specification: API Commons Plans
specificationVersion: '0.1'
schema: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/api-evangelist/interface-research/main/schema/api-commons.yml#/$defs/Plans
provider: Aetna
providerId: aetna
generated: '2026-08-30'
method: searched
created: '2026-05-04'
modified: '2026-08-30'
source: >-
  https://developerportal.aetna.com/ (the Developer Portal has no pricing page and no plans page),
  https://developerportal.aetna.com/assets/Data/quickstart.json (Aetna's own description of what the
  portal provides: "documentation, registration services, Developer Sandbox services, and other
  developer services ... pursuant to the CMS Interoperability and Patient Access Final Rule"),
  https://developerportal.aetna.com/assets/Data/createapp.json,
  https://developerportal.aetna.com/assets/Data/createprodapp.json
provenance_note: >-
  REPLACES a 2026-05-04 bulk-sweep scaffold that invented three tiers - Free, Professional at "TBD",
  and Enterprise - with quota and rate numbers Aetna has never published. Its own description said
  "Tier limits and prices are scaffold defaults; replace with provider-published values." There are no
  provider-published values, because there are no plans.
tags:
  - Health Insurance
  - Healthcare
  - FHIR
  - CMS Mandate
description: >-
  Aetna publishes no API plans and no API pricing, and that is the correct commercial description of
  this surface rather than a gap. The Interoperability APIs exist because CMS-9115-F and CMS-0057-F
  require a payer to make member and directory data available to third parties at no charge; there is
  no metered product, no paid tier, no overage and no contract to negotiate. Access is gated on
  registration and product subscription in the Developer Portal, not on payment.
plan_count: 0
pricing_model: none-published
monetized: false
access_gate: registration and per-product subscription in the Developer Portal
plans: []
notes:
  - >-
    "Free" would be the wrong label. A free tier implies a paid one it is a step below; Aetna has no
    paid tier at all, so the honest record is plan_count 0.
  - >-
    The only differentiation Aetna makes is by APPLICANT TYPE, not by spend: a third-party developer
    application, a payer application (payer-to-payer data exchange), an EHR application, a provider
    system, and since 2026-08-19 an "ECS Provider" organization. Each type gates a different product set.
  - >-
    Production access is a review, not a purchase - Aetna operates a registration questionnaire and an
    approval process for EHR applications (added 2024-11-15) and a separate production-access mailbox,
    AetnaInteroperabilityProductionAccess@AETNA.com.
maintainers: []