The Financial Stability Institute (FSI) of BIS published a paper that examines the suptech developments by analyzing suptech initiatives of 39 financial authorities globally. The analysis is based on the responses to a survey on suptech strategies and use cases and is supplemented by information from the two previous FSI Insights papers on suptech and by information from the online tracker developed by Regtech for Regulators Accelerator. FSI and the Regtech for Regulators Accelerator conducted this survey jointly. The analysis reveals that, while suptech is still in its infancy, it is gaining traction, with a significant number of suptech use cases found in the areas of misconduct analysis, reporting, and data management. However, most of these use cases are still experimental in nature.
Financial authorities have refined their use of technology over the years, leading to technologies that this paper would consider as suptech. The application of big data or artificial intelligence to tools used by authorities represents the latest generations of technologies that are considered to be suptech for the purposes of this paper. It is important for authorities to continue enhancing existing tools, including those not considered suptech. There are many ways of exploring suptech tools and these are not mutually exclusive. Most financial authorities covered in the paper either have suptech strategies in place or are in the process of developing them. A well-defined strategy can help authorities to optimally realize the potential benefits of suptech. However, for authorities that want to explore specific suptech tools first, before committing substantial resources, there are helpful avenues, such as innovation labs, accelerators, or tech sprints. These methodologies can also be included in authorities’ existing or future suptech strategies.
The paper mentions that the latest big data or artificial intelligence-centered generations of technology that supervisors are either using or exploring have emerged only recently. Most suptech solutions are still in either the experimental or the development stages. Suptech tools are applied mainly in misconduct analysis, reporting, and data management. These tools will support financial authorities in better tackling non-financial risks. The experimental nature of most suptech initiatives may have prevented a greater number of external parties from participating in the development of suptech solutions. Most solutions are being developed within financial authorities, or at least partly using internal resources, with only about a quarter being developed solely by external parties. This may be due to the experimental nature of these initiatives, among other reasons.
The paper notes that strategic partnerships with other authorities, academia, and research organizations will be important in overcoming the challenges associated with the experimental nature of these initiatives. The paper highlights that international coordination and collaboration could help to accelerate suptech development. Global standard-setting bodies and international organizations provide platforms for authorities to exchange information on their suptech initiatives. These international platforms could also be used to collaborate on the development of suptech solutions that may be useful to a number of authorities or to address the cross-border issues affecting suptech development. A good example is the recently announced BIS Innovation Hub, which is designed to foster international collaboration on innovative financial technology within the central banking community. Such platforms can help authorities to benefit from peer learning, including from different types of authority, helping to offset the lack of specialist providers. They also reduce the need for individual authorities to independently work on similar solutions, thus increasing efficiency.
Keywords: International, Banking, Suptech, Research, Regtech, Big Data, Reporting, FSI, BIS
Previous ArticleFASB Consults on XBRL US DQC Rules Taxonomy and Technical Guide
FCA and PRA in the UK, FED in the US, and the authorities in Singapore have fined Goldman Sachs for risk management failures in connection with the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).
BCBS announced that OSFI and the Bank of Canada hosted the 21st International Conference of Banking Supervisors (ICBS) virtually on October 19-22, 2020.
FCA proposed guidance on how firms should continue to seek to help customers who hold insurance and premium finance products and may be in financial difficulty because of COVID-19, after October 31, 2020.
EBA issued an opinion on prudential treatment of the legacy instruments as the grandfathering period nears an end on December 31, 2021.
ESRB published the fifth issue of the EU Non-bank Financial Intermediation Risk Monitor 2020 (NBFI Monitor).
HM Treasury announced that the new Financial Services Bill has been introduced in the Parliament.
APRA announced that it has increased the minimum liquidity requirement of Bendigo and Adelaide Bank for failing to comply with the prudential standard on liquidity.
PRA published the consultation paper CP17/20 to propose changes to certain rules, supervisory statements, and statements of policy to implement elements of the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5).
US Agencies adopted a final rule that applies to advanced approaches banking organizations and aims to reduce interconnectedness in the financial system as well as to reduce contagion risks associated with the failure of a global systemically important bank (G-SIB).
US Agencies (FDIC, FED, and OCC) adopted a final rule that implements the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) for certain large banking organizations.