ISO 20022 VS Model Context Protocol
As of 30 October 2026, Model Context Protocol is named by 3,710 companies and ISO 20022 by 202; ISO 20022 skews to companies under 200 people (22% vs 42%), Model Context Protocol to companies over 1,000 (31% vs 57%).
As of 30 October 2026 · refreshed daily · counts move as websites, DNS and career sites are re-read.
The website-and-DNS footprint is not comparable between a marketing suite and a CRM: ISO 20022's script and mail records show on hundreds of thousands of small sites, Model Context Protocol rarely leaves a trace outside its own apps. Compare on the job-posting numbers; use the footprint for reach.
- ISO 20022: 2–200 employees
- 22%
- Model Context Protocol: 2–200 employees
- 42%
- ISO 20022: 1,000+ employees
- 57%
- Model Context Protocol: 1,000+ employees
- 31%
- Postings per company, 90 days
- 3.3 · 3.2
- Website or DNS footprint
- 0 · 0
Who chooses which
Share of each tool's companies in every segment. "Leans" marks a gap of more than two points.
| Segment | ISO 20022 | share | Model Context Protocol | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-employed | 2 | 1% | 64 | 2% | even |
| 2-10 employees | 11 | 5% | 252 | 7% | even |
| 11-50 employees | 13 | 6% | 490 | 13% | Model Context Protocol |
| 51-200 employees | 21 | 10% | 800 | 22% | Model Context Protocol |
| 201-500 employees | 25 | 12% | 548 | 15% | Model Context Protocol |
| 501-1000 employees | 15 | 7% | 408 | 11% | Model Context Protocol |
| 1001-5000 employees | 48 | 24% | 612 | 16% | ISO 20022 |
| 5001-10000 employees | 19 | 9% | 160 | 4% | ISO 20022 |
| 10,001+ employees | 48 | 24% | 376 | 10% | ISO 20022 |
| Segment | ISO 20022 | share | Model Context Protocol | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Business & finance services | 115 | 57% | 781 | 21% | ISO 20022 |
| Technology & software | 59 | 29% | 1,931 | 52% | Model Context Protocol |
| Manufacturing & industry | 11 | 5% | 276 | 7% | even |
| Utilities & infrastructure | 5 | 2% | 85 | 2% | even |
| Media & content | 3 | 1% | 145 | 4% | Model Context Protocol |
| Transport, logistics & rental | 3 | 1% | 50 | 1% | even |
| Public, community & associations | 2 | 1% | 82 | 2% | even |
| Consumer services & leisure | 2 | 1% | 85 | 2% | even |
| Automotive | 1 | 0% | 30 | 1% | even |
| Commerce & trade | 1 | 0% | 99 | 3% | Model Context Protocol |
| Health care | – | – | 67 | 2% | outside top 12 |
| Property & construction | – | – | 48 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | ISO 20022 | share | Model Context Protocol | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 92 | 46% | 2,391 | 64% | Model Context Protocol |
| United Kingdom | 23 | 11% | 285 | 8% | ISO 20022 |
| Germany | 19 | 9% | 212 | 6% | ISO 20022 |
| France | 12 | 6% | 103 | 3% | ISO 20022 |
| Canada | 8 | 4% | 106 | 3% | even |
| Australia | 5 | 2% | 41 | 1% | even |
| India | 5 | 2% | 52 | 1% | even |
| Switzerland | 3 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Denmark | 3 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Lithuania | 3 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Portugal | 3 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Singapore | 3 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Netherlands | – | – | 52 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Sweden | – | – | 42 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Spain | – | – | 33 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Brazil | – | – | 32 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Poland | – | – | 32 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | ISO 20022 | share | Model Context Protocol | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Software engineering | 214 | 26% | 4,101 | 28% | Model Context Protocol |
| IT operations & business systems | 189 | 23% | 1,440 | 10% | ISO 20022 |
| Product, program & project management | 94 | 11% | 659 | 5% | ISO 20022 |
| Finance & accounting | 56 | 7% | 63 | 0% | ISO 20022 |
| Data & AI | 17 | 2% | 4,805 | 33% | Model Context Protocol |
| General management & consulting | 11 | 1% | 76 | 1% | even |
| Sales | 11 | 1% | 461 | 3% | even |
| Legal, compliance & risk | 6 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Business development & strategy | 5 | 1% | 62 | 0% | even |
| Customer service & success | 5 | 1% | 146 | 1% | even |
| Manufacturing and production | 4 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Marketing & communications | 4 | 0% | 171 | 1% | even |
| Engineering (non-software) | – | – | 205 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Design & UX | – | – | 109 | 1% | outside top 12 |
The companies behind each column
Companies using ISO 20022 →
Companies using Model Context Protocol →
api specs data formats ranked →
Quote the sentence with the date and the link. The numbers change daily; the link always shows the current ones.
Model Context Protocol is named by 3,710 companies in job postings and ISO 20022 by 202; 0 name both. (Breaknorm, 30 October 2026, https://breaknorm.co/compare/iso-20022-vs-model-context-protocol)
Read from the source, not self-reported
Every number on this page can be traced to a page we crawled or a posting we read. Full methodology →
- Job postingsRead hourly from career sites. A tool counts when the employer's own text names it as the team's system; both tools can count for one company.
- Website and DNSScripts and embeds on the company's pages, plus SPF, DKIM, MX and CNAME records of its domain that point at the vendor.
- SegmentsCountry, size and industry from the company profile built from its website.
- Not a reviewNo ratings, prices or feature claims. For those, read the vendors.
ISO 20022 vs Model Context Protocol: questions
Which is more used, ISO 20022 or Model Context Protocol?
By companies naming it in their own job postings, Model Context Protocol (3,710) over ISO 20022 (202). By website-and-DNS footprint, Model Context Protocol (0 vs 0), because its scripts and mail records sit on many small company sites.
Who chooses ISO 20022?
22% of ISO 20022 companies have 2 to 200 employees, against 42% for Model Context Protocol. 57% of ISO 20022 companies have over 1,000 employees, against 31% for Model Context Protocol.
Do companies run both?
0 companies name both in their postings, usually ISO 20022 in marketing and Model Context Protocol in sales, or during a migration.
Where do these numbers come from?
From the employer's own text in job postings read hourly from career sites, and from scripts found on company websites in our crawl. No vendor data, no surveys.
Get either list your way
The same data as a search, over MCP and the API, as bulk files, or pushed to you as it changes.
Every company on either tool,
with the person who owns it
Filter on ISO 20022 or Model Context Protocol. Start free, no card.