Options API endpoint coverage matrix
Map a real options-data workflow to the CuteMarkets endpoints it needs before you write a wrapper, model a request budget, or compare providers. The useful answer is not whether an API has "options data"; it is whether the endpoint surface covers the objects your product must reproduce.
Selected workflow
Backtesting
5 core endpoint groups are marked as required or commonly useful for this workflow.
| Object | Endpoint | Coverage | Docs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chains | GET /v1/options/chain/{ticker} | Calls and puts by expiration with Greeks, IV, OI, latest quote, latest trade, and underlying context. | Open |
| Contracts | GET /v1/options/contracts | Contract discovery by underlying, expiration, strike, type, OCC symbol, and historical as_of date. | Open |
| Quotes | GET /v1/options/quotes/{option_ticker} | Historical bid and ask prices, sizes, exchanges, sequence fields, and timestamp filters. | Open |
| Trades | GET /v1/options/trades/{option_ticker} | Tick-level prints with price, size, exchange, conditions, and nanosecond timestamps. | Open |
| Snapshots | GET /v1/options/snapshot/{ticker}/{option_ticker} | One-contract drilldowns with break-even, day stats, Greeks, IV, OI, quote, trade, and underlying data. | Open |
| Expirations | GET /v1/tickers/expirations/{ticker} | Listed expiration dates for the selected underlying before chain or contract requests. | Open |
| Aggregates | GET /v1/options/aggs/{option_ticker}/range | Historical OHLC bars, VWAP, volume, and open/close context for option contracts. | Open |
| Indicators | GET /v1/indicators/{type}/{ticker} | Server-side SMA, EMA, MACD, and RSI for broader charting and watchlist workflows. | Open |
Use the evaluation framework first
Convert provider claims into testable workflow criteria before you map endpoints or compare pricing.
Backtesting needs objects in order
Start with historical contracts and expirations, then fetch quotes, trades, aggregates, or snapshots only for selected legs.
0DTE needs freshness checks
Same-day chains are useful only when quote timing, spread, size, and selected-contract details stay visible.
Python wrappers should stay small
Map the endpoint sequence first, then turn only the used calls into a Python helper or internal SDK.
Buyer use case
Use coverage to remove vague vendor comparisons
A practical options-data evaluation should list the exact objects required by the workflow: contracts, expirations, chains, quotes, trades, snapshots, Greeks, open interest, aggregates, and indicators. This matrix gives that checklist a concrete shape before you compare docs, pricing, and implementation effort.
Implementation detail
Coverage is only useful when it maps to a replayable workflow
Treat every endpoint group as a data object with a job. Expirations define the listed-date boundary, contracts preserve point-in-time identity, chains expose the broad surface, quotes and trades provide market evidence, aggregates provide chart context, and snapshots refresh a selected leg. If a workflow cannot say which object it needs first, it will usually overfetch or mix current state with historical evidence.
A backtesting workflow should record the endpoint path, query parameters, pagination cursor, request timestamp, market timestamp, selected OCC symbol, and reject reason beside every result. A scanner workflow should keep quote age, bid/ask spread, open interest, volume, IV, Greeks, and DTE visible before it ranks contracts. A dashboard workflow should label whether the row is live, delayed, cached, stale, or unavailable under the current entitlement.
This matrix is therefore a test plan. Pick one ticker, one expiration, one selected contract, and one timestamp window. Then verify that the required endpoint groups can reproduce the same row in a notebook, an API wrapper, and a user-facing screen without changing terminology between steps.
For provider evaluation, mark an endpoint as covered only after it returns the fields needed by the workflow under the same plan and time window. A quote endpoint without historical pagination is not enough for backtesting. A chain endpoint without current quote state is not enough for a live scanner. A snapshot endpoint without selected-contract identity is not enough for a drilldown dashboard.
Keep the coverage matrix close to engineering tickets. Each row should become a client method, fixture, test case, or logged artifact before the workflow is considered implemented. That prevents endpoint coverage from staying as a buying checklist that never reaches code.
The handoff from one endpoint to the next should be explicit in code review. Expirations hand a listed date to contracts. Contracts hand an OCC symbol to quotes, trades, aggregates, or snapshots. Snapshots hand the current state to the UI, while historical rows hand replay evidence to research. If that handoff is missing, the workflow may appear covered while silently switching from point-in-time evidence to latest state.
A useful coverage matrix also names what is intentionally out of scope. If the product does not route live brokerage orders, hold account custody, or provide a broker risk engine, those boundaries should stay separate from market-data coverage. Clear scope keeps provider comparisons focused on the API objects that CuteMarkets actually returns.