Featured Product

    Yves Mersch of ECB Examines Impact of Fintech on Credit Business

    February 26, 2019

    While speaking at the third annual Conference on Fintech and Digital Innovation in Brussels, Yves Mersch of ECB discussed the impact of fintech on core banking services, particularly the credit business. He highlighted that fintech credit makes up only a very small fraction of overall credit, but it is growing rapidly and could become more dominant in certain market segments. In the United States, for example, 36% of unsecured personal lending was issued by fintechs in 2017.

    Mr. Mersch added that globally active technology companies, also known as the big tech companies, are also entering the market. These companies have a competitive advantage because they can leverage their existing customer networks and huge amounts of proprietary data to provide financial services. Moreover, their enormous balance sheets give them the financial capacity to handle credit risks economically on a large scale. These comparative advantages of big tech could, in principle, generate benefits for customers. By using predictive algorithms, machine learning, and a wider range of data, big tech could become more efficient at lending than traditional banks. Moreover, if big tech can speed up loan application processing, reduce transaction costs, and improve credit risk assessments, it could increase the overall degree of competition in credit markets. With their increasing market share, these companies could help diversify the sources of credit to the economy, thus fostering investment and growth.

    However, not only could large technology companies increase market concentration by exploiting their network externalities, but they could also create new risks. For example, risks could arise from big tech’s funding models, which often use a mix of internal and external investors to finance loans or repackage and sell them to third-party investors. Such originate-to-distribute models can lead to information asymmetries, incentive problems and financial instability—as was painfully learned from the mortgage lending that led to the subprime crisis. Another type of fintech is the so-called peer-to-peer lender, which offers credit services in a fundamentally different way to banks in that the services are unbundled. Electronic platforms typically match borrowers and investors without taking on balance sheet risks and generate fee revenue rather than net interest. Technological innovation may enable lending platforms to become more efficient and more targeted in terms of how they intermediate between borrowers and lenders and thus put pressure on incumbent banks. He argue that, until lending platforms can replicate the benefits of intermediation, they will not meaningfully challenge the role of banks in the economy because:

    • Lending platforms are unable to perform liquidity transformation on a significant scale—that is, to provide short-term liquidity services for depositors and long-term loans for borrowers.
    • Lending platforms are less resilient during shocks, being more prone to funding freezes and swings in credit risk appetite than banks, as at this stage they are small and not diversified. Also, banks have both insured deposits, which contain depositor runs, and higher levels of capital, which supports lending during downturns.

    For these reasons, lending platforms are currently unlikely to threaten banks’ market position in lending. Still, these developments should be continuously monitored. As the competition between fintechs and incumbent banks unfolds, the financial system could become more diverse and competitive. It could also become more concentrated and new risks to financial stability could emerge. According to him to scenarios are possible in the future. In the first scenario, banks rise to the digital challenge by upgrading their technological systems and teaming up with fintechs. Risks to financial stability would be rather low, as financial services provision would remain largely subject to the existing prudential regime. In the second scenario, banks fail to provide the digital financial services demanded by customers. New, innovative, and fast-moving fintechs, or big tech firms with large customer networks, would come to dominate the market and lead to the financial stability risks. Therefore, "we certainly must continue monitoring developments closely and adjust regulation when and where needed to ensure that financial services remain safe and sound. He concludes that legislation and regulation should ensure a level playing field for all market players, incumbents, and new entrants alike.

     

    Related Link: Speech

    Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, Lending, Regtech, Fintech, Bigtech, ECB

    Featured Experts
    Related Articles
    News

    BIS Innovation Hub Sets Out Work Program for 2021

    BIS Innovation Hub published the work program for 2021, with focus on suptech and regtech, next-generation financial market infrastructure, central bank digital currencies, open finance, green finance, and cyber security.

    January 22, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EC Plans to Consult on Crisis Management and EDIS Framework Revisions

    In an article published by SRB, Mairead McGuinness, the European Commissioner for Financial Services, Financial Stability, and Capital Markets Union, discussed the progress and next steps toward completion of the Banking Union.

    January 21, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EBA Finalizes Remuneration Standards for Investment Firms in EU

    EBA finalized the two sets of draft regulatory technical standards on the identification of material risk-takers and on the classes of instruments used for remuneration under the Investment Firms Directive (IFD).

    January 21, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    ECA Recommends Actions to Enhance Resolution Planning for Banks

    EC published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, a notification that the European Court of Auditors (ECA) has published a special report on resolution planning in the Single Resolution Mechanism.

    January 20, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    BoE Publishes Key Elements of the 2021 Stress Testing for Banks in UK

    BoE published a scenario against which it will be stress testing banks in 2021, in addition to setting out the key elements of the 2021 stress test, guidance on the 2021 stress test, and the variable paths for the 2021 stress test.

    January 20, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    PRA Proposes Rules on Identity Verification of Depositor Protection

    PRA published a consultation paper (CP3/21) proposes rules regarding the timing of identity verification required for eligibility of depositor protection under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).

    January 20, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FSB Publishes Work Program for 2021

    FSB published the work program for 2021, which reflects a strategic shift in priorities in the COVID-19 environment.

    January 20, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FCA Issues Update on Move to New Data Collection Platform

    FCA announced that 50% firms have started using the new data collection platform RegData, which is slated to replace the existing platform known Gabriel.

    January 20, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    Bundesbank Publishes Derivation Rules for Reporting by Banks

    Bundesbank published Version 5.0 of the derivation rules for completeness check at the form level, with respect to the data quality of the European harmonized reporting system.

    January 19, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FED Revises Capital Planning and Stress Testing Requirements for Banks

    FED finalized a rule that updates capital planning requirements to reflect the new framework from 2019 that sorts large banks into categories, with requirements that are tailored to the risks of each category.

    January 19, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 6488