Bankloch

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...

  The migration to ISO 20022 has already delivered significant change across cross-border payments, introducing richer and more structured data that promises greater efficiency, transparency, and interoperability. Yet one of the most operationally important milestones is still approaching: the November 2026 SWIFT CBPR+ deadline for structured postal addresses . While many financial institutions initially view this as another messaging format requirement, the reality is far more complex. The deadline is not simply about changing how addresses appear in payment messages. It is about understanding, controlling, and improving transaction data quality across the entire payment lifecycle. Since SR 2025, institutions have been allowed to use hybrid address formats within CBPR+ traffic, providing a transition period for adapting systems and processes. That flexibility will end in November 2026. From that point onwards, payments containing only unstructured address information will no ...

  In recent years, the way we consume products and services were fundamentally changed, and perhaps more importantly, they changed our expectations of what good service should feel like. The Corona crisis accelerated two major trends in our consumption patterns. On the one hand, there was a clear move toward local and smaller-scale commerce . Some of this shift emerged out of necessity: transport became more difficult, larger crowded places created uncertainty, and local alternatives simply became more practical. But increasingly it also became a conscious choice. People wanted to support local businesses and preserve the social fabric of their communities. Shopping locally was not only about purchasing products; it became a way of staying connected. Buying bread from the local bakery, visiting nearby shops, or choosing local suppliers created a stronger sense of community and human interaction. At the same time, another trend accelerated at an enormous pace: eCommerce and digita...

  Belgium loves underestimating itself. Ask almost any Belgian entrepreneur about the country’s business climate and the reaction is often immediate: taxes are too high, regulation too complex, labour too expensive, venture capital too limited, the market too small…​ We compare ourselves to Silicon Valley and conclude we are hopelessly behind before the conversation has even properly started. In the United States, founders supposedly build billion-dollar companies in garages before breakfast. In Belgium, we are still scheduling a steering committee to determine whether the garage complies with zoning regulations. And yet, beneath all that national pessimism, Belgium has quietly built one of Europe’s more impressive technology ecosystems . Not loudly or theatrically. Belgium rarely dominates startup headlines or founder culture online. But while the country kept doubting itself, something significant happened in the background: Belgium started producing globally relevant tech co...