Bankloch

  In recent years, financial institutions have been making increasingly bold decisions about who they are willing to bank. The practice of debanking (closing or denying accounts based on perceived risk or unprofitability) has shifted from back-office policy rooms to the center of public, political, and legal debate. For example, the Nigel Farage–Coutts Bank scandal, involving a (potentially politically-biased) debanking decision, ultimately led to the resignation of the NatWest CEO. What started as a niche compliance measure has become a global phenomenon with far-reaching consequences. More and more individuals and businesses are finding themselves without access to essential financial services, due to the practice of debanking. So why is this happening? And what does it mean for financial institutions and their customers? While banks have always had discretion in choosing their clients, the criteria for rejection are rapidly expanding. Those affected now include: Customers no lon...

  We often describe the financial services industry as being in the midst of a technological revolution, i.e. Open and Embedded Banking, AI, blockchain, stablecoins, CBDCs, you name it. But stepping back, one might wonder: has the sector truly transformed? Despite the buzz, the fundamentals of financial services remain largely unchanged. Incumbent banks still dominate most markets (with exceptions like Nubank in Brazil or Revolut in select countries), and the mechanics of many financial products and transactions would look familiar to someone from 20 years ago. Digitalization has undeniably changed the industry: Branches gave way to online portals, then mobile apps. Cash and chip cards were replaced by contactless and mobile wallets. Customer onboarding and credit origination moved from paper-based to digital workflows, increasingly embedded in journeys led by other industries. Yet, many of these shifts were   reactionary, not proactive . Take Covid-19: it accelerated digital ...

At financial institutions, insider threats and internal fraud are serious issues. Globally, the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners estimates that fraud costs organizations about   5% of their annual revenue , amounting to a staggering   $5 trillion per year . Insider fraud   is believed to account for up to   40%   of these costs around   $2 trillion annually . The average cost per incident is   $412,000 , making this type of fraud not only widespread but also extremely damaging. Insider fraud is defined as " the deliberate misuse or misappropriation of the employing organization’s resources or assets for personal benefit. " It’s committed by a malicious insider, such as a current or former employee, contractor, or partner, who uses their authorized access to compromise sensitive systems or data. These actions pose serious risks to confidentiality, integrity, and trust. Financial institutions   are especially   vulnerable   due to ...

  A lot has been written about financial wellbeing. On the one hand, we have financial coaches and influencers who share practical tips on how to improve it. On the other, banks and Fintechs are positioning themselves as partners in boosting financial wellbeing, offering savings tools and educational programs. Increasingly, Fintechs are also targeting employers, arguing that financially stressed employees are more likely to be absent, less engaged, and less motivated. As a result, solutions like salary advance platforms (e.g. Scudi) and HR-focused financial wellbeing platforms (e.g. Warren) are gaining traction. Yet, the impact of financial stress and lack of education is substantial. Even in a well-developed country like Belgium, the numbers are staggering: In 2025, only 46% of Belgian households are considered financially healthy or resilient. That means 54% are still vulnerable or unhealthy. Just 32% of Belgians have sufficient financial literacy. Over 60% of Belgian families st...