidelity relationship and appear to target RIAs/BDs.
• Path to access: Contact Fidelity Relationship Manager + potentially register as RIA or obtain broker-dealer sponsorship.
• Data freshness: Real-time (if institutional WIX path achieved).
• Order routing: Yes, via FIX (institutional only).
• Customer UX: Fidelity SSO into Wealthscape embedded frame, or API-driven.
• Cost: Undisclosed; likely contract-negotiated.
• Timeline to live: 6-18 months (relationship establishment + legal + technical integration).
• Raxx eligibility today: Not confirmed.

6b. SnapTrade Aggregator (Fidelity via SnapTrade)

• Status: Available. SnapTrade has a documented Fidelity integration using OAuth.
• Data freshness: Real-time for positions, orders, balances.
• Order routing: None for Fidelity. SnapTrade explicitly states Fidelity integration is read-only.
• Source: https://snaptrade.com/brokerage-integrations/fidelity-api
• Customer UX: Customer authenticates directly with Fidelity via OAuth; no credential sharing.
• Cost: Free plan (up to 5 connections); $2/connected user/month on Pay-as-You-Go; custom pricing for volume.
• Source: https://snaptrade.com/pricing
• Rate limits: 250 requests/minute standard; higher on custom plans.
• Developer onboarding: Self-service. Developer signup available.
• Raxx eligibility today: Yes.
• Key limitation: No order execution for Fidelity. Raxx could display portfolio data but not fire orders.

6c. Plaid Investments

• Status: Available. Fidelity access is auto-granted ~8 weeks after Production access on Growth/Custom plans.
• Source: https://plaid.com/docs/investments/
• Data freshness: Overnight (checked after market hours). Not real-time. Unsuitable for active trading workflows.
• Order routing: None. Plaid Investments is read-only. No order-execution capability.
• Source: https://plaid.com/products/investments/
• Customer UX: Plaid Link (standard OAuth-style flow).
• Cost: Not publicly listed; Growth/Custom plan required.
• Raxx eligibility today: Yes, but data latency makes it unsuitable for real-time trading support.
• Key limitation: Overnight data refresh + no order execution. Better fit for portfolio analytics than trading platforms.

6d. Summary Recommendation for Attorney / Fidelity Rep Meeting

The research suggests a two-phase posture: 1. Now: Integrate Fidelity read-only data via SnapTrade for portfolio visibility features. This is unblocked, self-service, OAuth-safe, and GLBA-defensible. 2. Future (requires meeting outcomes): Explore whether Fidelity institutional partnership (WIX or DBS) is achievable for a small SaaS, or whether an aggregator with order-execution capability for Fidelity will emerge. Neither path is open today without material effort.

7. Cost Comparison

8. Operational Considerations

• Sandbox / test environment: No publicly documented sandbox for Fidelity retail or institutional APIs. SnapTrade offers a testing/sandbox environment for developers.
• Fidelity uptime SLAs: No public SLA disclosure found for Fidelity's retail or institutional APIs.
• Fidelity incident history: Fidelity reported a data breach in August 2024 affecting ~77,000 customers via a third-party application.
• Source (unsourced here — confirm with public incident reports or Fidelity newsroom): verify independently.
• Customer support tier: Institutional WIX includes a dedicated integration consultant. SnapTrade includes Discord (free), email (Pay-as-You-Go), and dedicated Slack (custom). No Fidelity developer support channel publicly available.

Jurisdiction Flags

• All regulatory analysis above is federal US law (SEC, FINRA, FTC/GLBA).
• State law: Several states (California, New York) have additional financial data privacy laws. California's CCPA applies to Raxx if thresholds are met (100K+ consumer records or 50%+ revenue from data). California Financial Information Privacy Act may impose additional consent requirements.
• Fidelity International (FIL): Separate entity, UK/international jurisdiction. Do not assume FIL developer portal applies to US Fidelity Investments accounts.
• FINRA membership: Required for broker-dealers; Raxx's exposure to FINRA oversight depends on whether broker-dealer registration is triggered (see Section 4a).

Timing / Deadlines

No hard regulatory deadlines identified for the research topics above. However:

• GLBA Safeguards Rule is fully in effect as of May 13, 2024. If Raxx is not already compliant, this is past-due. Flag immediately for attorney.
• Source: https://fingerprint.com/blog/what-fintechs-need-to-know-about-ftc-safeguards-rule/
• Fidelity credential-sharing enforcement began September 2024. Any screen-scraping or credential-based access path should be treated as already blocked.
• Source: https://newsroom.fidelity.com/pressreleases/update-on-fidelity-s-secure-data-sharing-efforts/s/7a30c2e4-f070-4396-b04c-b773678d59f9

Questions for Attorney (12 items)

1. Does Raxx's current Alpaca integration trigger broker-dealer registration requirements under the Securities Exchange Act, and would the same analysis apply to a Fidelity integration? What specific facts about the routing mechanism determine the answer?

2. Does the structure-enforcement framing ("user-defined rules, Raxx enforces them") qualify for the publisher's exclusion or any other exclusion from Investment Adviser status under the Advisers Act? What product or UI characteristics would push Raxx over the line into RIA territory?

3. Is Raxx currently a "financial institution" subject to the FTC Safeguards Rule by virtue of the Alpaca integration? If so, what specific controls does the 2023/2024 updated rule require that Raxx may not yet have?

4. If Raxx uses SnapTrade to provide read-only Fidelity portfolio data in the Raxx UI — where the customer sees their Fidelity positions alongside their Alpaca positions — does this constitute data redistribution that would violate Fidelity's ToS or require a Fidelity data-sharing agreement?

5. Fidelity's website ToS prohibits automated access without express written approval. Does OAuth-based access via SnapTrade (where the customer authorizes through Fidelity's own OAuth flow) require separate written approval from Fidelity directed at Raxx? Or does Fidelity's authorization of SnapTrade as an aggregator partner cover Raxx as a downstream developer?

6. What is the customer disclosure language Raxx must provide before connecting a Fidelity account? Specifically: GLBA Privacy Notice requirements, scope-of-access consent, and investment-advice disclaimer. Please draft or review draft language.

7. Does firing an order to Fidelity via a formal institutional API (if Raxx ever achieved WIX access) make Raxx the "introducing broker" or "order originator" under applicable securities law, and what registration or disclosure obligations follow?

8. SEC Rule 17a-4 aside — does Raxx have any independent obligation today to retain records of orders it generates, even if Raxx is not a registered broker-dealer or RIA? What is the retention period and format if yes?

9. Does Fidelity's active enforcement action against credential-sharing platforms (Pontera case) have any precedential or practical implication for Raxx, even if Raxx uses OAuth rather than credentials? Is there litigation risk from Fidelity if the integration is perceived as unauthorized?

10. Reg BI applies to broker-dealers; does the SEC's "conflicts of interest in technology" proposal (2023) or any finalized rule extend Reg BI-style obligations to non-BD fintech platforms offering automated trading?

11. At what AUM, revenue, or customer count would Raxx be required to register as an RIA at the federal level vs. the state level? Is the "Internet Adviser exemption" (SEC rule finalized March 2024) available to Raxx's current business model?

12. What contract terms should Raxx require from Fidelity in any institutional partnership agreement to protect against sudden API termination? Standard cure-period, SLA, and liability terms for a small SaaS vs. a Tier-1 financial institution.

Questions for Fidelity Representative (9 items)

1. Is there a formal partner onboarding path in the Wealthscape Integration Xchange for an independent SaaS platform (not an RIA, not a broker-dealer) that wants to submit orders on behalf of retail Fidelity customers who have consented?

2. What are the minimum eligibility requirements to become a WIX integration partner — specifically regarding registration status (do we need to be an RIA or BD, or is a fintech company sufficient)?

3. Does Fidelity have or plan to offer a public developer program for retail brokerage order execution via OAuth, similar to Alpaca's model? If not, what is the roadmap?

4. The "Fidelity Access" OAuth infrastructure currently supports read-only aggregators (e.g., SnapTrade). Is there a path for Fidelity Access to support order submission by authorized third-party platforms, and if so, what is the qualification process?

5. What branding and disclosure obligations would Raxx have if it integrates with Fidelity? Does Fidelity require "Powered by Fidelity" or similar attribution in the customer UI?

6. What API rate limits, uptime SLAs, and sandbox/test-environment access does Fidelity provide to WIX partners?

7. How does Fidelity handle the books-and-records trail for orders originated by a third-party platform via the WIX API? Does Fidelity's confirmation data include the originating platform identifier?

8. What data fields are available via WIX real-time APIs for a connected retail brokerage account (positions, balances, open orders, order history, buying power, margin status)? Are options positions included?

9. Is there a Fidelity relationship manager assigned to early-stage fintech partnerships, or does the WIX program only engage with companies above a certain AUM or customer threshold?

Sources

https://www.fidelity.com/security/third-party-app-protection
https://www.fidelity.com/security/fidelity-access-data-security
https://newsroom.fidelity.com/pressreleases/update-on-fidelity-s-secure-data-sharing-efforts/s/7a30c2e4-f070-4396-b04c-b773678d59f9
https://clearingcustody.fidelity.com/app/item/RD_9883092/integration-xchange.html
https://integrationxchange.wealthscape.com/
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20181016005148/en
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200218005068/en/Fidelity%C2%AE-Easier-Firms-Build-Tailored-Technology-Platforms
https://www.fidelity.com/go/designated-brokerage-services
https://developer.fil.com/
https://developer.fil.com/api-catalogue
https://developer.fil.com/terms-and-conditions
https://snaptrade.com/brokerage-integrations/fidelity-api
https://snaptrade.com/pricing
https://snaptrade.com/brokerage-integrations
https://plaid.com/products/investments/
https://plaid.com/docs/investments/
https://nb.fidelity.com/public/nb/default/resourceslibrary/articles/termsofuse
https://www.fidelity.com/spend-save/full-view/terms-of-use
https://www.planadviser.com/fidelity-limit-third-party-401k-access/
https://401kspecialistmag.com/held-away-assets-fidelity-pontera-feud-highlights-different-perspectives-on-access-vs-security/
https://investmentnews.com/goria/custodian/schwab-joins-fidelity-in-credential-sharing-crackdown-pontera-escalates-fidelity-blame/262952
https://www.sec.gov/about/divisions-offices/division-trading-markets/division-trading-markets-compliance-guides/guide-broker-dealer-registration
https://www.finra.org/registration-exams-ce/broker-dealers
https://www.sidley.com/en/insights/newsupdates/2024/02/us-sec-expands-dealer-registration-requirements-including-to-certain-private-funds
https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/key-topics/regulation-best-interest
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R46115
https://tickeron.com/trading-investing-101/how-will-the-secs-new-rules-impact-algorithmbased-trading-platforms/
https://clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu/2025/06/04/regulating-algorithmic-accountability-in-financial-advising/
https://www.myrialawyer.com/sec-rule17a-4/
https://www.innreg.com/blog/sec-rule-204-2
https://cdp.cooley.com/fintech-faces-expanded-applicability-of-glbas-privacy-and-security-requirements/
https://specopssoft.com/blog/glba-safeguards-rule-requirements-update/
https://fingerprint.com/blog/what-fintechs-need-to-know-about-ftc-safeguards-rule/
https://perkinscoie.com/insights/update/ftc-announces-data-breach-reporting-obligation-under-glba-safeguards-rule
https://breachcraft.io/compliance/glba/
https://www.innreg.com/blog/glba-privacy-notice
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/06/22/2022-13307/request-for-comment-on-certain-information-providers-acting-as-investment-advisers
https://www.sec.gov/rules/2019/06/commission-interpretation-regarding-solely-incidental-prong-broker-dealer-exclusion
https://apitracker.io/a/fidelity
https://github.com/kennyboy106/fidelity-api
https://pypi.org/project/fidelity-api/
https://riabiz.com/a/2023/10/19/fidelity-just-dropped-the-hammer-on-screen-scrapers-to-cheers-but-some-firms-like-plaid-are-holdouts-and-the-cfpb-may-wield-the-final-gavel
https://www.americanbanker.com/news/fidelity-latest-financial-firm-to-roll-out-customer-data-api
https://workplacexchange.fidelity.com/public/wpx/api-catalog
https://clearingcustody.fidelity.com/campaigns/emerging-advisor