Can fintech close the gender gap in access to financial services? Using novel survey data for 28 countries, this paper finds a large and ubiquitous ‘fintech gender gap’: while 29% of men use fintech products, only 21% of women do. This difference exceeds the gender gap in bank account ownership at traditional financial institutions. While country characteristics and individual-level controls explain about a third of the fintech gender gap, the residual gap declines by 60% when accounting for gender differences in the willingness to use new financial technology, the suitability of fintech products, and the willingness to use fintech entrants if they offer cheaper products. The paper concludes by discussing drivers of differences in attitudes and implications for policy to foster financial inclusion with new technology

This article studies how the rise of financial technology (Fintech) lending affects credit access, interest rates, and social welfare. We consider a lending competition model with two incumbent banks and a Fintech lender, which use different information and technologies to assess borrower creditworthiness. We show that Fintech lending could negatively affect high-quality borrowers’ access to credit when the Fintech lender’s screening accuracy is superior to that of the banks. Furthermore, Fintech lending may worsen the allocative efficiency of credit and reduce social welfare under some conditions. Analytical and numerical results suggest that Fintech lending mostly reduces the expected interest rates

Richard Holden of UNSW Business School reviews “Fintech Explained: How Technology Is Transforming Financial Services” by Michael R. King. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Explores how entrepreneurial startups, mature businesses, digital-only banks, and global technology companies are transforming the customer experience in financial services, focusing on financial technology (fintech) applications developed since the mid-2000s that primarily target individuals and small business customers

We describe the dimensions along which bank technologies differ from fintech competitors and construct a novel measure of a bank’s technology based upon its overlap with fintech firms in terms of granular product installation data. A one standard deviation increase in our financial technology measure is associated with an 8.3 percentage point increase in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans in 2020Q2. We show that smaller banks benefited more from marginal technology gains, that technology facilitated out-of-area lending, and that technology complemented small banks’ branch-based in-area lending. In a difference-in-differences analysis, we show an outsized increase in small business lending growth in 2020 for high tech small banks relative to their peers

Hundreds of equity market intelligence financial technology firms (FinTechs) have formed in the last decade. We assemble novel data to describe their capabilities, users, and consequences. Our data suggest that these FinTechs i) aggregate many data sources, including nontraditional ones (e.g., Twitter, blogs), and synthesize such data using artificial intelligence to make investment recommendations, and ii) change Internet users’ information discovery by serving as substitutes for traditional information providers. We evaluate some nontraditional data and find evidence suggesting that such data contain valuable information or “crowd wisdom” that links to informational efficiency. Overall, our findings are consistent with this innovation benefiting investors and markets

We study the broad question about the sources of FinTech lending growth by examining a specific representative product for which the technologies of both FinTech and the incumbent competitors can be identified and compared—small business lending. We test whether the presence of incumbents employing different technologies affects FinTech penetration, and find more FinTech lending where large/out-of-market banks are more prevalent. Using stress test exposures and Community Reinvestment Act examinations as instruments, we find that FinTech credit more often substitutes for loans by large/out-of-market banks than small/in-market banks. Results are consistent with FinTech advantages in processing hard information, rather than hardening soft information

We provide a spatial framework to study competition between banks and fintechs in the lending market and examine the impact on investment and welfare. Based on the key differences between banks and fintechs, we derive results consistent with the empirical evidence available. We find that fintechs with inferior monitoring efficiency can successfully enter because of their superior flexibility in pricing and that higher bank concentration leads to higher fintech loan volume. If fintechs and banks have similar funding costs, fintech borrowers pay lower loan rates and have higher default rates than bank borrowers with similar characteristics; however, the result will flip if fintechs have much higher funding costs than banks. The advantage of fintechs in offering convenience can also induce them to charge higher loan rates than banks. Fintech entry will improve welfare if fintechs have high monitoring efficiency and inter-fintech competition intensity is intermediate. Fintech entry may induce banks’ exit and reduce investment; however, it will increase investment if inter-fintech competition is intense enough

We examine the impact of fintech on firm labor demand, job turnover, and firm performance. Occupations with higher exposure to fintech experience a net decline in job postings and employment, though both complementary and substitutive effects emerge across different sectors. Fintech blurs traditional industry boundaries, creating demand for workers with a combination of finance and technology skills. In response, firms upskill through hiring, reallocate talent internally, and pivot innovation to new areas. As a result, firms are better equipped to absorb the shock than individual workers, with innovative firms even experiencing growth in employment, sales, and productivity upon fintech disruption

FinTech is about the introduction of new technologies into the financial sector, and it is now revolutionizing the financial industry. In 2017, when the academic finance community was not actively researching FinTech, the editorial team of the Review of Financial Studies launched a competition to develop research proposals focused on this topic. This special issue is the result. In this introductory article, we describe the recent FinTech phenomenon and the novel editorial protocol employed for this special issue following the Registered Reports format. We discuss what we learned from the submitted proposals about the field of FinTech and which ones we selected to be completed and ultimately come out in this special issue. We also provide several observations to help guide future research in the emerging area of FinTech

We study the role of trust in traditional finance in the consumer adoption of various fintech products, including cryptocurrencies, peer-to-peer lending, other crowdfunding, roboadvisors, and alternative payment solutions. Using an online lab experiment, an experiment on an investment website, and a representative survey of Dutch households, we find no consistent evidence that trust in banks affects fintech adoption in any of the product categories, although we find weak evidence suggesting that trust in banks positively affects interest in alternative payment apps. Our results do not support the narrative that trust in traditional finance is a major driver of fintech adoption