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 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

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

Motivated by its rapid growth, this paper investigates how FinTech activities influence risk-taking by financial intermediaries (FIs). In this context, the paper revisits an ongoing debate on the impact of competition on financial stability: on one side, it is argued that greater competition encourages greater risk-taking (competition-fragility hypothesis), while the other side asserts that more competition can increase financial stability (competition-stability hypothesis). Using a curated database covering over 10,000 FIs and global FinTech activities, we find a robust relationship whereby greater FinTech presence is associated with heightened risk-taking by FIs, offering support for the competition-fragility hypothesis. However, the inclusion of bank-, industry, and country-specific characteristics can alter this relationship. Importantly, there is suggestive evidence indicating that in certain cases, greater FinTech presence may be associated with less FI risk-taking amid stronger domestic institutions. Notwithstanding the relevance for policy, this paper presents a novel framework that may help reconcile some of the conflicting results in the literature, which have found supportive evidence for each of the two competing hypotheses

This paper studies the role of trust in incumbent lenders (banks) as an entry barrier to emerging FinTech lenders in credit markets. The empirical setting exploits the outbreak of the Wells Fargo scandal as a negative shock to borrowers’ trust in banks. Using a difference-in-differences framework, I find that increased exposure to the Wells Fargo scandal leads to an increase in the probability of borrowers using FinTech as mortgage originators. Utilizing political affiliation to proxy for the magnitude of trust erosion in banks in a triple-differences specification, I find that, conditional on the same exposure to the scandal, a county experiencing a greater erosion of trust has a larger increase in FinTech share relative to a county experiencing less of an erosion of trust. Estimating treatment effect heterogeneity using generic machine learning inference suggests that borrowers with the greatest decrease in trust in banks and the greatest increase in FinTech adoption have similar characteristics

Analyzing a sample of Chinese firms, we find that when companies receive more coverage from FinTech advisory firms, their stock prices move less in tandem with the overall market. This suggests that FinTech coverage improves how accurately stock prices reflect firm-specific information. Our results hold true across multiple testing methods and alternative ways of measuring stock price synchronicity. Further analysis shows that FinTech coverage reduces stock price synchronicity primarily by addressing information gaps between companies and investors. Additionally, greater FinTech coverage improves stock liquidity and lowers the costs of raising debt or equity financing. When examining the topics covered by FinTech firms, we find that diverse coverage topics are linked to lower stock price synchronicity, with discussions on finance, corporate governance, and negative sentiment playing a particularly effective role. Finally, a textual analysis reveals that FinTech coverage includes significantly more firm-specific information than traditional analyst reports

Open banking (OB) empowers bank customers to share their financial transaction data with fintechs and other banks. New cross-country data shows 49 countries adopted OB policies, privacy preferences predict policy adoption, and adoption spurs fintech entry. UK microdata shows that OB enables: (i) consumers to access both financial advice and credit; (ii) SMEs to establish new lending relationships. In a calibrated model, OB universally improves welfare through entry and product improvements when used for advice. When used for credit, OB promotes entry and competition by reducing adverse selection, but higher prices for costlier or privacy-conscious consumers partially offset these benefits

Does the recent proliferation of technology in lending process have an impact on business loan market competition? Using a theoretical model that assumes heterogeneity in lenders’ screening abilities and borrowers’ investment horizons, we show that FinTech (Traditional) lenders primarily supply unsecured (asset-backed) loans to borrowers with short-term (long-term) projects. The model builds on the interplay between screening ability and collateral requirements to characterize the competition between two ex-ante symmetric lenders. Lenders use screening technology and collateral requirements to mitigate competition and restrict the supply of credit through an endogenous segmentation of the loan market. As information technology improves, the effect on credit supply and equilibrium interest rates becomes more nuanced and depends on the market segment. The results offer a supply-side explanation for the growth of unsecured lending

Compared with the previous literature on external FinTech, this paper is more interested in the role played by bank FinTech. On the basis of panel data from Chinese commercial banks spanning 2010–2021, this paper investigates the impact of digital transformation on bank soundness and its potential mechanisms. The empirical findings demonstrate a positive association between digital transformation and bank soundness, driven primarily by strategic and management digitization. Mechanistic analysis indicates that digital transformation improves bank soundness by mitigating risk-taking behavior and promoting diversification. The positive effect of digital transformation is more pronounced in state-owned and joint-stock banks, banks with higher liquidity mismatch and in the subsamples with greater levels of external FinTech development and economic policy uncertainty. Additional analysis suggests that digital transformation can still enhance bank soundness even in the presence of relatively lenient monetary and macroprudential policies, highlighting the harmonization and complementarity between internal innovation from digital transformation and external regulatory policies in maintaining banking stability. Overall, this paper contributes to the literature on bank FinTech, which focuses on the factors influencing bank stability. This study also provides a novel explanation for the relationship between financial innovation and financial stability