Codat alternatives for fintech and SaaS teams

Many fintech and SaaS teams built their accounting and commerce integrations on Codat. If you are one of them, you have probably read the news. Codat announced a refocus on commercial banks in 2026 and deprecated legacy products on 28 February 2026 (Codat docs, checked November 2026).

Your situation depends on which Codat products you use and what your contract says. Confirm the details with Codat directly before you plan anything. This post assumes you need, or want, a plan B, and walks through the realistic options and a safe way to move.

First, write down what you actually use#

Before comparing vendors, list your real dependencies. Teams are often surprised by how much they rely on.

• Platforms. Which accounting, commerce and banking systems do your customers connect? How many connections on each?
• Objects. Which data types do you read? Invoices, bills, payments, balance sheets, bank transactions, orders?
• Writes. Do you create or update anything in your customers' systems? Bills, payments, journal entries, bank feed transactions?
• Freshness. How current must the data be? Daily, hourly, on demand?
• Events. Which webhooks does your product depend on?
• Auth flow. Is the connection flow embedded in your product, and how is it branded?
• Data handling. Does your security review assume data is stored by the provider, or fetched live?

This list becomes your evaluation criteria and your migration scope.

The realistic options#

Option 1: another unified API#

Several companies offer unified APIs that include accounting. They differ in focus, so match them to your list.

• Merge is known for breadth across categories such as HR, CRM, ticketing and accounting.
• Rutter focuses on commerce and accounting data for fintech.
• Apideck offers accounting and other categories with a pass-through architecture.
• Unified.to covers a wide range of SaaS categories with real-time pass-through.

Each publishes its own coverage and documentation. Check object-level coverage for your platforms, especially write support, rather than relying on category lists.

Option 2: build in-house#

If you depend on one or two platforms, building direct can be reasonable. You get full control and no provider in the middle.

The costs come later. Each platform needs auth handling, token refresh, rate limit management, webhook verification, error mapping, monitoring and someone on call when month-end traffic spikes. Multiply by every platform on your list. Our build vs buy comparison covers the cost lines.

Option 3: Unify Int#

Unify Int is a unified API on one data model, the Unify Graph, built for finance and product data together. We designed it for the teams this change affects: fintech and SaaS products that read and write accounting data, often alongside commerce data.

Two things set it apart for a Codat migration:

• Finance-grade writes. Idempotency keys, validation before submit, approvals and an audit trail on every write.
• A migration service. The Unify Technology Center plans and runs migrations, including parallel runs and reconnect strategy.

We are in developer preview, so check status per platform on our integration pages before you decide.

How to compare options fairly#

Score each option against your dependency list, not against marketing pages. A simple table works:

Ask each vendor for a sandbox and run your three most important calls against it. A day of testing beats a week of reading docs.

How to migrate without breaking customers#

The risky part of any migration is not the code. It is your customers' connections. A good plan protects them.

1. Assess#

Map every object and field you use today to the new provider's model. Call out gaps early. For each platform, find out whether existing authorizations can move or customers must reconnect.

2. Understand reconnects#

Whether a customer must reconnect depends on who owns the OAuth app credentials. If the original authorization was made against an app registered in your name, the grants may be usable by your new provider, subject to the platform's rules and your contracts. If it was the old provider's app, customers usually need to reconnect.

Plan for both. Where reconnects are needed, batch them, give customers notice, and make the new flow look like your product.

3. Build behind a switch#

Put the new integration behind a per-customer flag. Your product code should call one internal interface that can route to either provider.

4. Run in parallel#

Sync both providers side by side for a subset of customers. Diff the results: record counts, totals, statuses. Fix mapping differences before anyone relies on the new data.

5. Cut over in batches#

Move customers in cohorts, smallest risk first. Keep a rollback point for each batch. Watch error rates and support tickets.

6. Decommission#

Once every cohort is stable, turn off the old provider and remove dead code. Keep the diff reports; your auditors may ask.

Common mistakes#

• Migrating everything at once. Cohorts limit blast radius.
• Skipping the parallel run. Mapping differences show up in totals, not in unit tests.
• Forgetting webhooks. If your product reacts to events, test event parity, not only data parity.
• Leaving writes to the end. Writes are where behavior differs most. Test them first.
• Not telling customers. Even a silent migration deserves a note to your support team.

How Unify Int fits#

If you are leaving Codat, start with an assessment. The Migration service maps your current usage to the Unify Graph, runs a parallel sync and plans cutover. Compare details on our Codat comparison page, or plan a migration with the Technology Center.