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
PRA published a set of questions and answers (Q&A) covering common queries regarding residential and commercial property valuations, for the purpose of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR), during the period of disruption caused by COVID-19 pandemic.
IOSCO proposed updates to its principles for regulated entities that outsource tasks to service providers.
MAS announced that the first phase of the Veritas initiative will commence with the development of fairness metrics in credit risk scoring and customer marketing.
BoE published the Statistical Notice 2020/4 to update the buy-to-let (BTL) Phase 2 and Phase 3 definitions for the Interest Rate Type data item.
FSI published a brief note that examines challenges facing the banking sector as a result of the payment deferral programs put in place to support borrowers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.
PRA published the policy statement PS14/20, which contains the supervisory statement SS1/20 and the feedback to responses to the consultation paper CP22/19 on expectations for investment by firms in accordance with the Prudent Person Principle, or PPP, as set out in the Investments Part of the PRA Rulebook.
EBA published an opinion following the notification by the French macro-prudential authority, the Haut Conseil de Stabilité Financière (HCSF), of its intention to extend a measure introduced in 2018 on the use of Article 458(9) of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
As part of a Research Bulletin on the recent policy-relevant work, ECB published an article that examines the lessons learned from past crises for nonperforming loan resolution in the post COVID-19 period.
RBNZ published the financial stability report for May 2020. This review of the financial system in the country highlights that the economic disruption associated with COVID-19 will present challenges to the financial system.
ECB updated the guidance notes for reporting related to the statistics on holdings of securities by reporting banking groups (SHSG).