For decades, intraday liquidity management followed a predictable rhythm. Treasury teams monitored end-of-day positions, reconciled overnight balances, and relied on relatively stable, batch-driven payment flows to plan their funding needs. The tools and processes built around this world were fit for purpose, because the world itself moved at a manageable pace. Instant payments have dismantled that rhythm entirely. Across Europe, the US, the UK, and markets beyond, real-time payment rails are now live, scaling fast, and operating around the clock. SEPA Instant, FedNow, Faster Payments, TIPS, RT1: each of these schemes imposes obligations that traditional liquidity management frameworks were simply not designed to meet. Settlement accounts must be pre-funded and continuously replenished. Outflows can spike without warning at 2am on a Sunday. And when a pre-funded account runs dry outside of business hours, the consequences are immediate: failed transactions, reputational damage, and reg...
One of the most frequently used arguments behind the rise of Fintechs and especially neo-banks, is the inability of large incumbent banks to remain agile. Traditional financial institutions often struggle to rapidly adapt to changing customer expectations, evolving regulations, and technological innovation. Fintechs, by contrast, start smaller, carry significantly less historical software legacy, and operate with far less bureaucracy. Decisions are taken faster, teams move quicker, and products evolve continuously. In short: they are more agile . Yet after speaking with many Fintechs and observing numerous start-ups and scale-ups from close by, I increasingly notice a paradox: many young Fintech companies begin to lose their agility surprisingly early, not because of business bureaucracy, but because their IT organization becomes the bottleneck. Ironically, this happens despite hiring highly talented, motivated, and technically excellent engineers. In many start-ups, productivit...