brief insights from pef research fintech: a glimpse into ... · brief insights from pef research 5...
TRANSCRIPT
Brief Insights from PEF Research
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the
Financial Sector
PR
IVATE EQUITY FORU
M
JUSTUS-LIEB IG -U N IV ERSIT
ÄT
PRIVATE EQUITY FORUM AT JUSTUS LIEBIG UNIVERSITY
Brief Insights from PEF Research 2
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
“Silicon Valley is coming. There are hundreds of start-ups with a lot of
brains and money working on various alternatives to traditional banking.”
– Jamie Dimon (CEO, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.)
The term “FinTech” – short for “Financial Tech-
nology” – covered many headlines of reports
and analyses on the financial sector in recent
years. It deals with technologically improved
applications, processes, products, and services
of the financial industry reaching from digital
currencies to regulatory technology (Dorfleit-
ner et al., 2017; Kawai, 2016). Especially for
communities in developing countries, FinTech
can pave the way out of poverty by enabling
the “unbanked” population to become finan-
cially included (Demirguc-Kunt et al., 2018;
Vives, 2017). However, according to Demirguc-
Kunt et al. (2018), about 1.7 bn adults are still
unbanked. Yet 1.1 bn of them have a mobile
phone, demonstrating the extent of financial
inclusion if access to the internet and to mobile
banking is made possible.
Besides that, FinTech can also introduce the al-
ready “banked” population to more efficient
ways to use financial services (Vives, 2017). Ba-
zot (2017) shows that the unit cost of financial
intermediation in Germany has stagnated
1 More detailed information on the loss of trust in banks and the financial system can be found in Edel-man Trust Barometer Global Reports and Hurley et al. (2014).
around 2% in the period of 1950 – 2007. Philip-
pon (2015, 2016) argues that the improve-
ments in the information technology has bene-
fitted the financial sector as a whole but the
progresses have not trickled down to the end
users. He also finds similar rates for US market,
analyzing the period between 1986 and 2015.
Corruption as well as transaction costs and fi-
nancial risks can be reduced by the increase of
transparency and speed, creating economic
welfare (Demertzis et al., 2018; Demirguc-Kunt
et al., 2018; Dorfleitner et al., 2017; Karlan et
al., 2016; Vives, 2017).
The financial crisis of 2007/08, which led to a
loss of trust in banks and the prevailing finan-
cial system inter alia, fueled the conception of
a decentralized banking system detached from
all kinds of financial intermediaries.1 The eu-
phoria about this topic and the rise of peer-to-
peer lending platforms even led to the debate
of a world with banking without banks (see e.g.
The Economist, 2014). Banks, insurers, and
other incumbent financial service providers
PRIVATE EQUITY FORUM AT JUSTUS LIEBIG UNIVERSITY December 2018
FinTech: A Glimpse into the
Future of the Financial Sector
Alireza Emadi & Thomas Heyden
Brief Insights from PEF Research 3
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
around the globe recognized the need for inno-
vative ideas and more efficient and cost reduc-
ing solutions to stay competitive towards the
new market players in today’s highly regulated
financial system. The main challenge from the
viewpoint of governments and regulators for
the near future will be to improve the regula-
tory framework in a way that more financial
stability is made possible without negatively in-
fluencing competition (Philippon, 2016).
In this white paper, we provide a glimpse into
the future of the financial sector and discuss
the drivers, hurdles, and trends for the German
FinTech market in particular.
FinTech Definition
There is no uniform definition of the term
“FinTech”, yet. Many definitions use the word
“FinTech” to describe “a FinTech company”.
However, we differentiate between these two
notions. A FinTech company in our conception
uses technological know-how with the main
purpose of serving the financial industry by in-
novating the distribution of financial prod-
ucts/services, providing innovative financial
products/services, and enabling the provision
of innovative financial products/services.
FinTech companies are primarily but not exclu-
sively start-ups2. Moreover, established finan-
cial service providers as well as tech companies
without the main purpose of changing the fi-
nancial industry can offer FinTech-based solu-
tions. Therefore, all these players are partici-
pating and competing more or less in the same
market – some with the full scope of their busi-
ness and others only with the respective divi-
sions – and cannot be excluded (Comdirect,
2017; Demertzis et al., 2018; Dorfleitner et al.,
2017; Ernst & Young, 2017; Kawai, 2016; Oliver
Wyman, 2018).
According to Oliver Wyman (2018), Carney
(2017), and the definition above, FinTech com-
panies can be classified into six different types:
(1) Neo-Banks, (2) Marketplaces & Aggrega-
2 We define start-ups as young companies (max. 10 years) with high expectancies of growth in the near future.
tors, (3) Product-specific Marketplaces & Ag-
gregators, (4) Product Specialists, (5) Banking
Service Providers, and (6) Bank Platforms.
(1) Neo-Banks
Neo-Banks or Smartphone-Banks can be con-
sidered as full-featured banks, which enable
real-time banking through the use of mobile
devices. The crucial point is that not only the
products but also the entire value chain of an
ordinary bank has been innovated (e.g. N26).
(2) Marketplaces & Aggregators
FinTech companies belonging to this classifica-
tion provide two-sided e-marketplaces and/or
work as aggregators of different financial prod-
ucts/services. The end user is usually able to
vary different parameters according to his pref-
erences on those platforms and compare the
various offerings of the providers. These com-
panies do not offer the products themselves;
they only distribute them (e.g. CHECK24).
(3) Product-specific Marketplaces & Aggrega-
tors
Similar to the classification above, these
FinTech companies operate closely to the end
Brief Insights from PEF Research 4
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
user. The only difference is that they are spe-
cialized on a certain product/service (e.g.
Zinspilot).
(4) Product Specialists
Since FinTech companies of this field are con-
sidered “Product Specialists”, they are special-
ized on a specific product (e.g. Auxmoney:
peer-to-peer lending). The technological infra-
structure as well as the distribution of the prod-
uct can be provided by third parties or can be
realized by the “Product Specialists” them-
selves.
(5) Banking Service Providers
Classifying FinTech companies as “Banking Ser-
vice Providers” means that their main purpose
is to serve as technological enablers for banks,
insurers, and other FinTech companies that of-
fer products/services and/or distribute them
(e.g. Figo).
(6) Bank Platforms
Operating according to this classification,
FinTech companies allow third parties to create
their own banking products/services by provid-
ing the necessary infrastructure behind those
(e.g. solarisBank).
Segments and their Dynamics
For Germany, the data shows that the total
number of banks is shrinking whereas the num-
ber of newly founded FinTech companies has
been increasing since 2007:
Now, the growth rate of FinTech start-up foun-
dation is expected to slow down on a high level
3 Note that the number of FinTech start-ups may dif-fer from report to report due to varying definitions.
with an average growth rate across all seg-
ments of about 7%. Many of them emerged in
every segment, some of them even created
whole financial ecosystems (see e.g. N26).
Around 793 are based in Germany until the end
of September 2018, representing a total
growth of 21% since 2016. However, the high-
est density of start-up foundations per week is
still measured for the year 2016 with almost
three per week (Clairfield International, 2018;
Comdirect, 2017, 2018; Bundesbank, 2009,
2012, 2015, 2018).3
FinTech companies can operate in various seg-
ments of the financial industry. The main seg-
ments include: financing, payments, real estate
(PropTech), insurance (InsurTech), regulatory
(RegTech), and investments (InvesTech). It is
important to note that FinTech companies can
belong to multiple classifications and/or can
work cross-segmental (Comdirect, 2017; Ernst
& Young, 2017; Oliver Wyman, 2018).
However, the key trends are consistent across the different approaches.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
20
15
20
16
20
17
Banks FinTech companies
Source: Barkow Consulting, Comdirect, Deutsche Bundesbank
1 Number of banks and growth of FinTechs
Brief Insights from PEF Research 5
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
By taking a closer look on the number of
FinTech start-ups based in Germany – including
all possible classifications – in the respective
segments, it becomes apparent that FinTech
start-ups operating primarily in the area of real
estate (PropTech) dominate the field. Accord-
ing to Comdirect (2018), about 24% of the ob-
served 793 FinTech start-ups were PropTechs.
The second place goes to start-ups that mainly
belong to the financing segment with a total
share of approximately 20%. InsurTech start-
ups have also made it to the podium, account-
ing for about 11%. The rest of the field is quite
fragmented with shares close to or below 10%.
Especially PropTech and RegTech are gaining
the attention of young start-ups in recent
years, which anticipate great business opportu-
nities in those areas due to a stable real estate
market in Germany and the more stringent reg-
ulatory requirements for the financial sector.
However, the deal sizes for RegTechs in Europe
are relatively small compared to the other
FinTech segments. Nevertheless, in terms of
scope the efforts are exceptional, especially in
the UK (Ernst & Young, 2017; KPMG, 2018). The
InsurTech segment should not be neglected as
start-up activity in this segment is growing
above average (21%) in Germany. Comdirect
(2018) identifies a 26% growth for the Insur-
Tech segment whereas PropTech has grown by
15% since 2016.
FinTech Hubs and their Drivers
A FinTech hub is a geographical location with
increased activity in the interface between fi-
nance and technology. After a certain period,
hubs usually develop their own characteristics
due to various aspects (e.g. cultural environ-
ment) and grow in size.
Following Deloitte (2017), we discuss four key
factors, which affect the formation, growth,
and success of those hubs and position the Ger-
man FinTech market in this context:
(1) Policy & Regulation
The regulatory framework is not only crucial for
a stable financial system, it also plays an im-
portant role concerning the decision on the
place of business from an entrepreneurial per-
spective. The financial landscape of the EU has
been dominated by traditional banks for dec-
ades and is changing very slowly. Their domi-
nance is often justified by their long history and
4 For more insights on the inverse U-shaped rela-tionship between competition and innovation, please refer to Aghion et al. (2005). We recommend Blind (2012) for in-depth information on the effects
the regulatory and supervisory environment,
which is suited particularly to them and shaped
them over the years (Demertzis et al., 2018).
On the one hand, higher regulatory require-
ments might conflict with the entrepreneurial
spirit, hinder market entries, and restrict the
cooperation between companies (i.e. in re-
search and development) resulting in an overall
slowdown of innovation. In that case, espe-
cially FinTech start-ups would shift their busi-
nesses to areas with lower regulatory require-
ments since they are more flexible and have a
greater risk affinity than the already estab-
lished companies (Philippon, 2016). On the
other hand, regulatory burdens can guard the
existing market players from too much compe-
tition and therefore allow them to generate
profits to finance their innovations.4 Therefore,
governments’ and regulators’ task should be to
of different types of regulation on innovation. His analysis covers 21 OECD countries in the period be-tween 1998 and 2004.
Brief Insights from PEF Research 6
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
reduce regulatory arbitrage, create healthy en-
vironments where entrepreneurialism is pro-
moted without allowing innovation-reducing
market structures, and to develop forward-
looking regulatory frameworks that are aligned
with the dynamics of our technological era (Li
et al., 2017).5 Demertzis et al. (2018) recom-
mend focusing on the consumer’s interest
while creating the required regulatory frame-
work, since the FinTech innovation is primarily
consumer-driven, implying that its success’ as
well as failures are to a large extent absorbed
by the consumers. The regulatory bodies of the
UK and Singapore could be role models. Their
progressiveness has been rewarded as they are
one of the important leaders in the FinTech in-
dustry.
By launching the FinCamp events the German
Finance Ministry took actions to encourage the
idea exchange between all parties including the
Finance Ministry, the Deutsche Bundesbank,
the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority,
FinTech start-ups, and banks. The Federal Fi-
nancial Supervisory Authority also imple-
mented a new department called “Financial
Technology Innovations” that discusses the
regulatory aspects and the upcoming issues of
the changing financial environment. But a “reg-
ulatory sandbox” has still not been imple-
mented to test innovations in a safe environ-
ment (Ernst & Young, 2017). Considering this
progress, Germany’s regulatory authorities and
the government are on a good path. However,
comparing Germany to other established finan-
cial centers still leaves plenty of room for im-
provement.
(2) Demand & Risk Affinity
Areas with well-established financial systems
are more likely to attract FinTech companies
since a broader population is already familiar
with improved financial products/services. Fur-
thermore, the risk affinity to changes plays a
major role. If the population and the institu-
tions tend to stick to their old habits, the cost
5 Philippon (2016) outlines further guidelines for FinTech regulation covering various aspects.
of convincing (marketing) might exceed the
costs of moving elsewhere if budget is limited.
Beyond that, more intense competition among
the established financial institutions and there-
fore a greater demand for innovative ideas to
increase market shares can create lucrative
business opportunities for FinTech companies.
Especially B2B-oriented FinTech companies
that can boost the incumbents’ efficiency (e.g.
usability of digital banking apps) and reduce
their processing costs profit from this situation
since they appeal less threatening to them.
About 51% of the payments at the point of sale
in Germany in 2016 have been done by paying
cash. 46% of the transactions are card-based
(EHI Retail Institute, 2017). A survey of the
Deutsche Bundesbank (2017) shows that, espe-
cially among the younger generations (age 18-
24), digital payment alternatives are getting
popular. However, 88% of the participants in
the survey would like to be able to pay with
cash in the future and do not prefer the total
abolition. In comparison to Germany, the Chi-
nese payment behavior is significantly mobile-
based (56%) and offered by third-party compa-
nies like Alibaba (Alipay/AntFinancial) and Ten-
cent (WeChat). Paying with cash plays only a
limited role (18%) in China (Korella and Li,
2018).
(3) Capital
Access to capital is needed to innovate and
grow in scale and scope. Therefore, FinTech
start-ups are emerging in areas where they can
raise money easily. As the start-up business is
quite risky, the immature FinTech companies
are financed primarily with equity capital from
angel investors, venture capital (VC), and pri-
vate equity (PE) firms. Government and corpo-
rate institutions might also participate in later
fundraising stages. By reaching a specific size,
some of the FinTech companies even go public
Brief Insights from PEF Research 7
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
whereas the main investors initiate their exits
(e.g. Wirecard AG).
Besides the inflows in the FinTech companies
themselves, it is also important to invest in
pitch deck events, networking possibilities, and
panel discussions to improve the dialog be-
tween all parties, including the government
and regulators, the incumbents (usually banks
and insurance companies), and entrants
(FinTech companies). The knowledge diffusion
is a crucial factor for the success of those hubs.
From a regulatory perspective, investments in
“regulatory sandboxes” should be considered,
at least as a short-term solution, since they al-
low the FinTech companies to test their new in-
novations in a safe environment (Demertzis et
al., 2018)
(4) Talent Acquisition & Recruiting
Finally yet importantly, it is indispensable to ac-
quire and retain the right staff. The key attrib-
utes that should be brought to the table are fi-
nancial expertise, technological expertise, and
entrepreneurial spirit. Particularly on the gov-
ernment level, decisions on simplifying the en-
try for professionals should be considered since
a diverse team of entrepreneurs can be a huge
advantage, especially for the international ex-
pansion. Furthermore, increasing investments
in the education system and new education
programs (e.g. Applied Data Science) are essen-
tial to keep up with the pace of our technolog-
ical era.
If most of the mentioned aspects would be
taken into account it is likely that the estab-
lished hubs feed themselves by attracting more
and more innovative minds, resulting in an
overall positive feedback loop.
A significant number of FinTech start-ups are
still located in the capital of Germany, Berlin.
According to Comdirect (2017), in 2017, Berlin
had more FinTech start-ups than Frankfurt and
Munich combined, who shared the second
place. Other FinTech centers are emerging
around Hamburg, Cologne, Düsseldorf, and
Leipzig. However, the top three hubs were
home to >70% of the total FinTech start-ups
and responsible for about 78% of new FinTech
start-ups for the period of 2015 – 2017. This
trend underlines the self-fulfilling prophecy of
well-working FinTech hubs as mentioned
above.
Considering the upcoming results concerning
the negotiations between the EU and the UK on
the Brexit issue, Frankfurt is receiving increas-
ing attention, which is likely to strengthen its
second place or might pave the way for the
pole position. Some signals for improving the
financial center in Germany have been given by
Chancellor Angela Merkel with her speech at
an event of the German Stock Exchange on
September 4th (Handelsblatt, 2018). Ernst &
Young (2017) identify six success factors in
2017 that could make the Rhine-Main-Neckar
region, led by Frankfurt, the capital of FinTech
activity in Germany. These factors include
funding, partners, coaching/training, regula-
tion, infrastructure, and events/networking.
Frankfurt’s strongest factors are its infrastruc-
ture and events/networking. Significant pro-
gress has been made in providing affordable
co-working spaces and in the transfer of
knowledge and content. Besides that, the part-
nership between the incumbents and the en-
trants improved as well. This might be due to
the fact that Frankfurt’s FinTech companies are
more focused in B2B-ortiented fields in which
the provision of the necessary technology is of
main interest. The access to funding has been
identified as the weakest factor as already es-
tablished hubs like Berlin and London mostly
attract investors. However, we do expect shifts
of capital flows.
Brief Insights from PEF Research 8
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
Investment Activity
Fewer FinTech start-up foundations, increasing
deal sizes, and total investment volumes are in-
dicating that the German FinTech market is on
a healthy path to slowly enter the maturity
phase. This transition is boosted by an increase
in investors’ confidence towards German-
based FinTech companies and a shift of atti-
tude towards collaboration from the incum-
bent viewpoint, who might also invest through
their VC arms (CVC). More successful FinTech
companies with rather strong customer bases
as well as established market players (primarily
banks) and tech companies are currently trying
to increase their dominance in the market
through cooperations and acquisitions. How-
ever, less successful FinTech start-ups will
simply fail and shut down their businesses due
to lacks of capital, unprofitability etc. or be-
come acquired in the near future. Additionally,
an increase in the number of VC exits is ex-
pected which is also one of the characteristics
for the upcoming stage of the industry life cy-
cle. Since investments in the FinTech market
are still quite risky, focusing primarily on VC
and PE inflows as well as M&A transaction vol-
umes should be an appropriate way to depict
the current market situation and future trends
(Barkow Consulting, 2018; Clairfield Interna-
tional, 2018; Comdirect, 2017; Ernst & Young,
2017).
VC investments in the German FinTech industry
are peaking at record heights every year. About
41% of the total VC investment of 2017 (€713
mn) have been made in the first quarter of
2018 (€295 mn). This amount was mainly
driven by the deals of N26 (approx. €130 mn),
solarisBank (approx. €57 mn), and smava (ap-
prox. €52 mn). 2018 is also a record year al-
ready, since a value of €778 mn has been
achieved in the first nine months of this year.
The largest share (25%) of the cumulated VC of
2017 – September 2018 has flown into the fi-
nancing segment followed by investments (In-
vesTech) (17%). Only 8% were attributed to
FinTech start-ups, which operate in the largest
of all segments in numerical terms, the real es-
tate (PropTech) segment (Barkow Consulting,
2018; Comdirect, 2018; Crunchbase; Finanz-
Szene, 2018).
However, on the international stage Germany’s
investment and transaction volume – taking
VC, PE, and M&A activities into account – in
FinTech industry are inconsiderably small com-
pared to the giant markets of China, the US,
and even to the market of its European neigh-
bor, the UK (Demertzis et al. 2018; KPMG,
2018; Vives, 2017). According to Clairfield In-
ternational (2018), there are three main rea-
sons for that phenomenon: (1) German FinTech
business models have not reached the stage of
development of their international competi-
tors6, (2) investors were still not convinced of
their performance and the relevance of their
business models, and (3) German investors are
more cautious.
6 Cross-border activity of FinTech companies in Eu-rope measured in terms of inflow and outflow funds are relatively low compared to the US and Chinese markets, suggesting that European FinTech compa-nies are still largely domestic (Demertzis et al.,
2018). However, the European FinTech market is becoming more attractive as can be seen in the large investment of Tencent in N26, among others.
Brief Insights from PEF Research 9
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
Complement or Substitute?
The question we try to answer based on the
gathered results is whether FinTech start-ups
will replace the existing market players in their
respective business segments or whether their
technologically improved applications, pro-
cesses, products, and services act as a comple-
ment when utilized jointly with the current
ones. Research on this topic is quite sparse, as
FinTech is more or less a recent development
and data is not readily available (Demertzis et
al., 2018).
Li et al. (2017) analyze the impact of FinTech
digital banking start-ups’ funding on the stock
returns of incumbent US retail banks. The fund-
ing was used as an indicator of the potential
values of the FinTech start-ups and was proxied
by the number of funding deals and the funding
volume. The funding volume and the number
of deals themselves were not statistically sig-
nificant. However, in terms of growth, the co-
efficients were significant and positively re-
lated to the stock returns of traditional retail
banks, implying complementarity and there-
fore an on average positive spillover effect off
digital banking start-ups (FinTech start-ups) on
traditional retail banks in the US. In addition to
their findings, the researchers draw attention
to a case of spurious correlation due to the in-
effective size of the FinTech start-ups7, the
counterbalancing of substitutable and comple-
mentary effects8, different customer bases (i.e.
“unbanked” population), and other limitations
concluding that the result of complementarity
is fragile.
Oliver Wyman (2018) identifies a negative ef-
fect of FinTech start-up activity on the earnings
potential of German retail banks. The total
earnings potential of the retail bank sector is
7 According to Clairfield International (2018), out of the 700 identified German FinTech companies, less than 2% are profitable. 8 On the one hand, FinTech start-ups have started to suck up segments of the financial industry and push
valued at €54 – 55 bn and total earnings loss
accounts for 2 – 3% of it. Approximately one
third of the total earnings loss occurs due to in-
direct effects, like the increase of transparency
through digital marketplaces etc. The rest is as-
signed to direct effects including, among oth-
ers, the shift of the customer base towards
Neo-Banks. However, especially FinTech com-
panies that implement marketplace and aggre-
gator functions will cause a headache for in-
cumbent retail banks in the near future as they
are responsible for about 60% of the expected
total earnings loss by 2022 (€2 bn).
By taking a closer look on how the established
financial institutions respond to the new mar-
ket players, it becomes apparent that the top
ten banks in Germany use multi-response ap-
proaches. Ernst & Young (2017) identifies that
investing in FinTech companies is the most pre-
ferred one, followed by collaboration. In con-
trast, boosting innovation in-house is quite
modest across those banks. This might be due
to the stiffness of the banking culture towards
entrepreneurialism and distance between the
innovator and the decision maker within the
company. However, the “uncertainty principle
of economic research” should be considered,
since participants in a survey might refuse to
answer (correctly) on sensible topics.
Taking all the reports and scientific evidence
into account, we believe that it is too early to
predict the result of this transition in the finan-
cial industry. However, it is undeniable that
FinTech companies are becoming a serious al-
ternative to avail financial services, especially
in Eastern Asia, but also in the US and the UK.
Established market players seem to recognize
the incumbents out of the respective segments; on the other hand, incumbents try to maintain their market power by acquiring, cooperating, and in-vesting in FinTech start-ups or start innovating themselves.
Brief Insights from PEF Research 10
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
the need for action and are trying to incorpo-
rate profitable FinTech start-ups through dif-
ferent response models.
Not only the interaction between the incum-
bents and the entrants will be interesting for
the near future, the interplay among the
FinTech companies themselves will also call for
excitement. For the German FinTech market, it
can be said that the market is slowly entering
the maturity phase, since investment volumes
are increasing whereas FinTech start-up foun-
dations are slowing down. German-based
FinTech companies are trying to catch up with
their international peers by attracting interna-
tional investors and using those additional
funds to expand their businesses across Ger-
man borders. Overall, more intense M&A activ-
ities, cooperation, and collaborations should
be expected, especially in more mature seg-
ments (e.g. payments). Moreover, regulatory
aspects will also play a key role concerning the
structure of the market, as mentioned above.
Government, regulators, and FinTech compa-
nies in Germany are working more closely to-
gether but in comparison to other giant
FinTech markets, there is still much room for
further improvements. Should technology
companies (e.g. Google, Apple, Amazon, Face-
book etc.) start to disrupt the market in full-
scale, going beyond their payment services (i.e.
Google Pay, Apple Pay etc.), this might erode
the financial system more drastically in the fu-
ture: They have incredibly large customer ba-
ses, are proficient in gathering and analyzing
data, and have more investment capital than
FinTech start-ups.
Brief Insights from PEF Research 11
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
References
Aghion, P., Bloom, N., Blundell, R., Griffith, R., & Howitt, P. (2005). Competition and innovation: An
inverted-U relationship. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(2), 701-728.
Barkow Consulting (2018). FinTech Money Map. URL: http://www.barkowconsulting.com/barkow-
consulting-fintech-money-map/ (Last accessed on 17/12/2018).
Bazot, G. (2017). Financial consumption and the cost of finance: measuring financial efficiency in Eu-
rope (1950–2007). Journal of the European Economic Association, 16(1), 123-160.
Blind, K. (2012). The influence of regulations on innovation: A quantitative assessment for OECD
countries. Research Policy, 41(2), 391-400.
Bundesbank (2009). Bankenstatistik September 2009-Statistisches Beiheft zum Monatsbericht 1.
Frankfurt am Main.
Bundesbank (2012). Bankenstatistik September 2012-Statistisches Beiheft zum Monatsbericht 1.
Frankfurt am Main.
Bundesbank (2015). Bankenstatistik Oktober 2015-Statistisches Beiheft zum Monatsbericht 1. Frank-
furt am Main.
Bundesbank (2017). Zahlungsverhalten in Deutschland 2017-Vierte Studie über die Verwendung von
Bargeld und unbaren Zahlungsinstrumenten. Frankfurt: Deutsche Bundesbank.
Bundesbank (2018). Bankenstatistik September 2018-Statistisches Beiheft zum Monatsbericht 1.
Frankfurt am Main.
Carney, M. (2017, January). The promise of Fintech–something new under the sun. In speech at the
Deutsche Bundesbank G20 Conference on Digitising finance, financial inclusion and financial literacy,
Wiesbaden (Vol. 25).
Clairfield International (2018). Current developments in the German FinTech market. URL:
http://www.clairfield.com/wp-content/uploads/Clairfield-Germany-FinTech-2018-Study.pdf (Last ac-
cessed on 17/12/2018).
Comdirect (2017). comdirect Fintech-Studie. URL: https://static.comdirect.de/content/Blog/comdi-
rect_Fintech-Studie_2017.pdf (Last accessed on 12/17/2018).
Comdirect (2018). comdirect Fintech-Studie: Jeden vierten Tag ein neues Fintech. URL:
https://www.comdirect.de/cms/ueberuns/media/comdirect-Fintech-Studie-bundesweit.pdf (Last ac-
cessed on 17/12/2018).
Deloitte (2017). What makes a succesfull FinTech hub in the global FinTech race? URL:
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/lu/Documents/technology/lu-what-makes-suc-
cessful-fintech-hub-global-fintech-race-112017.pdf (Last accessed on 17/12/2018).
Demertzis, M., Merler, S., & Wolff, G. B. (2018). Capital Markets Union and the fintech opportunity.
Journal of Financial Regulation, 4(1), 157-165.
Brief Insights from PEF Research 12
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
Demirguc-Kunt, A., Klapper, L., Singer, D., Ansar, S., & Hess, J. (2018). The Global Findex Database
2017: Measuring Financial Inclusion and the Fintech Revolution. The World Bank.
Dorfleitner, G., Hornuf, L., Schmitt, M., & Weber, M. (2017). FinTech in Germany. Cham: Springer In-
ternational Publishing.
EHI Retail Institute (2017). Kartengestützte Zahlungssysteme im Einzelhandel 2017. URL:
https://www.ehi.org/de/studien/kartengestuetzte-zahlungssysteme-im-einzelhandel-2017/ (Last ac-
cessed on 12/19/2018)
Ernst & Young (2017). Germany FinTech Landscape: Insights into the response of financial institutions
to FinTechs and inter-FinTech collaboration. URL: https://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/ey-
germany-fin-tech-landscape-2017/$FILE/ey-germany-fin-tech-landscape.pdf (Last accessed on
12/17/2018).
Hurley, R., Gong, X., & Waqar, A. (2014). Understanding the loss of trust in large banks. International
Journal of Bank Marketing, 32(5), 348-366.
Karlan, D., Kendall, J., Mann, R., Pande, R., Suri, T., & Zinman, J. (2016). Research and impacts of digi-
tal financial services (No. w22633). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Kawai, Y. (2016). Fintech and the IAIS. IAIS Newsletter, 1.
Korella, J. L., & Li, W. (2018). Retail payment behaviour and the adoption of innovative payments: A
comparative study in China and Germany. Journal of Payments Strategy & Systems, 12(3), 245-265.
KPMG (2018). The Pulse of FinTech 2018. URL: https://assets.kpmg.com/con-
tent/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2018/07/h1-2018-pulse-of-fintech.pdf (Last accessed on 17/12/2018).
Li, Y., Spigt, R., & Swinkels, L. (2017). The impact of FinTech start-ups on incumbent retail banks’
share prices. Financial Innovation, 3(1), 26.
Oliver Wyman (2018). FinTechs – Viel Lärm um nichts!? URL: https://www.oliverwyman.de/con-
tent/dam/oliver-wyman/v2-de/publications/2018/Mai/20180516_Oliver_Wyman_FinTech_POV.pdf
(Last accessed on 12/17/2018).
Philippon, T. (2015). Has the US finance industry become less efficient? On the theory and measure-
ment of financial intermediation. American Economic Review, 105(4), 1408-38.
Philippon, T. (2016). The fintech opportunity (No. w22476). National Bureau of Economic Research.
The Economist (2014). Banking without banks. URL: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-eco-
nomics/2014/02/28/banking-without-banks (Last accessed on 12/17/2018).
Vives, X. (2017). The impact of FinTech on banking. European Economy, (2), 97-105.
Brief Insights from PEF Research 13
FinTech: A Glimpse into the Future of the Financial Sector
Appendix
About the authors:
Alireza Emadi is a student assistant at the Chair of Behavioral and Institutional Economics at Justus
Liebig University Giessen (JLU), Germany, and an active member of the Private Equity Forum at JLU.
He is about to finish his Bachlor's degree in Economics, majoring International Economics and Financial
Markets and Institutions.
E-Mail: [email protected]
Thomas Heyden is a research associate and Finance Ph.D. student at the Chair of Banking & Finance
at Justus Liebig University Giessen (JLU), Germany, and an active member of the Private Equity Forum
at JLU. He studied Economics and Mathematics in Giessen and Darmstadt, Germany, and holds a Mas-
ter’s degree in Economics, majoring Financial Markets and Institutions.
E-Mail: [email protected]
Research publication from Private Equity Forum at Justus Liebig University (JLU). This paper is for information
purposes only and not intended for commercial use. Private Equity Forum at JLU is an officially recognized non-
profit organization connected to the Chair of Banking & Finance at JLU. The views expressed in this paper are
those of the authors.
Photo on front page by energepic.com on Pexels.
Version as per December 2018.
© 2018 - Private Equity Forum an der Justus-Liebig-Universität e.V.