April 28, 2016

Which are The Hottest #FinTech #VC's in Europe Backing the Next Big Breakthrough

These are the main #FinTech investors in Europe.  

The Hottest FinTech Investors in Europe to Back the Next Big Breakthrough in FinTech

Big breaks across industries don’t usually happen without VCs backing them. Success stories in most cases have co-authors and in 2016, VCs are the ones to provide a financial fuel to bright entrepreneurs and ideas with a high disruptive potential.
While some VCs are operating across regions, some have a particular geographical focus. Since Europe is one of the world’s hubs of innovation, the UK and other countries in Europe and in the Nordic region have their dedicated investors. The US is also rich on FinTech-focused VCs that have a keen interest in discovering the next big thing in FinTech. 
Aside from VCs, there are also FinTech accelerators accountable for success stories, both in the US and in Europe.
This time, let’s look at some of the hottest FinTech investors in Europe that also invest in other regions along with European venture allocations.

BBVA Ventures

Description: BBVA Ventures provides funding and expertise to promising technology companies disrupting financial services. The firm works with the entrepreneurs and co-investors in the US and EU, thereby becoming a long-term partner in their success.
Stage/size of investments: Early-stage venture to later-stage venture investments
Segments: FinTech, financial services
Portfolio of payments companies: Prosper, DocuSign, Simple, Radius, Coinbase, SumUp, Personal Capital, Ribbit Capital

Santander InnoVentures

Description: The company launched its $100-million fund in July 2014 to get closer to the wave of disruptive innovation in the FinTech space. Santander InnoVentures aims to support the digital revolution to make sure its customers around the world benefit from the latest know-how and innovations across the banking group’s geographies.
Stage/size of investments: Small companies and startups
Segments: FinTech exclusive
Portfolio: iZettle, MyCheck, Ripple, Kabbage, Cyanogen
The Hottest FinTech Investors in Europe to Back the Next Big Breakthrough in FinTech

Anthemis Group

Description: Anthemis Group is the venture investment and advisory firm at the center of a vibrant ecosystem of startups and financial institutions dedicated to reinventing financial services for the digital world. The firm boasts of being committed investors, thoughtful advisors, active conveners and dedicated problem solvers who share a passion for technology and a belief in the transformative power of digital financial services.
Stage/size of investments: Seed, early-stage ventures and later-stage venture investments
Segments: Retail banking & consumer finance, business & corporate banking, payments, wealth & asset management, capital markets & trading, insurance & risk management, data, technology & infrastructure
Portfolio of payments companies: Moven, Simple, Vericash, Fidor Bank

Index Ventures

Description: Index Ventures backs the best and most ambitious entrepreneurs and help them make their ideas real and lasting. The entrepreneurs it teams up with were born to build their businesses—it is their life’s mission. Working side-by-side with these visionaries makes Index Ventures incredibly optimistic about the future. The transformative companies they’re building, include Dropbox, Etsy, Sonos, SoundCloud, Flipboard, King, BlaBlaCar, Squarespace, Just Eat, Lookout, Hortonworks, Nasty Gal, Pure Storage, Supercell, Criteo, Funding Circle and many others.
Stage/size of investments: Index invests in various multiple stages including seed, early-stage venture, later-stage venture and private equity investments.
Segments: Information technology, life sciences
Portfolio of payment companies: iZettle, Clinkle, TransferWise, Funding Circle, Xapo, Swipely, BitPay, iZettle, CrowdRise, Funding Circle

AXA Strategic Ventures

Description: AXA Strategic Ventures’ commitment to founders and teams is to enhance value and maximize impact, therefore enabling you to engage individuals, customers and businesses. The firm maintains long-term, strategic focus. In other words, AXA Strategic Ventures want to help you become real players in the sharing economy—when you succeed, they succeed.
Stage/size of investments: All stages
Segments: Alternative business models, big data, climate change, financial inclusion and health
Portfolio: FundShop, WIDMEE, FLYR, Policy Genius

SmartFin Capital

Description: SmartFin Capital is an anti-cyclical and long-term oriented investment vehicle managed by a strong team that combines financial, operational and entrepreneurial experience supporting its portfolio companies in their growth ambitions. The firm provides replacement and expansion capital to European companies that display the potential for significant value creation in fast-growing market segments in. SmartFin Capital believes in building successful companies rather than setting up financially engineered transactions. The firm also looks for opportunities where other investors hesitate to go, refusing pigeonholing that would limit our flexibility.
Stage/size of investments: Growth technology companies
Segments: FinTech
Portfolio: ANCOA, NG DATA, Divitel

Highland Capital Partners

Description: The firm partners with the most compelling entrepreneurs developing innovative technologies to disrupt massive markets. As early investors, Highland Capital Partners surrounds our entrepreneurs from the start with expertise and strategic guidance necessary to build the next generation of category-defining companies.
Stage/size of investments: All
Segments: Consumer technology, enterprise technology, bitcoin, mobile payments
Portfolio: Bitnet, LevelUp, WePay, etc.

Earlybird Venture Capital

Description: Venture capital is a product for entrepreneurs. Earlybird Venture Capital backs nonlinear companies that create network effects, shorten value-chains, drive new economies or improve people’s lives. The firm backs European companies that have a global profile, from a few hundred thousand up to $15M.
Stage/size of investments: All stages; investments ranging from €250K to €10M.
Segments: FinTech, e-commerce, software, media
Portfolio: Smava,, Traxpay

Orange Growth Capital

Description: Orange Growth Capital (“OGC”) is a financial technology investment firm founded in the fall of 2013. Its team consists of eight professionals and 25 industry advisers who operate from its offices in London and Amsterdam.
Stage/size of investments: All stages
Segments: FinTech
Portfolio: Salviol Global Analytics, Zopa, Moni, BUX, Knip

General Atlantic

Description: General Atlantic is a leading global growth equity firm providing capital and strategic support for growth companies. Established in 1980, General Atlantic combines a collaborative global approach, sector-specific expertise, long-term investment horizon, and a deep understanding of growth drivers to partner with great management and build exceptional businesses worldwide.
Stage/size of investments: Early-stage ventures, later-stage ventures and private equity investments
Segments: Financial services, business services, retail and consumer, healthcare, internet and technology
Portfolio of payments companies: Adyen, Avant, Klarna

TA Associates

Description: Founded in 1968, TA Associates is one of the oldest and largest growth private equity firms in the world. The firm invests in growing private companies in exciting industries, with the goal of helping management teams build their businesses into great companies. This mission has been at the heart of TA’s approach to investing, and its more than 450 current and former portfolio companies illustrate its commitment to provide steady support through the cycles of the global economy. With $18 billion raised since inception and over four decades of experience, TA offers its portfolio companies strategic guidance, global insight, M&A support, recruiting assistance, and a significant network of contacts, in addition to sound financial backing.
Segments: FinTech, technology, financial services, healthcare and consumer businesses, communications
Portfolio of payments companies: BATS Global Market, BluePay, BillDesk, Smart Stream,, RGM Advisors

Summit Partners

Description: Summit Partners was founded in 1984 with a commitment to find and partner with exceptional entrepreneurs to help them accelerate their growth and achieve dramatic results. Since then, Summit has become the investment partner of choice for many of the best growth companies in the world. The firm has grown to a team of more than 90 investment professionals, led by 24 managing directors whose tenures average more than 14 years with Summit. The company has the capital and team to support your growth initiatives.
Stage/size of investments: Flexible investment approach offering growth equity, venture capital and fixed income ranging between $5 million and more than $500 million.
Segments: Financial technology, FinTech, healthcare, internet & e-commerce, consumer, educational, software, communications, electronics, life sciences
Portfolio of payments companies: 360T Group, Progressive, Ogone, Fleetcor


Description: Accion is a global nonprofit dedicated to building a financially inclusive world with economic opportunity for all, by giving people the financial tools they need to improve their lives. Accion is building the next generation of top-tier microfinance institutions, and over the last 50 years has helped create 64 such institutions in 32 countries on four continents that today reach millions of clients.
Stage/size of investments: Early-stage equity, quasi-equity financing and loan guarantees
Segments: FinTech, financial services
Portfolio of payments companies: Payclip, Coda, Neogrowth, Zoona, GKN Peru

Warburg Pincus

Description: At Warburg Pincus, private equity investing is its only business. Established more than 45 years ago, Warburg Pincus has invested more than $50 billion in more than 720 companies in more than 35 countries around the world. The firm has more than $35 billion in assets under management. Its active portfolio of more than 120 companies is highly diversified by stage, sector and geography.
Stage/size of investments: Seed, early-stage venture, later-stage venture and private equity investments
Segments: Energy, financial services, healthcare and consumer, industrial and business services, real estate, technology, media and telecommunications
Portfolio of payments companies: Capital First, Santander Asset Management, China Huarong, Au Financiers

SBT Venture Capital

Description: SBT Venture Capital manages a FinTech VC fund investing in the most promising growth stage companies in the financial services industry. The firm brings a solid experience in the banking industry, an incredible network of financial services companies and related technology vendors. SBT’s main partner and investor is Sberbank, the largest commercial bank in Russia. The current focus is on early-stage growth companies that are generating revenue, in need of financial/intellectual capital and access to the right network in order to rapidly scale. SBT provides more than just finance, it fosters growth.
Stage/size of investments: Early-stage growth companies
Segments: FinTech, financial services, banking
Portfolio of payments companies: Advanced Merchant Payments (AMP) , eToro, IdentityMind Global™, Mobeewave, Sequent, Walkbase

Google Ventures

Description: Google Ventures provides seed-, venture-, and growth-stage funding to the most innovative and promising entrepreneurs across a variety of industries. Founded in 2009, Google Ventures has extensive entrepreneurial experience, deep technical knowledge, and expertise in building high growth, scalable products and companies. Among its 300 investments are Uber, Kabam, Flatiron Health, Cloudera, Homejoy and DocuSign. Google Ventures is headquartered in Mountain View, Calif., with offices in San Francisco, Boston, New York and London.
Stage/size of investments: Seed-, venture- and growth-stage funding
Segments: Life science, consumer, mobile, commerce, enterprise & data
Portfolio of payments companies: LedgerX, OnDeck, Ripple, LendUp, Upstart, Plaid, CircleUp

Technology Crossover Ventures (TCV)

Description: With over 20 years of experience backing market-leading technology companies in the Internet, business & financial services, infrastructure and software markets, TCV is uniquely positioned to provide long-term financial, strategic and operational support for today’s rapidly growing, innovative tech companies. Given its market focus, TCV has built deep domain expertise and a proprietary network across the technology landscape. This expertise provides significant value to its management teams.
Stage/size of investments: Early-stage venture, later-stage venture and private equity investments
Segments: Internet, business & financial services, infrastructure and software, FinTech
Portfolio of payments companies: Merkle, WorldRemit, Elevate, Think Finance, Trading Screen

Accel Partners

Description: Accel Partners has been committed to helping exceptional entrepreneurs build lasting, category-defining technology companies since 1983. Utilizing a focused, “prepared mind” approach to investing, the firm partners with businesses that show potential for significant long-term success in specific sectors. Emphasizing synergy in its portfolio enables the firm to offer the advantages of a cohesive, cooperative Accel community, including access to an extensive network of past and present entrepreneurs.
Stage/size of investments: Accel invests in companies from their genesis to growth. Its funding rounds include seed-, early-stage venture and later-stage ventures.
Segments: Technology companies, infrastructure, Internet & consumer services, mobile, software & cloud-enabled services
Portfolio of Payment Companies: Circle, Card Spring, Gumroad, Clinkle, Lenddo, Braintree, Nomi, Yodlee

Silver Lake

Description: Silver Lake is the global leader in technology investing, with over $26 billion in combined assets under management and committed capital and a team of approximately 100 investment and value creation professionals located around the world. Dedicated to the thesis that the dynamism and rapid pace of innovation in global technology demand intensely focused domain expertise, Silver Lake differentiates itself from generalist investment firms by devoting its full scope of talent and intellectual capital to the singular mission of investing in the world’s leading technology companies and tech-enabled businesses.
Stage/size of investments: Later-stage ventures, private equity and debt financing investments
Segments: FinTech, financial services, e-commerce, it & cloud computing, healthcare, mobile communications
Portfolio of payments companies: Alibaba Group, Cast & Crew, Global Blue, Interactive Data Corporation, Renovate America 

-- The MasterFeeds

April 12, 2016

Mobile is not a neutral platform

 Excellent post on the future of Mobile 

The building blocks of the desktop internet in 1995 were pages and links and that was still the case in 2005 or indeed today. ...
On mobile this is different - it's the operating system itself that's the internet services platform, far more than the browser, and the platform is not neutral. 
Smartphones are internet platforms in a way that PCs never really were, and they're not neutral - the platform owners keep reshaping them, and reshaping how user acquisition works.

Mobile is not a neutral platform

For a decade or two, for most people 'the internet' meant a web browser, a mouse and a keyboard. There were a few things around the edges, like IM, Spotify, Skype or Steam (or, for some people, email), but for most people and for almost all activities, the web was the internet. The web was the platform, not the PC operating system - people created services for the web, far more than for Windows or MacOS.
And once the browser wars died down, the browser was pretty much a neutral platform. Browser technology changed and that made new things possible (Google Maps, say), but the browser makers were not king-makers and were not creating or enabling entirely new interaction models. The building blocks of the desktop internet in 1995 were pages and links and that was still the case in 2005 or indeed today. You might never actually see a URL and the pages might start blending into each other, but everything still happens in that framework. 
On mobile this is different - it's the operating system itself that's the internet services platform, far more than the browser, and the platform is not neutral. 
The first manifestation of this (but only the first) has been messaging. As I've written before, push notifications, home screen icons and easy access to address books and photos mean it's very easy to adopt a new messaging service and very easy to use several at once, where on the desktop web it would painful. It's not just that you're running an app instead of a web page, but that the app can leverage specific APIs on the platform that never existed on the web. So the smartphone is itself a social messaging platform. Social apps plug into that platform rather like Facebook apps used to plug into the Facebook platform, or the way Facebook wants apps now to plug into Messenger. 
All of those enabling layers and APIs are consciously controlled by the platform provider, and they keep changing things. We're post-Netscape and post-PageRank - we left behind a monolithic intersection model, the web, and a near-monolithic way to find things in web search, and now we have many models and no stabilization around new ones. Apple and Google keep making decisions, enabling or disabling options and capabilities and creating or removing opportunities. This was also true of Windows or Mac for Windows or Mac applications (as competitors to Office complained) but in practice it wasn't the case on the desktop internet, because most of what mattered was happening inside the browser and not touching the OS, and the browsers themselves weren't making these kinds of moves. 
The crucial change is that Netscape or Internet Explorer did not shape which websites you visited (though toolbars tried to) and they didn't do things that changed how user acquisition or retention worked online. Apple and Google do that all the time, both consciously and unconsciously - it's inherent in what an actual operation system means. Some of this is simple evolution, and often collaborative  - the emergence of deep links is a good example of this. But some of it isn't. 
Hence, at both IO and WWDC this summer we saw moves from Apple and Google to create their own real-estate around the home screen. The 'swipe left from home' screen gains more and more capabilities, all totally under the platform owner's control. A lot of this happens to be about attempts at basic 'AI' - to watch the user in different ways and suggest something useful - but the broader point is that this is Apple's screen or Google's screen, and another content provider gets there only if Apple or Google want (and if they implement the indexing APIs that Apple and Google require). This will get bigger. 
Next, Apple and Google are exploring new ways to unbundle the content within apps into new usage models. Hence Apple's 3D Touch unbundles app content into the home screen (shades of Windows Phone) with these dynamic menus. Can there be apps where this is the main UI? Can you use them for notifications? (And of course this isn't on Android, so the fantasy of a cross-platform app gets even further away.)
Equally, Google's Now on Tap unbundles apps (and anything else) into Google's own search and suggestions. There's a nice dilemma here - when you implement the APIs to support app indexing and deep linking, you also let Google route people away from your app at a moment's notice (here a flow away from Soundcloud to YouTube, by pure co-incidence). 
Of course, all this sort of stuff is a big reason why Google bought Android in the first place - Google was afraid that Microsoft (it was that long ago) would dominate mobile operating systems and shut it out. The obvious fear was around things like preloads, and the justice of that fear was proven right with Maps, where Apple Maps now has 2-3x more users on iOS than does Google Maps, despite being a weaker product - the 'good enough' default wins and the platform owner chooses what that is. But the deeper issue is that we haven't just unbundled search from the web into apps - we're now unbundling apps, search and discovery into the OS itself. Google of course has always put a web search box on the Android home screen (and indeed one could ask why there needs to be an actual browser icon as well) but this is much more fundamental.
That is, this isn't really about what kinds of boxes slide onto your screen from where. It's about how you talk to your friends, how you discover new services and how you decide to spend money. 
This, obviously, is why Facebook keeps trying to insert its own layers into the OS (and why Amazon made a phone). I sometimes feel that every spring Facebook holds F8 and says "this is what interaction on smartphones will look like"!", and a few weeks later Apple and Google say "look, sorry kid, but...". It's not Facebook's platform to change. But if Facebook is successful in using Messenger to close the loop between its online identity platform (which both Apple and Google lack) and notification and engagement on the phone, then it it'll have managed to create its own layer at last. 
Really, what we see here is a search for another run-time. We had the web, and then we added apps, and now we look for another. Notifications? Siri/Now? Messaging (as forWeChat in China)? Something else?  But each of the previous run-times lacked search, discovery and acquisition as a fundamental part of the architecture - they had to be added later (and arguably that's still not there with apps). On Facebook's desktop platform, in contrast, both halves were there almost from the beginning. The next run-times on mobile might have both halves too. 

Read the post online here: Mobile is not a neutral platform:

February 08, 2016

Will Artificial Intelligence have an Uber Effect on Finance? -

Yea, but "On the other hand, the front office is an area where Sutton believed that human interaction is necessary as finance is an industry that is very relationship centric as people leverage financial advisors and wealth managers to provide customised advice."

This from 

Will Artificial Intelligence have an Uber Effect on Finance?

Following the recent breakthrough of artificial intelligence (AI), many have been wondering how this form of technology can be implemented in the financial services. As newer products emerge, it questions how popular the traditional legacy financial institutions will remain or perhaps, fintech startups will gain an increased number of customers, in a similar way to how Uber affected the taxi industry. bobsguide spoke to Josh Sutton, global head of artificial intelligence practice at technology company Sapient about how AI is set to transform business and finance, alongside how banks are already implementing a technology that has been around for 30+ years, but its true potential hasn't been seen until now.

According to CNBC, nearly $700 million has been invested in artificial intelligence over the past two years and Sutton explored how it is important to work with the C-suite of a company to give them a roadmap of the capabilities AI has as it provides a way to increase revenue, reduce cost and minimise risk. "Increased investment in AI has been over 30 years coming and technology has caught up to the conceptual promise of what could be done. If you look at all the products deployed by machine learning today, these are not new concepts by any means, but the processing power of the machines has finally reached a point where it is cost effective and time effective enough to generate real results from that information," Sutton highlighted.

Sutton continued to explain how AI has been extensively used by government and academic institutions, but banks have started to use it in order to monitor their risk related to illegal insider trading activities. A large global bank has already implemented AI instead of using the historical approach of having a team review trade information and police it in a human manner, Sutton revealed. "The platform that they built combined big data, machine learning and causal intelligence and that aggregates all the trade data and communication data from various traders and people they interact with across the various divisions."

Alongside this, artificial intelligence will benefit different parts of an organisation in different ways. Sutton said that leveraging AI would "systematically accelerate certain portions of the core middle and back offices to automate everything from trade processing through to KYC and AML." This ties into the long standing debate that has been occurring over the past year about whether human workers will be needed if technology becomes increasingly sophisticated. The stage that we are at the moment is that there needs to be a mixture of tasks completed by people and the rest by machine learning, but Sutton explored how the number of people required to fulfil the function of the middle and back office will eliminate the need for people.

"I think there will always be a need for people to identify and review the high priority activities but I do think that a substantial amount of work that is done today that is relatively trainable can be replaced via technology over the coming decade," Sutton said. On the other hand, the front office is an area where Sutton believed that human interaction is necessary as finance is an industry that is very relationship centric as people leverage financial advisors and wealth managers to provide customised advice. "I do believe that artificial intelligence will enable financial advisors to be much more effective in their interactions so, if you look at the job of a financial advisor, a significant portion of their time goes to understanding their individual customers, what is going on in their lives and what advice they can provide."

"What you'll see in the traditional wealth group, financial advisors will be able to take on a greater number of clients and the entire industry will expand as it becomes a cost effective tool that people can have that they haven't traditionally. If you look at a good disruptive example, like Uber, the model has changed the way that the industry works and it has dramatically increased the amount of money that gets spent." Sutton predicts that this "Uber Effect" will occur with artificial intelligence and the financial industry, especially in the retail banking industry where there will be a blur between retail banks and wealth managers.

"I think what you're starting to see is a lot of fintech players trying to nibble around the edges of that," Sutton highlighted as he went on to say that artificial intelligence will be ubiquitous in our day to day life, so much so that you are not even aware that you are using AI. However, to get to this point, there are many obstacles that must be overcome, one which concerns how the financial services industry are focusing on big data when it comes to implementing AI, rather than seeing it as a business tool.

"Artificial intelligence is not a technology solution, it is a business solution."

January 27, 2016

The Low-Down: #WhatsApp Nears a Billion Users: Is It Finally Time to Make Money?

Given the number of competing services adding users when you're free is not exactly easy, but it's a different challenge when you actually have to make money.

WhatsApp's global reach gives it some advantages. Whether it can figure out how to capitalize on them is another question. That said, being owned by Facebook, a company that also endured skepticism when it made that transition, suggests that it will get lots of experienced help. JL

Cade Metz reports in Wired

WhatsApp has a greater global reach than nearly any other app. A lot of companies are global. And these companies may be willing to embrace this kind of messaging because WhatsApp gives them more efficient access to more people than any other medium. The company can refine this kind of communication—and eventually charge a fee for it.
Read the rest of the article online here :  The Low-Down: WhatsApp Nears a Billion Users: Is It Finally Time to Make Money?

January 24, 2016

#Fintech investments will continue

Deconstructing the recent financial technology boom raises intriguing questions about the sustainability of the innovation cycle.

Fintech and the Fear of Froth

For more than half a decade, a seemingly irresistible momentum has been building around the idea that finance and technology are converging at a historical inflection point, a combination of business transformation and competitive disruption that has come to be labeled fintech. With annual investments in product development and entrepreneurial ventures now well into double-digit billions of dollars — and climbing — a 2000-style crash apparently isn’t in the offing.
However, if fintech is booming, then it is not immune to cyclical decline. Any investment, whether in a strategic initiative or a start-up, carries risk. But might there be more secular, or macro, forces that could wreak havoc on fintech as a whole? Or, to spin it more positively, what will it take to ensure this emerging sector’s longer-term sustainability?
There may be no better barometer of the fintech climate than what the money people are saying. The venture capitalists, investment bankers and others spotlighted last November in Institutional Investor’s inaugural Fintech Finance 35 ranking were unanimously enthusiastic and optimistic — but with murmurs of concern about too much froth. 
Alan Freudenstein, co-head of the Credit Suisse NEXT Fund, observed that some deals were “pushing prices to ridiculous levels.” Hans Morris, managing partner of Nyca Partners, cited overvaluations as a reason to be cautious about the blockchain boomlet.
Reacting to the mid-November announcement that Japanese e-commerce giant Rakuten had become the umpteenth corporation to launch a fintech investment strategy, Michael Maxworthy, a partner at M&A boutique Marlin & Associates, mused, “When will the madness end?”
In another everybody’s-doing-it example, Chicago is the latest major city to aspire to be a “fintech hub,” one of the local business community’s ChicagoNext initiatives.
Everyone wants a piece of fintech, but what exactly is it? The challenges and risks may lie in the fact that the concept is vague and undifferentiated. Some observers are taking a step back to define — or redefine — fintech. It is not one thing.
The basic premise is dialectic — a collision of old and new, incumbents and upstarts, legacy and disruption — along with a growing consensus that the opposites can profitably coexist.
Banks and other diversified financial institutions still have advantages in terms of customer databases and operational scale, but their lack of “fintech DNA” and “gaps in execution” leave them vulnerable to newer, agile, less regulated companies that are “digital first and can do one thing, but smarter,” says Senthil Kumar, vice president of marketing at Oracle Financial Services. 
That essentially describes how one of the early fintech disruptions, peer-to-peer and online lending, has played out over eight to ten years. Now Lending Club and OnDeck Capital, among other maturing newcomers, are forming partnerships with the likes of Citi and JPMorgan Chase & Co.
“The greatest opportunity lies at the meeting point of large financial institutions and young, ambitious start-ups,” Andrew Veitch, director of Anthemis Group, said last June upon the release of a “Fintech 2.0” paper that the London-based investment firm co-authored with Oliver Wyman Group and Banco Santander’s Santander InnoVentures.
Alexei Miller, a managing partner at technology development and consulting firm DataArt, deconstructs fintech three ways: general advancements like high-performance computing and mobility that make an impact on finance; entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley and elsewhere who set out to disrupt specific aspects of the business; and innovation led by established players. He says the last category is often overlooked but is yielding benefits increasingly through collaboration, as in Depository Trust & Clearing Corp.’s customer-data-aggregation affiliate, Clarient, and Goldman Sachs Group’s trading technology spin-off, REDI Holdings. 
John Dwyer, senior analyst at Oliver Wyman-affiliated research firm Celent, says attitudes toward “generic fintech” have been shaped by high-profile successes in online lending and electronic payments. He is considering a more detailed taxonomy of subsectors, including technology of regulation and compliance, which he dubs regtech; crypto tech, encompassing alternative currencies and blockchain; cybersecurity; insurance tech; and capital markets.
Seen in this light, fintech has legs, each of its facets evolving at a different pace. The capital markets category includes “the biggest [markets] on the planet,” Dwyer says: “As a fintech market, it is still in need of much greater definition.”
Get more on trading and technology

Fintech and the Fear of Froth

-- The MasterFeeds

Subscribe to The MasterTech's Feeds

Add This