Looks nice - really - but I wouldn't touch you till you got external validation of your security practices and shared more about what you do there on your FAQs. Encrypting access tokens is just table stakes. My finances are private and not to be trusted with just anyone. The folks you compare yourself to have that type of certification but it's not listed in the comparison.
Even a SOC type 1 would show you're on the journey.
_wesley 1 hours ago [-]
Thanks, that's fair. No SOC 2 yet, but I understand if that's a dealbreaker. I will expand the FAQs/Comparison pages to make that clear.
pj_mukh 48 minutes ago [-]
Very interesting, and I've been looking for something like this. Kudos for building this. But for my information do you think you have a different handle on this vs. say ChatGPT's Plaid connection [1]. What do you think you offer differently?
Thanks. It's an interesting time for sure. Muse also launched with Plaid integration support. I haven't tested either offering (and probably won't ever trust Meta with anything), so take these with a grain of salt:
- Privacy. Stoke is a paid subscription. I’m not selling your data. Caveat: if you connect an agent over MCP, what that agent does with your data is up to you. I can't control that.
- Data. The core product is the projection, and it’s only as good as the data underneath it. Plaid data is imperfect, so there’s always some cleanup to do. ChatGPT and Muse may do a decent job of recategorizing transactions and even remembering those fixes for future ones, but I think direct access to those controls (categories, rules, overrides) is a better experience than asking a chatbot.
- Portability. Everything you’ve modeled lives in Stoke, not in one product's memory. You can freely switch from ChatGPT to Claude or anything else without losing anything.
- Not mutually exclusive. All the questions you would ask your LLM about your finances, you can still do via the Stoke MCP, so I see it as the best of both worlds.
skinfaxi 1 hours ago [-]
> The Service is currently published under the brand name VoidHQ as the product Stoke Money. Both names are subject to change.
The governing terms are California's. I checked CA business registry and found no 'VoidHQ' or 'Void HQ'. Not sure who I would be trusting with my data.
_wesley 26 seconds ago [-]
Thanks, totally fair to be wary. It's a one-person project right now. I'm registering an LLC, and the terms and privacy policy pages will be updated once that's done.
Even a SOC type 1 would show you're on the journey.
[1]: https://openai.com/index/personal-finance-chatgpt/
- Privacy. Stoke is a paid subscription. I’m not selling your data. Caveat: if you connect an agent over MCP, what that agent does with your data is up to you. I can't control that.
- Data. The core product is the projection, and it’s only as good as the data underneath it. Plaid data is imperfect, so there’s always some cleanup to do. ChatGPT and Muse may do a decent job of recategorizing transactions and even remembering those fixes for future ones, but I think direct access to those controls (categories, rules, overrides) is a better experience than asking a chatbot.
- Portability. Everything you’ve modeled lives in Stoke, not in one product's memory. You can freely switch from ChatGPT to Claude or anything else without losing anything.
- Not mutually exclusive. All the questions you would ask your LLM about your finances, you can still do via the Stoke MCP, so I see it as the best of both worlds.
The governing terms are California's. I checked CA business registry and found no 'VoidHQ' or 'Void HQ'. Not sure who I would be trusting with my data.