A recent article in the American Banker asked the question “Is it OK for lending algorithms to favor Ivy League schools?” It begins by saying that much of the energy behind the fintech movement (to become chartered banks) comes from its promise of financial inclusion. Unfortunately, that is really not the goal of the fintech, aka alternative lender, movement—making money is. And what is the fintech plan for lending? It’s pretty simple actually. Here is the recipe: Take the inclusive element (credit risk data) out of the mix.
Swap execution facilities have been meandering along for three years now, most of the nonincumbents dropping by the wayside, volume in the doldrums for over a year, and … boom! By the end of Q4 2016, this market is finally starting to get spicy:
Despite the outlook on blockchain adoption for financial services starting to move from excitement to criticism, trade facilitation business processes represent a stronghold for blockchain-based programs, as long as basic change management principles hold true.
There is a mounting debate about the limits of blockchain in the world of financial services. Financial consortia R3 and Swift declare banks can do without blockchain because of its immaturity, while a survey across delegates at the DTCC Fintech event also shows that blockchain adoption optimism suffers setback.
R3’s recent announcements warn banks to carefully watch blockchain as long as the technology remains immature. This comes at a time when blockchain-based initiatives see financial institutions taking the driver’s seat. The path to blockchain maturity demands the guiding role of bank industry independent associations, exactly what R3 is. This article takes the perspective of corporate banks.
On February 23, 2017, the European Banking Authority (EBA) published its final report on the draft regulatory technical standards (RTS) on strong customer authentication (SCA) and common and secure communication. The EBA was tasked to develop the RTS under Article 98 of EU Directive 2015/2366 (PSD2).