From Our Partner:

From Crisis to Continuity: Building a Minimum Viable Bank

When cyberattacks occur, traditional business continuity and disaster recovery plans often show their gaps.

Join our upcoming webinar to see key insights like:

• Defining essential financial services functions
• Understand differences between MVB and BCM/DR approach
• Examine real-world examples

Save My Spot

 

 

News from FinTech Weekly

The Banks Are Winning One Battle. Here Is What That Means for the Other.

Banks are blocking the CLARITY Act in Congress while crypto firms race for OCC trust charters. Two separate fights now point to the same question: who gets to define the next U.S. financial system?

---

Eleven Companies, Eighty-Three Days: The Race for a Federal Crypto Banking License.

From Circle to Morgan Stanley, eleven companies filed for or received OCC trust charter approvals in just 83 days. The rush shows how quickly crypto and fintech groups are moving to secure a federal regulatory foothold.

---

The Rules Were Not Written for Us. Some Women Are Rewriting Them.

The first in our March series on women in fintech looks at what the numbers still show — and what some women are changing inside the system. If you have a story to share, email us at [email protected]
 

 

Before the Focus

Banks usually compete on lending, payments, and deposits. Lloyds Banking Group is placing a different bet.

Internal plans show the UK lender intends to expand the sale of anonymised customer data while automating compliance checks and cutting hundreds of internal applications. The goal is lower technology costs and new sources of revenue.

It is also an attempt to operate more like a fintech company.

 

Read the full article

Lloyds Plans Data Sales and Automation Drive to Cut Tech Costs

 

The Focus

Every bank holds detailed information about how people spend, borrow, and save. For most of modern banking history, that information stayed locked inside internal systems. Its value lay in underwriting decisions and account management. Today, banks are beginning to treat data as an asset that can produce revenue beyond financial services.

Lloyds’ plan to expand anonymised data sales shows how far this thinking has progressed. Data products promise something banks struggle to achieve elsewhere: income that does not rely on balance sheet growth.

Yet the move raises an uncomfortable question. At what point does financial data stop being a service tool and become a commercial product?

Consumers rarely think about their transaction history as part of a broader data economy. They expect confidentiality. Banks promote that expectation. Trust forms the foundation of the entire industry.

Anonymisation provides one answer. Removing identifying details can allow aggregated insights to circulate without exposing individuals. Retail spending patterns, regional consumption data, and sector trends all hold value for companies trying to understand the economy.

But anonymisation does not eliminate the sensitivity of financial information. The idea that banks might monetise behavioural data will attract attention from regulators, privacy advocates, and customers themselves.

Trust has always been the currency of banking. Data monetisation tests how far that trust can stretch.

Automation introduces another dimension to the conversation.

Banks run enormous governance structures. Compliance teams monitor transactions, review activity, and ensure that regulations are followed. These systems rely heavily on manual oversight. That model developed when computing power was limited and regulatory frameworks were simpler.

Technology now allows those checks to occur inside the transaction process itself. Algorithms can screen activity instantly rather than waiting for employees to verify it later.

For executives, the appeal is obvious. Automation reduces operational costs and increases speed. For regulators, the appeal is more complicated. Machines can detect patterns faster than people, yet they also introduce questions about transparency and accountability.

A bank cannot simply replace judgment with code. Someone must still take responsibility for the decision logic.

Lloyds appears to be moving toward a hybrid structure. Machines perform most monitoring while employees supervise the process. That approach reflects how fintech platforms operate. Compliance systems function continuously rather than as periodic reviews.

The difference lies in scale. Fintech companies built their infrastructure around automation from the beginning. Large banks must retrofit automation into systems assembled across decades.

This is why Lloyds plans to close hundreds of internal applications. Every additional system increases complexity. Complexity increases cost. And cost makes it difficult to compete with digital platforms.

The ambition to become the UK’s largest fintech-style institution reveals something deeper than marketing language. Banks are redefining what they believe they are.

Once, technology departments supported the bank. Today, banks often function as technology companies that happen to manage money.

The real contest now concerns who controls financial infrastructure. Fintech firms built their advantage through speed and simplicity. Traditional banks still hold scale, capital, and customer relationships.

The outcome may not be a victory for one side or the other. Instead, the institutions that combine scale with software discipline may dominate.

 

 

Your Voice Matters

Share your insights with us!

🚀 Join over 7,000 fintech professionals staying ahead of the curve. 

Follow FinTech Weekly for expert insights & industry updates!