Catalogue snapshot taken 25 July 2026

Why no single public register can describe US financial providers

A 13,594-record audit shows how four official registry pipelines contribute different pieces of identity, location, scale and customer facing evidence.

ServeAssess study52.3%Dated sample
13,594provider records
7,116registry tagged records
Fourofficial registry pipelines
511words in this edition
Public data infrastructure

Four registry pipelines covered 52.3% of the catalogue.

The other 47.7 percent came through different discovery routes or had not yet received a registry enrichment tag.

FDIC98.3%

matched website

2,351 records
SEC RIA94.6%

matched website

2,427 records
NCUA0%

website field in import

Pipeline limit, not provider conduct
OCC100%

state resolved

103 records
Registry share describes ServeAssess enrichment tags, not each regulator's full population.Download study CSV
Research lineage

What established research measured, and what this study adds.

Established research

Federal registers publish different slices of the market for different legal purposes. The SEC describes its adviser download as a subset of Form ADV and warns that filed information is not agency approved.

SEC adviser data methodology
ServeAssess addition

ServeAssess measured which identity, location, scale and website fields survived cross register matching in one provider catalogue.

Decision useUse several official systems before treating a provider record as complete.
Data behind the figure

How each recorded pipeline contributed

PipelineRecordsCatalogueWebsiteState resolved
Other / not tagged6,47847.7%64.6%0.6%
SEC RIA2,42717.9%94.6%100.0%
FDIC2,35117.3%98.3%99.8%
NCUA2,23516.4%0.0%*100.0%
OCC1030.8%54.4%100.0%
Reading rule

Every percentage and rate belongs to the sample, threshold and period shown beside it. A descriptive relationship is not presented as causation.

01
Evidence led analysis

The bottom line

Official registry pipelines were attached to 7,116 of the 13,594 records in the 25 July snapshot, or 52.3 percent. The remaining 6,478 records came from other discovery routes or had not yet received a registry enrichment tag.

That split does not mean 47.7 percent of providers were unregulated. It records the state of the ServeAssess catalogue and the limits of the four pipelines measured here.

02
Evidence led analysis

The registers supplied different fields

The FDIC pipeline contributed 2,351 records, the SEC investment adviser pipeline 2,427, the NCUA pipeline 2,235 and the OCC pipeline 103. Each source is designed for its own supervisory or disclosure purpose rather than for a universal consumer directory.

Headquarters state was resolved for nearly every tagged record. Customer facing website coverage varied sharply because the source files and enrichment stages exposed different fields.

03
Evidence led analysis

A zero can describe the import, not the provider

None of the 2,235 NCUA tagged records had a matched official website in this snapshot. That is a pipeline limitation, not evidence that credit unions lacked websites. By comparison, website matches were present for 98.3 percent of FDIC tagged records and 94.6 percent of SEC RIA tagged records.

This is why a field availability audit must stay separate from a provider transparency ranking. The absence of a field in a public file cannot be turned into a negative judgement about the institution.

04
Evidence led analysis

Official data still forms the backbone

Registry records are strong evidence for legal identity, charter, regulator, location and dated financial fields. They also help resolve brands that share names and institutions that have merged or changed ownership.

Provider websites add product terms, customer eligibility and service channels. Complaint systems and review platforms add other kinds of evidence. None substitutes for the others.

05
Evidence led analysis

What this adds to existing registry research

The FDIC, NCUA, SEC and OCC already publish large institution datasets. ServeAssess adds a cross register view of which fields survive entity matching and become usable in a provider comparison record.

The result is a data infrastructure study rather than a ranking of regulators. Counts describe the July catalogue, not the total population supervised by each agency.

06
Evidence led analysis

Method

The audit grouped records by registry_enrichment_version in the public provider export. Tags beginning with fdic, ncua, sec ria and occ formed the four named pipelines. Blank tags formed the other or not yet tagged group.

Website match meant a nonblank website field. Headquarters resolution required a two letter state value rather than blank or the national US placeholder. Percentages were calculated within each pipeline.

07
Evidence led analysis

Limits

Records can be discovered through more than one source even though the export retains one enrichment version tag. The tag therefore identifies the recorded pipeline, not every official system in which the provider appears.

The study does not measure regulatory quality, enforcement intensity, consumer access or product suitability. A later enrichment run can change field coverage without any change at the provider.

Source trail

Open the underlying records

Every result on this page belongs to the dated sample above. Later catalogue updates do not silently change its denominator.