Fintech ?? Food - 25th July 2021
Hey everyone???, thanks for coming back to Brainfood, where I take the week's biggest events and try to get under the skin of what's happening in Fintech. If you're reading this and haven't signed up, join the 6,950 others by clicking below, and to the regular readers, thank you.???
Plug:?On the 11:FS blog this week, I wrote about creating a financial services operating system (FS OS). It brings together a lot of the thinking you've read here on Brainfood, so you might enjoy it :).?
Weekly Rant ??
Could a bank ever be a growth stock?
Fintech is a growth monster. Banking isn't. Why? I mean it’s all finance, right?
PayPal, Square, and the big techs have arrived in Fintech, and there are no signs of Fintech's momentum slowing down. Quite the opposite.
1 in every 5 dollars ?of Venture Capital is now headed into Fintech, making it by far the hottest sector in all of tech. Meanwhile, the world's largest VC funds have just closed some of the largest funds in history. a16z, Index, General Catalyst, and more now have massive pools of capital to deploy, much of that pointed at Fintech.??
And Fintech is attacking bank revenue and profitability.?The threat to banks from Fintech is enormous already. But now, more VC capital = more Fintech companies. More Fintech companies = more of a threat to banks
Take Square, who just this week announced their checking account for SMBs. With no minimums, no account fees, no overdraft fees, this account becomes the natural home for Square's millions of SMB customers.?
Square doesn't have to monetize through minimums, fees, or overdrafts because it is a broader offering.??
Banks have woken up to the Fintech threat; during earnings season, Execs from Capital One to JP Morgan to Goldman have all talked up the need to partner, acquire and invest in Fintech due to the massive threat and opportunity for their business.
But banks need to find a new way of approaching the market. It can’t be the same old shit different decade anymore.
Temporarily, banks are having a bit of a moment.
As the economy re-opens and the possibility of interest rate rises, bank stocks had an excellent few weeks. But bank fortunes always followed the economy. When the economy is up, so are banks; when the economy is down, so are banks.
Banks rebounding off a very low base isn't the beginning of a growth movement for them, but?some?banks have been doing well for several years.
Banks doing well longer term.
If you zoom out over the past 5 years, you'll find a small cohort of bank share prices moving up and to the right.
1. Partner/community banks
Community banks (with sub $10bn in assets) benefitted significantly from the?Durbin Amendment . Banks like Bancorp, Celtic, Evolve, and Sutton sponsors some of the world's largest companies' debit card programs (like Doordash, Instacart, and even Square).?
Last year a16z?published a piece ?showing the community banks that are partnering are trending towards a much higher Return on Equity (ROE) and Return on Assets (ROA). Some of the smallest banks in the US serve the largest tech and Fintech businesses and benefited from their growth.?
But these aren't "growth stocks." They're successful and growing, but they've become niche players by their nature, and there are lots of them. They're not equal (some support more with lending like Cross River, and some have more in-house tech like Green Dot, for example). But as a general rule, their growth will be limited by focussing on their niche, the size of their balance sheet, or both.?
The niche means, even if they had all of the big tech companies processing card payments through them, their portion of those transactions is tiny. And the nature of a balance sheet requires; balance. Becoming a specialist lender is great, but you will need to fund that lending with deposits (or market funding) which can be expensive. Taking all of the deposits is fine, but can you deploy enough lending to make that worth your while as a small bank?
The very nature of the banking business model and economics mean it's great to be a niche product player, but it's hard to dominate at it.
Lesson:?Solve a problem others can't (or won't)?
2. Banks that serve the tech sector
There is another kind of niche, which is focussing on a client segment and becoming?the default partner. Banks like Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Silvergate have carved out a spot as the tech-friendliest among the banks.??
Silvergate has become one of (if not?the) default choice for Crypto companies looking for the on / off ramp between Crypto and regular fiat currencies. It has become a partner bank to the Crypto industry and grown with it by specializing in this sector.
SVB, in particular, has positioned itself as the default partner to some of the world's largest funds and accelerators and carved out a position as "the bank that can make it happen." This is especially appealing to Fintech startups who get little support from the larger banks, but SVB is positioned as a bank with VC instincts. By spotting promising startups, they will issue lending in the form of convertible loan notes. This means when a company hits IPO, SVB does exceptionally well.
SVB is the more interesting case study in this mold because it has altered its business model, perhaps historically due to how close it has always been to Silicon Valley itself. SVB differentiates because it?actually understands?its customers and will put in massive effort to overcome the complexity of the banking system and industry for its clients.??
SVB is perhaps the closest thing to a growth stock in banking. But it's still a bank, and it's still a regional player. It can grow, but nowhere near what the next big Fintech company can achieve.?
Lesson:?Understand your customers and remove complexity
3. Banks that have their tech act together
Some of the world's biggest banks are notoriously bad, just awful at technology. Being good at tech in banking is like being one-eyed in the land of the blind. Two names spring to mind for being pretty good at tech in banking, and they have something in common.
Capital One was founded in 1994 by Richard Fairbank and Nigel Morris (now a partner at Fintech VC QED Investors) and is famous as the 5th largest credit card issuer in the US. Capital One is famous for its focus on data and diligence. They can price risk others can't and see opportunities where others don't. Capital One pre-dates the .com boom (with 700+ branches, not a "digital" company as such), but it had a blank slate to build tech from in the 90s. Capital One has outperformed its peers in recent months (although, like most banks, it suffered during the pandemic).?
Goldman launched Marcus by Goldman it's direct-to-consumer offering. While it has acquired several Fintech startups (and even the GE book), Goldman built much of its technology greenfield with the latest available software from providers. Marcus itself hasn't set the Goldman share price on fire, but it has enabled Goldman's investment bank to be more efficient in the short term. Longer-term, Goldman's strategy tells the market it intends for the Marcus platform to be the core of its embedded finance offering.??
Lesson:?Start without legacy tech
What about the megabanks?
For the most part, the megabanks are rising and falling with the market, but one stands out. The juggernaut that is JP Morgan Chase has consistently outperformed its peers with a strategy it calls "fortress balance sheet." By maintaining?solid capital ?reserves, JP Morgan has been able to have some of the most affordable capital and been seen as an ultra-low credit risk. In turn, this makes their lending much more profitable than others.?
JP Morgan has also been the most vocal lately about the lack of a "level playing field" with Fintech and how Fintech companies benefit from not following the same stringent capital rules as banks. The megabanks are unlikely to be a growth stock any time soon, but the balance sheet focus has worked.
Lesson:?Use your balance sheet as a competitive advantage
The four lessons
If you look outside of Fintech, the best (or least worst) performing banks do one or more of the following.
领英推荐
What if someone put all of those together?
It's hard to have both a massive balance sheet (which reduces the cost of funding for lending) and be an agile, tech-savvy business. Those with an enormous balance sheet tend to have legacy tech, and those that are great at tech don't often have a massive balance sheet.?
What's more, the nature of?having?a huge balance sheet makes you a GSIFI (globally significant financial institution). Being a GSIFI dials up regulatory scrutiny two or three notches.??
Balance sheets are a blessing and a curse
The blessing of a massive balance sheet is the much lower cost of funds (CoF), which enables more profitable lending. The curse is ROTE.
Banks are measured on?Return on Tangible Equity ?(ROTE). To cut a long story short, this means sometimes profitable businesses (like payments) are unattractive to banks because it would negatively impact their ROTE. Banks have to turn away exciting and massive Fintech revenue opportunities because of how they're measured and the capital constraints placed upon them.
As a result, most large shareholders see banks as yield stocks, unlikely to drive share-price growth, but profitable and able to generate dividends.
But why can't we have nice things?
After the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), many banks built a "bad bank" or non-core part to their business. The idea was to put much of the high-risk debt or bad performing parts of the bank into one organizational bucket that would be sold, dismantled, or wound down slowly.
Couldn't that work for banking tech and business and operating model too? You wouldn't end the ROTE challenge, but you would open the door to things the bank hadn't done well historically (like?originate to distribute ?lending models, for example).?
We're on the cusp of a massive shift as finance becomes embedded and invisible. There has never been a better reason to break from the existing culture, business model, and operating model of the legacy bank.
The existing banks that have leaned into Fintech have done exceptionally well; they understood their superpower and executed.
What if you did that, but with a massive balance sheet, no legacy tech, a deep customer understanding, and started with a problem others can't or won't?
Maybe banks won’t be growth stocks. But my goodness the embedded finance opportunity has to be worth grabbing with both hands.
Or maybe, Fintech who’s already a platform will back its way into being a bank over time, and build a massive balance sheet.
Who's your money on getting there first?
ST.
4 Fintech Companies ??
1.Chaka ?- Robinhood for Africa
2.?Seon ?- eCommerce fraud prevention
3.?Paystand ?- Zero fee B2B Payment Network
4.Titan ?- Active fund management for Gen Z
Things to know ??
Quick hits: ??
Good Reads ??
1.?Not Boring: Axie Infinity ?- The Play to Earn game with explosive growth
Tweets of the week ??
Exclusive for substack subscribers
That's all, folks. ??
Remember, if you're enjoying this content, please do tell all your fintech friends to check it out and hit the subscribe button :)
General Counsel l Financial Services l Banking I Risk Management I Litigation Management I Regulatory and Compliance Expertise
3 年Simon Taylor Good read as always. Every FI is investing in tech, some better than others. You’ve touched on a big question for FIs which is, What do you do with legacy tech? Do you build infrastructure to enable it to connect to new technologies or do you double down and revamp entire systems paving the way for what’s looming, e.g. ISO 20022 in the payments space. I personally prefer the latter approach, but that’s a big budget commitment that’s hard to secure.
Learner & Builder |Entrepreneur ? Restauranteur ? FoodTech ? eComm ? FinTech ? 5X Founder 3X Exits
3 年Good read! Informative. Thanks
Author, Consultant, Dr. Business Administration
3 年Simon Taylor Meanwhile in the REAL world https://www.reuters.com/business/us-bank-profits-rose-768-bln-q1-2021-291-jump-previous-quarter-2021-05-26/ "U.S. bank profits rose 29% as outlook for future credit losses adjusted downward" in Q1 2021 LinkedIn anyone? https://www.dhirubhai.net/posts/pjmcconnell_martin-turpin-bullshitting-is-human-nature-activity-6822289516183871488-WYen
Principal Solution Architect (Governance, Risk & Compliance) at Amazon Web Services (AWS) - All views are my own
3 年Could a bank ever be a growth stock? Yes - definitely in the short term. Due to vast amounts of deployable capital (due to QE and other macro drivers), these funds need to be invested. Challengers with compelling customer propositions, lean operations and aggressive marketing are attractive investments. Big % customer acquisition metrics can be achieved that will fuel increasing valuations. Maybe - in the mid to long term. Many challengers do not have a compelling customer proposition - "Digital! Cool App!" only goes so far - growth then plateaus. Also, quite a few challengers rush to market with limited product sets. IMO, don't call yourself a bank if you don't have a lending product to go with your deposit product - this will catch out many in the longer term as the economic cycle eventually shifts from low interest. My preferred approach would be to pick bank stocks which have a compelling proposition, great tech (download and use their app to check) and a solid product set. Alternatively, find a fintech ETF that has a basket of bank stocks. Thoughts?
Senior Product Manager
3 年Could we be witnessing the start of a new paradigm where challengers become incumbents and will soon have to start adapting to their new position? My two (completely unbacked) assumptions are: 1. FinTech is less constrained by regulations 2. FinTech is highly leveraged by VCs This doesn't seem like a competitive advantage that is sustainable in the long-term. FinTech will likely have to face more and more regulation and/or have to find ways to grow that are less leveraged. In the meanwhile, it has become easier and easier to be a challenger in this space. New players with more efficient business models (just like we saw in retail energy) will come in threatening the margins of the challenger-turned-incumbents. This means that the new incumbents will quickly see themselves in the same position as banks 5-10 years ago. How will they react? Bet on service quality (like banks tried to do and failed)? Become more efficient and chase the challengers? Or find alternative business models (e.g., becoming a customer acquisition partner for brands)? Does any of this make sense or am I missing an important part of this story?