| Ecosystem |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 10 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Wallet.AI ingests financial data from multiple sources (bank accounts, credit cards, investment accounts, transaction histories) through secure API integrations or direct uploads, normalizing heterogeneous data formats into a unified schema for downstream analysis. The system likely uses standardized financial data connectors (Plaid, Yodlee, or proprietary integrations) to handle authentication, data fetching, and transformation into common transaction and account models, enabling cross-institution analysis without manual data entry.
Unique: unknown — insufficient data on whether Wallet.AI uses third-party aggregators (Plaid/Yodlee) or proprietary bank integrations, and whether it implements custom normalization logic or standard financial data schemas
vs alternatives: Free aggregation removes the $5-15/month cost of competitors like Personal Capital or Mint, though sustainability of this offering is unclear
Wallet.AI applies machine learning clustering and classification algorithms to transaction data to identify recurring spending patterns, categorize transactions beyond standard merchant categories, and segment spending into behavioral clusters (e.g., discretionary vs. essential, impulse vs. planned). The system likely uses unsupervised learning (k-means, DBSCAN) on transaction embeddings or supervised classification on merchant/amount/frequency features to detect patterns humans miss, enabling personalized insights into spending habits.
Unique: unknown — insufficient data on specific ML algorithms used (supervised vs. unsupervised), feature engineering approach, or whether clustering is real-time or batch-processed
vs alternatives: AI-driven pattern detection potentially more comprehensive than rule-based categorization in YNAB or Personal Capital, though effectiveness depends on model quality and training data
Wallet.AI generates actionable spending recommendations by analyzing detected patterns, comparing user behavior to anonymized cohort benchmarks, and applying financial heuristics (e.g., 50/30/20 rule, emergency fund targets). The system likely uses a recommendation engine that scores potential optimizations (e.g., 'reduce dining out by $X to reach savings goal') by impact, feasibility, and alignment with user-stated financial goals, then ranks and surfaces top recommendations via the UI.
Unique: unknown — insufficient data on recommendation algorithm (collaborative filtering, content-based, hybrid), how goals are weighted, or whether recommendations are real-time or batch-generated
vs alternatives: Free AI-driven recommendations differentiate from YNAB (manual budgeting) and Personal Capital (advisor-based), though effectiveness depends on algorithm sophistication and data quality
Wallet.AI enables users to define financial goals (savings targets, debt payoff, investment milestones) and tracks progress against these goals by monitoring relevant account balances, transaction flows, and spending categories over time. The system likely calculates goal completion percentage, projects time-to-completion based on current savings rate, and visualizes progress through charts and alerts, updating metrics as new transaction data arrives.
Unique: unknown — insufficient data on whether goals are manually tracked or automatically inferred from spending patterns, and whether projections use simple linear models or more sophisticated forecasting
vs alternatives: Free goal tracking competes with YNAB's paid goal features, though unclear if Wallet.AI offers behavioral nudges or advanced forecasting
Wallet.AI automatically identifies recurring transactions (subscriptions, memberships, regular bills) by analyzing transaction frequency, amount consistency, and merchant patterns over time. The system likely uses time-series analysis or pattern matching to detect transactions that repeat at regular intervals (weekly, monthly, annual) and flags them for user review, enabling identification of forgotten or unwanted subscriptions.
Unique: unknown — insufficient data on detection algorithm (time-series analysis, Fourier transform, simple frequency matching) or how variable-amount subscriptions are handled
vs alternatives: Subscription detection is a differentiator vs. basic budgeting tools, though competitors like Trim and Truebill offer similar functionality
Wallet.AI calculates aggregate financial health metrics (savings rate, debt-to-income ratio, emergency fund adequacy, net worth trajectory) and generates a composite health score that summarizes overall financial well-being. The system likely normalizes multiple metrics into a 0-100 scale, benchmarks against cohort averages, and identifies the top factors limiting the user's score, enabling users to understand their financial position at a glance.
Unique: unknown — insufficient data on which metrics are included in the composite score, how they're weighted, or whether weighting is static or personalized
vs alternatives: Free financial health scoring differentiates from paid advisory services, though simplistic scoring may not appeal to sophisticated users
Wallet.AI projects future income and expenses by analyzing historical transaction patterns, applying time-series forecasting models (ARIMA, exponential smoothing, or ML-based approaches), and adjusting for seasonality and trends. The system likely decomposes spending into trend, seasonal, and irregular components, enabling more accurate projections than simple averages, and surfaces confidence intervals to indicate forecast uncertainty.
Unique: unknown — insufficient data on specific forecasting algorithms used, whether seasonal adjustment is automatic or user-configurable, or how confidence intervals are calculated
vs alternatives: Automated forecasting with seasonal adjustment is more sophisticated than simple budget tools, though Personal Capital and YNAB offer similar features
Wallet.AI aggregates investment account data (stocks, bonds, mutual funds, ETFs, crypto) and calculates performance metrics (total return, annualized return, cost basis, unrealized gains/losses) while analyzing asset allocation against user-defined targets or standard models (e.g., 60/40 stocks/bonds). The system likely tracks individual holdings, calculates portfolio-level metrics, and alerts when allocation drifts beyond tolerance thresholds.
Unique: unknown — insufficient data on whether investment analysis is passive (tracking only) or active (rebalancing recommendations, tax optimization), and which brokers/exchanges are supported
vs alternatives: Free investment tracking removes cost barrier vs. Personal Capital ($0-14/month) and Morningstar ($199/year), though feature depth is unclear
+2 more capabilities
Executes SQL queries against Supabase PostgreSQL instances through the Model Context Protocol, translating natural language or structured query requests into parameterized SQL statements. Uses MCP's tool-calling interface to expose database operations as callable functions with schema validation, enabling LLM agents to perform CRUD operations, joins, and aggregations with automatic connection pooling and credential management through Supabase client SDK.
Unique: Exposes Supabase PostgreSQL as MCP tools with automatic credential injection from Supabase client SDK, eliminating manual connection string management and enabling seamless LLM-to-database queries within Claude or compatible agents
vs alternatives: Tighter integration than generic SQL MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in authentication and connection pooling rather than requiring separate database credential configuration
Exposes Supabase Auth session state and user metadata through MCP tools, allowing agents to inspect current authentication context, retrieve user profiles, and trigger auth-related operations. Integrates with Supabase's JWT-based auth system to validate sessions and access user claims without re-authenticating, using the Supabase client's built-in session management.
Unique: Integrates Supabase's JWT-based auth system directly into MCP tool interface, allowing agents to inspect and act on auth state without managing separate credential stores or re-authentication flows
vs alternatives: More seamless than generic auth MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in session management and avoids redundant credential passing between agent and auth system
Invokes Supabase Edge Functions (serverless TypeScript/JavaScript functions) through MCP tools, passing parameters and receiving results with optional streaming support. Uses Supabase's edge function HTTP API to trigger functions with automatic authentication headers and response parsing, enabling agents to execute custom business logic without embedding it in the agent itself.
Supabase scores higher at 42/100 vs Wallet.AI at 39/100. Wallet.AI leads on adoption and quality, while Supabase is stronger on ecosystem.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Edge Functions as MCP tools with automatic authentication and response parsing, allowing agents to invoke custom serverless logic without managing HTTP clients or credential injection
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic HTTP MCP tools because it handles Supabase-specific authentication, error handling, and response formatting automatically
Subscribes to real-time changes on Supabase tables through MCP's event streaming interface, using Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY mechanism to push INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE events to agents. Maintains persistent WebSocket connections and filters events by table and row-level policies, enabling agents to react to database changes without polling.
Unique: Bridges Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY real-time system with MCP's tool interface, enabling agents to subscribe to database changes without managing WebSocket connections or event serialization
vs alternatives: More efficient than polling-based approaches because it uses Supabase's native real-time infrastructure rather than repeated database queries
Manages files in Supabase Storage buckets through MCP tools, supporting upload, download, list, and delete operations with automatic authentication and path-based access control. Uses Supabase's S3-compatible storage API with built-in support for public/private buckets and signed URLs for temporary access, enabling agents to handle file I/O without managing cloud storage credentials.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Storage's S3-compatible API as MCP tools with automatic authentication and signed URL generation, eliminating the need for agents to manage cloud storage credentials or generate temporary access tokens
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic S3 MCP tools because it leverages Supabase's built-in bucket policies and authentication rather than requiring separate AWS credentials
Performs semantic similarity searches on vector embeddings stored in Supabase PostgreSQL using pgvector extension, translating natural language queries into embedding vectors and executing cosine/L2 distance searches. Integrates with embedding providers (OpenAI, Cohere) or uses pre-computed embeddings, enabling agents to retrieve semantically similar documents or records without full-text search limitations.
Unique: Integrates pgvector directly into MCP tools with automatic embedding generation and distance calculation, enabling agents to perform semantic search without managing separate vector database infrastructure
vs alternatives: More efficient than external vector databases (Pinecone, Weaviate) for Supabase users because it colocates embeddings with relational data, reducing network latency and simplifying data synchronization
Exposes Supabase database schema information through MCP tools, allowing agents to discover table structures, column types, constraints, and relationships without manual schema documentation. Queries PostgreSQL information_schema and Supabase metadata tables to dynamically generate schema descriptions, enabling agents to construct valid queries and understand data relationships.
Unique: Queries Supabase's PostgreSQL information_schema directly through MCP tools, enabling agents to dynamically discover and adapt to database schemas without pre-configured schema definitions
vs alternatives: More flexible than static schema definitions because it reflects live database state, including recent migrations or schema changes
Enforces Supabase Row-Level Security policies within agent queries, ensuring that agents can only access rows permitted by RLS rules defined in the database. Evaluates policies based on authenticated user context (JWT claims, user ID) and applies WHERE clause filters automatically, preventing unauthorized data access at the database layer rather than application layer.
Unique: Delegates authorization enforcement to PostgreSQL RLS policies rather than implementing authorization in agent code, ensuring that data access rules are centralized and cannot be bypassed by agent logic
vs alternatives: More secure than application-level authorization because RLS is enforced at the database layer, preventing accidental data leaks even if agent code has bugs
+1 more capabilities