Connectivity Gaps with Modern Financial Institutions – Is Quicken’s Aggregation Strategy Evolving?

xriley75

I’ve been a Quicken power user for over 15 years, and my subscription renewed January 11. Over time, I’ve experienced a steady decline in connectivity reliability with several major financial institutions.

Currently unsupported or non-functional for me:

• Marcus (recently dropped)
• Empower (retirement account not updating)
• Apple Card
• Apple Savings
• OnePay

These are not niche providers — they are mainstream institutions.

For context: I work in banking software and have direct experience integrating with aggregation providers such as Plaid and Finicity. I’m familiar with OFX, tokenized API access models, and the commercial realities behind data-sharing agreements. I understand that banks ultimately control access. However, competitors such as Monarch Money and Copilot successfully connect to these institutions using modern aggregation networks (Plaid, Finicity, MX, etc.), which suggests this is not simply a “bank refuses access” issue but a difference in aggregation strategy or partnership coverage.

Additionally, even manual import is increasingly problematic. Many institutions now only provide standard CSV exports. Quicken’s import options are extremely limited — in practice, the only broadly usable format is the legacy Mint-style CSV import. That requires significant manual reformatting and transformation work just to load basic transaction data. Banks often no longer provide QFX/OFX files compatible with Quicken, so even fallback workflows are becoming harder to maintain.

From a customer standpoint, the implementation details are secondary. Reliable connectivity and flexible import support are core value propositions. Right now I’m spending more time repairing feeds and transforming CSV files than actually using Quicken for financial management.

So my questions are:

1. Is Quicken actively pursuing expanded support for these modern fintech institutions?
2. Has Quicken’s aggregation strategy evolved to incorporate broader third-party aggregators where legacy connections are being deprecated?
3. Are there plans to modernize CSV import capabilities to support more flexible field mapping rather than relying on a narrow legacy format?
4. How is Quicken adapting as financial institutions move away from older Direct Connect / proprietary pathways toward tokenized API-based models?

This is not a troubleshooting request — it’s a product direction question.

As someone with nearly 20 years of historical data invested in the platform, clarity around Quicken’s connectivity and import roadmap is critical in determining whether to continue long-term.

I would appreciate input from someone who can speak to product and aggregation strategy rather than individual support cases.

jacobs

@xriley75 Those are fair questions to be wondering about as a longtime Quicken user. Unfortunately, I have never seen a Quicken executive above the level of a product manager post on this forum, and I have never seen anyone share long-term product strategy here.

As you likely know, Quicken was the original product at the founding of Intuit some 43 years ago, but grew to be an ever-smaller and more niche piece of the company after the turn of the century, suffering from benign neglect, until it was sold off in 2016. But the stand-alone Quicken company was still tightly tied to Intuit's connectivity processes, and the code in Quicken's legacy and newer products are built around it. It might be possible to yank out Intuit connectivity to replace it with Plaid or another aggregation partner, but I suspect that would be a massive undertaking (especially with parts of the Quicken Windows code that date back 3+ decades, and even Quicken Mac's connectivity code approaching 20 years old. But even if Quicken is quietly working on a strategy to switch away from Intuit for connectivity, I just cannot imagine that being discussed publicly until that was a done deal and they're ready to launch the new direction.

That's mostly about your first and second questions. Your last question is how Quicken is adapting as financial institutions move away from older Direct Connect, I think we have been watching that process over the past few years. Quicken developed the back-end systems to handle the newer FDX/OAuth API token-driven API, and more and more financial institutions have made the change. Some have had little o no announcement or fanfare, and have worked pretty much seamlessly. My bank is an example: I was told to follow a process to login via the bank's website, and within minutes, I was smoothly up and running on the new connectivity. And we've also seen financial institutions stumble badly due to errors in design, coding and/or testing; Fidelity's woes since the fall are the most recent large-scale example of that. But the answer to your question is that Quicken has adapted to support the change to FDX.

Your third question is the one it might be possible for a product manager to comment on if they are so inclined. Quicken Mac has long had a very limited CSV import — going back to the start of the modern Quicken Mac in 2014 — which was built to provide a migration path for people interested in switching from Mint.com. That limited import benefited Quicken because it brought in new customers. Only in the past year did Quicken officially embrace CSV import as a documented, supported method of data import — but they didn't expend any development effort to make it more flexible, more user-friendly, more broadly usable. (Heck, they didn't even both the take the Mint name off the menu command for CSV imports, even though Mint shut down two years ago.) There certainly is the potential for them to create a field-mapping UI to make it easier for users who want/need to import CSV data. But I don't know if they want to, since many users could really mess up their data by mangling CSV imports, and then complain to Quicken Support to fix their problems. Again, I'm doubtful anyone from Quicken management will talk about their future plans for this, simply because they don't talk about their future plans for any features.

(and to be clear, I'd love to be proven wrong if some senior Quicken employee posts here to address your questions about their future directions! 😀)

Chris_QPW

As @jacobs said I have never seen Quicken Inc (or Intuit before them) ever post about future development plans, so this just my opinion. Even though Intuit sold off Quicken, Quicken is still joined at the hip with Intuit as far as they are their aggregator. As such it is much more about what Intuit is willing to support than Quicken Inc, with the exception of CSV as @jacobs pointed out.

And I will state one more thing, NONE of the aggregators support all the financial institutions. So, when someone says well "this program/aggregator supports this financial institution" it might sound like that one has better coverage of all the financial institutions, but unless the program is using multiple aggregators that just isn't the case.