Tagged: banks Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • user 12:18 pm on January 15, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: banks, Blows, , , ,   

    Digital Usage Blows Up at BofA, Wells 

    You might as well call them e-Bank of America and Fargo Bank. Both and Wells, the No. 2 and No. 3 ranked in the U.S., respectively, today for the first time released numbers for their digital banking operations, and they are eyepopping. BofA got 112Read More
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 12:18 pm on January 14, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , banks, , , , , ,   

    Wells Shows Largest Mobile User Growth Among 3 Largest Banks 

    Three of the nation&;s released their digital stats this morning, and yes, the banking world is still racing to . Fargo, in particular, demonstrated strong both on yearly and quarterly basis, delivering on the CEO&8217;s promise of &;continued focus&; on tech and digital, despite theRead More
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 12:18 am on January 14, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , banks, , , Diversity, , ,   

    Banking and Fintech Could Benefit from More Diversity 

    It’s possible that if we did nothing, the problem will eventually work itself out, but if you look around most conferences these days, there are very few people of color. and companies offer a robust, growing segment of the economy – what will it take to convince peopleRead More
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 12:18 pm on January 13, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , banks, , , , , ,   

    Trend Watch: Personalization for Mobile Banking Success [SPONSORED] 

    Customers have recently stepped into the era of personalized services with apps built around their specific wants and needs. After Amazon, Netflix and Google pioneered customization of their offerings based on visitors’ past transaction history, consumers have grown to expect the same tailored experience from all other providers. alsoRead More
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 12:18 am on January 13, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: banks, , , , , , ,   

    Recent Grads Prefer Jobs at Goldman Sachs to Google 

    nudged aside and claimed the No. 1 spot for the most favorite workplace among a survey of 600 students globally, a new survey from Emolument.com reveals. McKinsey claimed the No. 3 spot. Goldman Sachs and other investment have been fretting that top undergrads tech startupsRead More
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 4:54 am on January 3, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: banks, , , , , Wishlist   

    My Current Fintech Wishlist 

    There are many nitty gritty problems that need solving in the financial services industry. , common sense, thoughtful regulation and new business models will address these over time.

    There are also complex problems, bigly ones, that will require either deceptively simple solutions and/or intricate collaboration among many stakeholders.

    I invest in solutions that address either, depending on scale and economics, and am passionate about the latter.

    Here is a non-exhaustive list of solutions that address complex solutions which I am passionate about.

    shutterstock_421243957

     

    1) Low cost reliable banking: We know many consumers are underbanked, non banked or unhappy with their . We still have not cracked the code for low cost reliable banking. I have invested in neo banks as well as digital startup banks in the UK. I still think there is much to do in this field and am interested in digital startup banks in the US to foster further competition and usher new simple licensed banking business models. I am equally interested in retail and SME low cost banking models.

    2) New core banking/insurance systems: There are no new core banking systems in use by banks, same with insurers. This is a technology anomaly in need of being rectified. What with new technologies, new needs centered around data analytics, edge computing on the horizon and interoperability, we are in dire need of new core systems that are low cost to develop and low cost to maintain. I am keenly interested in open source initiatives in this space as a means to unlock this major issue.

    3) Open Source financial technology: This is linked to the above core banking systems item. The power of open source software is tremendous. We see it with technology, we see it with AI. Developing business models around open sourcing of basic code that powers financial services will deliver untold riches.

    4) Bank as a Service platforms: I have written about this subject extensively. My interest lies in technology platforms that will drive the marginal cost of delivering a set of financial services or products to near zero. One can argue this is linked to points 2 & 3 above. (I need to think about Insurance as a Service).

    5) Low cost savings platforms for the US: The 401K market is woefully inefficient, fees are too high, the value chain is too sclerotic. A new cheaper 401K platform would be ideal, but maybe there is a need for a new product altogether which would need legislative & regulatory nudges. Either way this is a massive investment opportunity in the US.

    6) Secure micro payments platforms: There are no inexpensive and secure micro payments solutions for either digital goods & services, person to machine or machine to machine interactions. I do not see credit or debit card rails addressing this need. Maybe new models built off of Ethereum, maybe something else?

    7) Regtech as a Service platforms: I believe regtech solutions will still be needed going forward for certain use cases even if we move towards a financial deregulation era. I do not believe in the viability of point solutions in regtech. I also do not believe one vendor will be able to provide a best of breed portfolio approach &; the needs are too heterogenous, the technologies too varied. Hence, applying the concept of Bank as a Service to Regtech as a Service, with platforms that allow demand to meet supply in a frictionless way will be winners.

    8) Digital Identity solutions: We live more of our lives digitally, we buy, sell, interact with one another, on social media platforms, on mobile apps. Our data is insecure, our payment data is insecure and our identities are are nightmare to manage. Comprehensive digital identity solutions that allow us to build trust, interact with one another and with companies, while securing our data and our privacy will emerge. I am keen to participate and collaborate with the winners in this space. Incidentally, I am equally interested in digital identities for things and for enterprises. Whoever cracks this space will have a very large success on their hands.

    9) Data Marketplaces: By that I mean data marketplaces to monetize financial services data whereby at least one stakeholder (the seller or the buyer) needs a very different level of assurance with regards to data privacy & financial regulation. If we are enterting the digital age, and if data is a key ingredient of that age, then ways to monetize, exchange, buy, sell data that is tied to the financial service industries will be big businesses. Think the NYSE or NASDAQ, but for data and data sets.

    10) House Purchasing/Renting platforms: Face it, buying or renting a home is a pain. It is a pain to show you are a good tenant, and it is a pain to secure a mortgage. There are many documents to procure, many signatures to make, many steps to go through, much due diligence on the buyer/tenant and seller/landlord side for buying/renting. Any solution that helps make the experience a delight, with little friction and with embedded financial services/products is a winner.

    11) Cybersecurity insurance: Nascent space for sure, with lack of understanding of the risks. I dream of a marriage of reason between a insurtech startup and a cybersecurity consulting firm, backed by a forward thinking reinsurer. Definitely interested in exploring this space, especially knowing about the untold risks of IoT security or lack thereof.

    12) Securitization markets for insurance: Admittedly I know little about this space, but the potential for pooling risk, segmenting risk, providing liquidity to certain asset classes seems rather interesting. Big problem to solve, bigger opportunity.

    13) On demand micro insurance platforms: Mostly for retail, tailored for new usages of any type of asset, or new behaviors &8211; gig economy or otherwise &8211; on the fly. We have barely scratched the surface on this one.

    14) Specialized Climate *Change* Insurance platforms: For farming in developed or emerging markets for example. Enough said.

    Let me know about what makes you tick and which solutions/problems in financial services should be tackled.

    ps: I have several other pipe dreams that are not as investable as the above, the main one being digital fiat currencies (physical fiat be gone). Maybe the subject for another post.

    pps: Even though I am bullish on enabling technologies &8211; AR/VR, blockchain, AI, advanced data analytics, quantum computing &8211; I have not focused on these in this post, believing any of the above will be powered by one or several of them, hence my agnosticism.

     

    FiniCulture

     
  • user 12:18 pm on January 1, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , banks, , , , ,   

    10 Most Innovative CEOs in Banking 2016, Page 3 

    8. Tom Blomfield, Monzo In this age of -rules-it-all, nobody (hopefully) needs an explainer on what a neobank is. U.K. specifically has been an epicenter of the mobile-first , with Atom Bank, Starling Bank, Tandem Bank and Monzo as the main players. So why single out Monzo? Well, customer retentionRead More
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 12:18 am on January 1, 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: banks, , , ,   

    Breaking Banks: Fintech, What’s Next? 

    For the last episode of the year, Brett King hosts a group of all-stars &; Chris Skinner, Jim Marous, Dave Birch, Ghela Boskovich, and Penny Crosman to review a bit of 2016 and talk about the trends and predictions for 2017. What&;s ?
    Bank Innovation

     
  • user 11:35 pm on December 30, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: banks, , , , , ,   

    The Blockchain explained to my VP (and my President-CTO) 

    Last week I was contracted by my last employer before I retired, a world-class satellite operator in Luxembourg, to do a training on satellite business and — it’s always a pleasure to meet old friends again. I had the opportunity to discuss with 2 VPs who asked me about the and how it can be useful for the satellite and space industry. It was a nice opportunity to discuss about what the blockchain is useful for, instead of the usual speech on what the blockchain is.

    I made a 1-minute elevator pitch, which proved itself interesting enough that we chained on a 15-minute coffee explanation immediately after that. Note: This has also been checked by my former President 🙂

    Executive Summary – 1-minute elevator pitch

    • Today’s services bookkeeping and reporting rely heavily on the double-entry ledger.
    • This method of bookkeeping is a kind of manual checksum that has been invented in 13th century to support the lucrative wool trade across Europe. Doing this, each of the parties maintain their view of the ledger and the counterpart’s view, and both views must balance (“reconciliation”)
    • Mathematically speaking, the number of links among n parties grows as n-square in a peer-to-peer organisation, while it grows much more slowly (only logarithmically) in an hierarchical organisation.
    • So the double-entry ledger favoured a centralised model of trade, with layers of intermediairies, but also generated a need for regulations and auditing. Today’s entire financial world actors, regulators and auditors are organised from this double-entry ledger of the 13th century.
    • The blockchain brings back the simplicity of the single-entry ledger (journal) and peer-to-peer transactions protected by cryptographic primitives from glitches, from errors in operations sequencing or from deliberate frauds. We take full advantage of the speed of communication and of the calculation accuracy of computers.
    • But despite its great promises of simplification and cost reduction, its adoption may be hindered by the threat of disruption of the existing organization (actors, regulators, auditors).
    • Outside the finance world, every day-to-day activity that would be essentially peer-to-peer may benefit from the blockchain. The has the most success currently, but its blockchain is dedicated to crypto-currency transactions, while Ethereum and other blockchain platforms, being Turing-complete, have more potential.
    • Some examples of peer-to-peer activity: housing swaps, hotel rooms or airplane seats booking, spare parts tracking in airliners maintenance, tracking freight containers load, individual healthcare history, real estate transactions, proficiency certification of non-commercial pilots, mutuel pension funds, mutuel health funds, micro-insurance, micro-finance etc.

    What are the problems that the blockchain solves?

    The blockchain is best known through its impact on financial services, so we’ll start with this application before moving to other fields.

    The of keeping accurate records of commercial transactions existed since the Egyptians, but was not solved satisfactorily until back in the Middle Age. At that time, Flanders was the center of the wool textile industry. Merchants all over Europe bought the finest wool clothes there and retailed them to the richest families in the rest of Europe. Payment was done partly with various currencies, partly in kind. Some were done cash, some were paid at term.

    Let’s take the example of a wool merchant located in Munich, with subsidiaries in Paris, in Frankfurt, in Warsaw, and local representatives and warehouses in Bruges, in Brussels, in London. At that time, communication was done at the speed of a walking man, at best of a galloping horse.

    The problems were:

    • how to keep track of the amounts owed by customers, as well as owed to suppliers, in different locations?
    • how to keep accurately inventory of goods at different warehouses with their delivery status and synchronise the information among locations?
    • how to make sure that the same piece of cloth in Bruges warehouse is not sold simultaneously by both the Paris agent and the headquarters in Munich? accessorily how to make sure that the same piece of cloth has not been smuggled out and falsely booked as sold to someone?

    One could use a single-entry ledger per location, a journal, to record each operation. But it was very difficult to detect when and where an error would occur, until it would create an inconsistency with the rest. During the 13th century the double-entry ledger started to be used (the Farolfi ledger of 1299 in Nîmes, France). In such a ledger, each transaction would appear twice, once in the column of credit (where the article came from) and once in the column of debit (where it went). With this method, each transaction could be double-checked, making sure that any flow of goods or money has a starting point and an ending point, and that the total of both parties were equal (balanced). We can see it as the ancestor of a checksum :-).

    In practice, the journal would still be used to record the transactions and, at the end of the day, the accountant would copy and dispatch the transactions in the double-entry ledgers, identifying the origin and destination of each movement, making sure that all accounts were balanced after each operation and matched the journal (reconciliation).

    In 1495, an Italian named Luca Pacioli formalised in a printed book the details of the method and made it popular (Gutenberg’s first book was 1439). So popular that this double-entry ledger is still the basis of today’s accounting practices, of today’s official regulations, and of today’s financial processes. It is so deeply embedded in the commercial practices that the most recent payment settlement automation efforts of the Bank of England, of the Monetary Authority of Singapore and of the Australian New Payment Platform faithfully reproduced this process.

    I met concretely the reality of this kind of issues when I accepted to be treasurer of the Luxembourg Air Museum in Mondorf. This non-lucrative association has one bank account, one petty cash box for operations, one petty cash box for the Museum (selling tickets and souvenirs). It has also an inventory of postcards, DVDs, catalogs and wine bottles bearing the logo of the Museum. I use the bank account to receive subsidies and to pay suppliers. I use the cash boxes to feed the bank account, and I track the inventories. Considering the limited activity of the Museum, we do the bookkeeping ourselves instead of hiring an accountant. I discovered thus the mysteries of manipulating double-entry ledgers, inventories and journals.

    What are the steps involved in a financial transaction?

    To follow the steps of a transaction, let’s imagine I received an SMS from the president of the association “let’s take 100 € from our account to the petty cash box of the Museum“.

    • Step1 – submission: the president sent me a transaction request. In this case it is a SMS. For a bank transaction it could be submitted either with a check (in France or in UK), or a money transfer in the other countries. Generated from paper or directly by web banking, a formatted electronic message is sent to the bank’s payment system. For large amounts between , the interbank SWIFT messaging network would be used (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication).
    • Step2 – validation: I checked that the SMS came indeed from the president. A bank would check that the accounts of the payer and beneficiary indeed exist. It would check the syntax, verify that the amount is within some threshold, control an authorised signature etc.
    • Step3 – confirmation: I checked that Museum’s bank account had enough balance for me to withdraw 100 €. In real life, the bank would check the account balance, the regulatory status of the transfer (reporting threshold, exchange control etc.)
    • Step4 – settlement: I withdrew the amount and fed the Museum petty cash box. For a bank transaction, one account would be credited and the counterpart would be debited.

    Now that the payment is settled, comes the serious job: I have to record the operation in my journal, update the double-entry ledgers of the Museum’s account and of the petty cash box (in my case they are simply 3 worksheets of the same Excel file) and make sure that both have their double-entry balanced. At the end of the month, I’d verify that the bank statement carries the same amount as in my journal.

    On the bank’s side, in addition to keeping the equivalent books for the Museum’s account (journal, general ledger) it has also to keep an archive of the transaction, add it to the monthly reporting to the authorities for Anti-Money Laundering purposes etc.

    • Now what if I, the Museum M, have to pay a supplier S; and if M has an account in Bank A and S has an account in Bank B? In its simplest form, in cascade, Bank A would debit M and credit Bank B, and Bank B would debit Bank A and credit S. The double avalanche of updates and archives and reporting as above would also be unrolled.
    • What if between Bank A and Bank B there is no commercial relationship? The would be to involve a Bank C who would have relationship with both Bank A and Bank B. There comes another avalanche of updates and archives and reporting.
    • What if Bank B goes bankrupt before S is credited but after having received the credit from Bank A or Bank C? The answer is to involve a Central Bank that would never go bankrupt. We have another avalanche of updates and archives and reporting.
    • What if at the end of the day, there has been 200 billions Euros worth of transactions between the nation-wide set of 200 banks? Would all the 20’100 possible pairs of banks proceed to the mutual transfers knowing that the total compensated amounts will be much smaller? The solution is a common Chamber of Compensation (for example Clearstream) that would simply debit each bank of the difference. We have another avalanche of updates and archives and reporting.

    All this complexity was progressively built because initially the double-entry ledger was invented to do somehow a manual and medieval version of a checksum.

    Side note: all payment services Fintechs actually handle steps 1, 2 and 3, the easiest and most lucrative ones. Step 4 and the actual burden of complexity are still left to banks. This is why the European Payment Directive (PSD2) calls these services “Payment Initiator Services”, not “Payment Services”.

    Today the computing power is such that an iPhone 6 has 115 GFLOPs while a Cray-2 (a super computer of 1989) had only 2 GFLOPs. A GFLOP is one billion floating-point operations per second. And with the Internet, information travels at the speed of light, not at the speed of a galloping horse. In the same time we are still doing banking operations as if calculations were done manually, and indeed hundreds of thousands of accountants are still employed to verify manually on the double-entry ledgers the tricky cases generated by manual entry. Let’s go back to the initial questions and see how the blockchain solves them.

    How does the blockchain solve these problems?

    To start with, by definition the blockchain is a set of data that is shared by all computers (“nodes”) that participate as peers to a blockchain network and use the same blockchain protocol executed by a “client” software.

    How to keep track of the amounts owed by customers and owed to suppliers in different locations?

    Each participating node receives a copy of all transactions. It executes steps 1, 2, 3 and 4 above and share the result with peers.

    • Step1 – submission: this is solved with the blockchain by purely data network transmission.
    • Step2 – validation: cryptographic primitives are used to validate signatures; they involve heavy computing. It is part of the blockchain protocol and done by all nodes.
    • Step3 – confirmation: checking that there are sufficient funds to pay the transaction is part of the blockchain protocol and done by all nodes.
    • Step4 – settlement: the updated balances (or outputs of the transaction) are broadcast over the network to all other participating nodes and a consensus is build to record the settlement.

    How to keep accurately inventory of goods at different warehouses and their delivery status and synchronise the information between locations?

    Because the computation is now done electronically by the same “client” software, any discrepancy between nodes may come from a computing glitch, or from a difference in the sequence of execution of transactions: some nodes may receive transaction B before transaction A and other nodes in the reverse sequence.

    Addressing a computing glitch is easy: the faulty node is isolated and the corresponding result is rejected by peers. Handling a discrepancy in sequence is more subtle because there may be a minority subset of nodes that agree on a diverging sequence.

    The blockchain protocol states that if nodes achieve different results, they would all agree to chose randomly one of them to be right. This is called the “consensus”: the others discard their calculations and use the result of the chosen one. There are many ways to achieve consensus, the most widely used is the “proof of work”: the competing nodes try randomly to find a number that satisfies a given property. It may takes billions of billions of trials before finding it. The first node who finds a solution wins the consensus.

    How to make sure that the same piece of cloth in Bruges warehouse is not sold simultaneously by both the Paris agent and the headquarters in Munich?

    This can happen by coincidence in time, or by deliberate fraud. It is called “double-spending”. The blockchain protocol solves this problem by using a cryptography primitive called a “hash”. A hash of a document proves that it has not been modified. It is very difficult to forge but very easy to verify. We talked above about the “proof of work”: it consists of collecting a number of transactions together in a “block” and calculating a hash of it, as part of the work of finding a random number. If a block is modified, a verification of the hash will reveal it immediately. The blocks are “chained”, i.e. each block contains the hash of the previous block. If this previous one is modified, its hash changes and therefore the content of the next block also is, as well as the hash of this next etc. As a result, the whole (block)chain would reveal this single change.

    If the double-spending incident happened by coincidence, the problem is similar to the above: it is a matter of sequencing, so the transaction that gets first its block approved by the general consensus is the only one valid.

    If the double-spending was done on purpose for fraud, subsequently to the first spending being approved, the cheater will issue a second spending of the same good and this must also be approved, and at the same time somehow the block containing the first spending needs to be invalidated.

    However, because this previous block has already been approved by consensus and chained to other blocks, the cheating node that wants to invalidate that block must build a variant chain faster than the rest of the community. This means it needs more computing power than the rest of the community. It is not impossible, but economically very unrealistic because of the cost versus benefit of such cheating.

    As a result, there is a minimal need for auditing and verification from a higher authority because of the consensus is always achieved among all actors.

    So is the blockchain only good for financial transactions?

    If we take a step back and look at the big picture, the general problems that the blockchain solves are:

    • how can we track the inflows and outflows of something (money or token), among a large number of peer actors?
    • how can we protect against a quasi-simultaneous commitment (spending) of this “something” by 2 or several actors or by a same fraudulent one?

    Does it sound familiar to you?

    • have you ever been victim of an airline seat overbooking?
    • how can a tour operator makes sure that a hotel room has not been booked twice?
    • how can a peer-to-peer Uber reservation avoid that the same taxi be booked to 2 clients?
    • how can an air traffic controller be sure that another flight sector has not assigned the same flight level and same route than his, to another plane?
    • how to track over the lifetime of an liner aircraft the spare parts replaced gradually and independently by different airlines and repair shops? Airbus has 7000 subcontractors.
    • how to simplify registration and declaration of all customised add-ons equipments to homebuilt and kit aircrafts made by passionate “homebuilders“, instead of today’s heavy process of paper work and local inspection made by Civil Aviation delegates or private Quality Control agencies.
    • how about letting each private pilot log their hours in a blockchain and letting the doctors log the medical certificates of these pilots, both of which naturally confirms their proficiency for flying, instead of spending time and effort of all national aviation agencies to certify them, controlling an activity that is non-commercial.
    • how to track individually the placement of identified satellite parts in subsystems by subcontractors?
    • how to make sure that the same KWh from a solar array has not been sold to 2 different clients?
    • how to guarantee that a house has not been sold simultaneously by 2 remote real estate agents?
    • how to keep track of the loading of a fleet of container ships by peer forwarder stations?
    • etc, etc.

    All these problems have already been solved today by introducing some central coordination and distributed databases, which may be suited below a certain number of stakeholders and become polynomially complex when this number grows. But such centralisation is a source of failure, is of error-prone complexity and is a target for attacks. Above a certain volume and number of more or less independent actors, these problems would benefit from a peer-to-peer solution, and the resulting system would gain in flexibility, efficiency and resilience.

    Why did the financial services become the first application of the blockchain?

    • Since beginning of mankind, everybody uses some sort of financial service, every day. It’s an ideal peer-to-peer candidate application.
    • The lack of a satisfactory technology to detect and correct distributed mistakes fostered the creation of a multi-layered centralised system.
    • Then the centralisation and aggregation of transactions lead to huge movements of funds…
    • … and huge financial flows created a need for strict regulations, to detect and punish frauds.
    • A transformation into a peer-to-peer model needs significant changes in regulations and may deeply transform the financial industry.

    Which one of the above use cases are better candidates than the finance industry for blockchain transformation? Probably none. That’s why the first applications of blockchain were in this field. But all the other examples can at some stage take profit of the blockchain technology.

    The Bitcoin, the first well known blockchain platform, has been designed specifically for monetary transactions with a remarkable incentivizing scheme to support its use. This is why it is so successful. The Ripple blockchain platform has also been designed for monetary transactions. The Ethereum blockchain platform is more ambitious and targets to be universal. The task is huge and the product takes time to mature, but ultimately, it would not be limited to financial transactions and support the other use cases cited above.

    What else?

    If Ethereum succeeds, the question is “would it make sense to store in the same public blockchain the information of all the above use cases, and more (for example trading Pokemon-Go characters)“? Probably not. This is why there would be most certainly in the future

    • one public (Bitcoin or Ethereum or other) blockchain that supports public peer-to-peer trading Pokemon tokens, DVD cassettes, antique stamps, collector vynils, house swaps (AirBnB), car transportation services etc.,
    • and a number of private and restricted Ethereum-based (or not based) blockchains to manage more confidential matters.

    To cite only the current contributions to the open source Hyperledger project, that pave the road for different types of blockchains, we have today:

    But talking about them will be another discussion, that I’ll have with the same ex-colleagues VPs of the space industry, or with others.


    [linkedinbadge URL=”https://www.linkedin.com/in/kvutien” connections=”off” mode=”icon” liname=”Khang Vu Tien”] is Blockchain & Ethereum practitioner and this article was originally published here.

     
  • user 7:35 pm on December 30, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: alternative lending, banks, , , ,   

    Europe 2017: Key Trends to Watch in Alternative Lending. Interdependence and collaboration. 

     

    Connectivity and interdependence have increased in most industries, including financial services in the last decade. In the wave of digital transformation, new business models are born.

    From the crisis of 2008 to date, EUR 19 billion has been invested in companies (CB Insight, 2016) with hundreds of them newly founded. Though this number may not seem very high in the context of the balance sheets of the entire financial sector (EUR 28 trillion) or the recent fines some needed to pay, there are many aspects that are clearly changing in the landscape of financial services. Customer expectations drive changes in business models. New partnerships as well as methods of connecting borrowers and lenders are born.

    Herein I provide my reflection on recent trends and highlight some key predictions for 2017 in the landscape in .

    1)    Banks will continue to shrink their Balance Sheets and will invest in new business models and partnerships

    Europe relies heavily on banks. Therefore, in order to assess the lending ecosystem, I always start with what is going on with the banks. Banks have been shrinking their balance sheets since the crisis. In 2008, the total assets of banks in the Euro region stood at EUR 33 trillion and declined to EUR 28 trillion by 2015 (ECB, 2016). Just to put this number into context, the decline is higher than the combined balanced sheet of five major banks (Rabobank, ING, ABNAMRO, Deutsche Bank and Unicredit) as of June 30, 2016.

    In terms of profitability, it did not really improve this year. Interest rates continued to be low, capital requirements became harder, compliance rules and penalties remain harsh.

    The first 6 months of financials in 2016 indicate declining trends in many aspects, including revenue and deposits. The net interest margin of the Top 10 listed banks in the sector further reduced to below 1.5%, which is structurally lower than in the US. Return on equity was 5.8%, which remains below the cost of capital, estimated to be around 9%. The prolonged low profitability is very challenging, especially as it coincided with a low equity base and increasing capital requirements.

    Regarding outlook, the quantitative easing program is being extended so any interest rate hike is pushed well into the future. This environment forces banks to be more efficient with all of their key resources: people, branch network, system and their balance sheet. In practice, this implies closing down branch offices, reduction of headcount, further consolidation and tighter balance sheet management. Since the peak of 2008 till 2016, more than 350,000 jobs disappeared. This seems high, but between 2000 and 2008, almost 1 million jobs had been added to the sector. In this context, there might be still potential for job cuts. (The figures are based on listed banks representing approximately 80% of the total assets of the European sector.)

    In order to create operational leverage of their business origination capacity, banks are likely to rely on future partnerships.

    Banks will further explore alternative lending avenues and strengthen cooperation with institutional investors and Fintech companies. This creates new attractive opportunities for investors or potential partners that may have limited business origination or risk management capabilities but offer balance sheet capacity or more efficient business execution.

     2)    Political support to alternative lending will strengthen

    The funding needs of the European economy remains larger than ever. The sentiment that Europe in terms of economic growth is lagging behind the USA seems more widespread than ever. The need for a more diversified funding source in Europe is more urgent than ever.

    I see strong evidence that the conviction among key decision and policy makers in Europe is leaning towards increased lending via alternative sources. Over-reliance on banks made us too vulnerable and constrained our economic development and we need to increase resilience via diversifying funding sources towards the European economy.

    This vulnerability of Europe is clearly illustrated by the Basel IV debate in recent months. The proposed legislations, which had been discussed in Santiago some weeks ago, favor a regime shift towards a less risk-based approach for credit risk. These would need to be aligned and inserted in capital requirements of European banks (Capital Directive) with very significant potential impact on the economy, including mortgage lending. Proposals to increase capital requirements for lower risk-weight portfolios, such as mortgage loans are disproportionately hitting European banks (Fitch, 2016).

    As the European banking system finances about 75% of the economy, the potential adverse impacts are a lot higher. In contrast, only 25% of the US economy is financed by banks. It is largely capital market-based and long-term residential property risks are covered by government agencies (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). This diversification enables the US banks to operate with lighter balance sheets and any new legislation has less impact. 

    European banks are more sensitive to any regime shift and could be forced to decrease their direct lending to corporations and households. More importantly, any of these adverse changes in lending capacity has a direct impact on the economy. They understandably issued a strong pushback on the proposal.

    This illustrates profound vulnerability. As Olivier Guersent, DG for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Market Union at EU pointed out this month, “We have to set the rate of retention in securitization market to make sure that there is a market. Legislations are no use if there is no market anymore.”

    I believe our policy makers in Europe will become more articulate about the need for a diversification of funding sources.

    This implies a stronger push for support for developing alternative lending channels, securitization market and capital market union initiatives. There is also likely to be more scrutiny and consequently, regulation to ensure consistency and a more level playing field between risks of banks and non-banks and transparency to investors about risks they are taking.

    3)    Institutional investors will show increasing acceptance to alternative fixed income products (e.g. private debt)

    The search for yield remains a key theme in a low-return, volatile environment. Those who can deal with and accept the illiquid nature of the asset class will find a safe haven in private debt. These assets have limited liquidity and mark-to-market pricing; consequently, they “look and feel” stable.

    Institutional investors (insurance companies, pension funds, etc.) are inherently more suited to participate in funding the economy because they capture a large percentage of long-term savings. However, the infrastructure to facilitate this remains mostly at the banks and the investments need to be channeled via capital markets and partnerships. The growth of partnerships has been painstakingly slow. There needs to be significant education and convincing done also at supervisory board level at these institutions.

    Last but not least, investors seem to have high return expectations from private debt instruments that need to be managed. At the moment, a high percentage of investments are going to the highest risk basket in private debt (e.g., direct lending with return exceptions of 6-10%). The potential private debt universe is a lot larger than lending at 6-10% to sub-investment-grade companies. European banks have about 1.5% net interest margin and lend at an average interest rate of 2.5%. The bulk of the traditional banking products are safer assets and can be an excellent alternative to traditional fixed income products. Some of these new assets classes (like Dutch mortgages) has been favored by many institutional investors recently and a lot of similar product initiatives are likely to come.

    4)    Fintech: Getting more mature, more regulated with new collaborations

    Many companies were formed with a mission to implement a new business model in the financial services industry. 2017 is likely to be an important year for Fintech when many of these business models will be tested on their ability to scale and operate under increasing regulatory scrutiny. The market will understand the significant differences between certain sub-segments of Fintech companies. Payments and services are likely to cause the most disruption and we will see further diversification of deposits payments from retail clients.

    Some new companies will simply run out of money to support their business model. The market is likely to test the real value contribution of “smart algorithms”. With increased interdependence, potential defaults will have negative impact on others in the sector.  Fintech companies will further recognize the importance of operating in a regulated environment in order to build trust and scale their business model. Regulations above a certain size is inevitable and unfortunately, extremely costly (systems, KYC, compliance and risk management costs). In contrasts, risk management and compliance are core competencies of banks and the associated costs are already inherent.

    Rather than perceiving Fintech companies as competitors, financial services companies will be reviewing avenues to develop collaboration models for mutual benefit and assess to what extent they can incorporate innovative business ideas in their incumbent setup.

    Many financial services companies (e.g., BBVA, Santander, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan) have established incubation centers, dedicated VC activities and M&A departments to capture on the most interesting opportunities.

    A recent survey conducted by Roland Berger confirms that over 85% of Fintech companies anticipate stronger cooperation with incumbents. The most important reason mentioned was the access to a stronger customer base.

    The power of this approach is to ensure that business or product innovation can be scaled up in a regulated environment, create a mode of comfort and eventually generate a critical mass.

    Companies on different sides (banks, investors, Fintech companies) will have to realize that a collaborative approach is a very powerful way not just to overcome the challenges they face but to thrive.


    [linkedinbadge URL=”https://www.linkedin.com/in/kindert” connections=”off” mode=”icon” liname=”Gabriella Kindert”] is Head of Alternative Credit – NN Investment Partners and this article was originally published here.

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel
Close Bitnami banner
Bitnami