Financial Surveillance Technology Solutions: Market Size

The global trade surveillance market was valued at $717.4 million in 2019. The trade surveillance systems solutions help financial institutions and market experts in spotting fraud, erroneous, or abusive trading. The market has grown considerable since 2016, when it was worth roughly $600 million. The market is expected to grow at a CAGR of 19.7% until 2027.

The financial surveillance technology solutions industry

  • While we weren’t able to find the exact market size of the financial surveillance technology solutions industry, we did find that the trade surveillance market was worth $717.4 million in 2019.
  • Trade surveillance systems solutions help financial institutions and market experts in spotting fraud, erroneous, and abusive trading.
  • The market grew by over $100 million since 2016 when it was worth $600.2 million.
  • The trade surveillance market is expected to grow at a CAGR of 19.7%, reaching $2.9 billion by 2027.
  • The solutions segment and the on-premise segment had the highest market shares in 2019.
  • Data breaches and unlawful trading in financial institutions are the major factors that are contributing to the rapid adoption of trading surveillance.
  • According to Grandview Research, Europe was the biggest region for the industry, with more than 30% market share in 2019.

Research Strategy

We focused our research by going through several industry reports from PRNewswire and Grandview Research but the only information we could find on the financial surveillance market was related to trade surveillance. As information was rather limited on financial surveillance, we decided to go through different type of financial surveillance technologies and add the market sizes to determine the global financial surveillance market size. However, we weren’t able to find information on anything related to financial surveillance other than trade surveillance. As trade surveillance systems help financial institutions and market experts in spotting fraud, erroneous, and abusive trading, we decided to include that in our report as a proxy for financial surveillance technology solutions.

Financial Surveillance Technology Solutions: Global Players

  • NICE Actimize is the financial crime division of NICE.
  • Fiserv’s risk & compliance segment includes solutions for fraud risk & AML (anti-money laundering) compliance management.
  • Polaris Consulting & Services offers financial surveillance technology solutions as part of its risk & compliance services.
  • Simility’s Adaptive Decisioning Platform provides anti-fraud and risks management.
  • Securonix’s fraud prevention solution covers “new account fraud, account takeover, malicious insiders, payment fraud, application fraud, trade surveillance, payment fraud, and location spoofing.”
  • Temenos’ Financial Crime Mitigation product covers “watchlist screening, anti-money laundering, fraud prevention, and KYC (know-your-customer).”
  • NICE has over 6,500 employees.
  • NICE’s annual revenue stands at $1.620B as at June 30, 2020.
  • Fiserv has a wide range of products that include; Holistic View, Management Dashboards, Real-Time Detection, Low False Positives, Regulatory and Operational Efficiency, Payment Fraud Manager, and Verifast.
  • Polaris Consulting & Services has 750 employees.
  • Polaris Consulting & Services product prices start at “$49.00/month ($49 includes Sales and Basic Inventory Module and free 10 users per branch)”.

Financial Surveillance Technology Solutions: Market Overview

The state of the global financial surveillance technology solutions market is influenced by the types of players entering the space, such as fintech providers and incumbent banks looking to sell/lease their financial crime solutions to others.

Market Insights

  • A report released by ReportLinker indicates that the global market for financial surveillance technology went from $87.8 billion to $83.08 billion in 2020 at a 5.38% CAGR. The decline can be mainly blamed on the COVID-19 and the call for social distancing, closure of industries, and remote working. The entire supply chain of global surveillance has been affected by production to international trade of these surveillance technology solutions. However, the market is expected to recover in 2023 at a 14.0% CAGR. The major players in the financial surveillance technology solutions include; AxxonSoft, Genetec, Milestone, ExacqVision, Identiv, Verint Systems, and Magal Security Systems Ltd.
  • In December 2018, US-based trusted adviser and technology solution provider, Qognify, acquired On-net Surveillance Systems (OnSSI Group), an IP video management software (VMS) company, and SeeTec GmbH, the pioneer of IP video technology. The acquisition catapulted Qognify to become one of the largest Video Analytics, VMS, PSIM, and Critical Incident Management companies in the world. With the combination of portfolio technologies, infrastructure, and expertise, the company expanded its global presence. As a result, the company created an entity with enough capacity to meet the mid-market demands, financial institutions, and enterprise organizations anywhere in the world.
  • Even though the global financial surveillance technology solutions market has experienced a decline, it is expected to rise again in the future. Some of the market drivers include adopting these solutions among various end-users such as government regulators, financial institutions, IT service providers, and market operators. In 2019, the solutions segment accounted for the highest market share due to the associated benefits such as optimizing surveillance data, streamlining case management, and enhancing compliance management.
  • The on-premises deployment segment was responsible for the largest share due to the different benefits such as smooth integration with existing IT infrastructure and high-level security data. Meanwhile, Europe is expected to be one of the market leaders of financial surveillance technology solutions owing to anticipated significant growth and extensive adoption of cloud-based trade surveillance systems by various institutions, enterprises, and trade regulations imposed by the government.
  • MK Decision and Amazon Web Service fintech venture capital are examples of fintech startups entering the financial surveillance technology space by implementing cloud security as an imperative to protect sensitive financial data. These startups are a prime example of how upcoming fintech startups are becoming more conscious of the need to leverage cloud technology to proactively counter threats that may compromise customer information, privacy, and security. More fintech startups are incorporating cloud into surveillance technology solutions to handle more data faster and share it with the intended people.
  • The International Bank of Azerbaijan (IBA) is looking to lease its FICO® Siron® solution, a system-based financial crime solution that has been successfully implemented to provide an integrated approach to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. The system incorporates three major modules that create room for maximum automation of combating money laundering and terrorist financing by monitoring customer behavior and transactions, customer risk screening, rating, and real-time transaction screening. With its wide network of foreign correspondents worldwide, the International Bank of Azerbaijan is dedicated to helping other banks, especially in the Republic of Azerbaijan, fight against financial crime while meeting all regulatory requirements and compliance procedures. However, the biggest anticipated challenge is to comply with international and local regulations and minimize IBA’s risk exposure while having associated costs under control to stay competitive.
  • JPMorgan Chase has been leasing out its technology solutions and investing in to fuel a team of 50,000 technologists. Recently, the company also invested in partnerships with high-profile startups, such as OnDeck and Roostify, to the tune of $600 million. JPMorgan Chase prioritizes financial technology solutions by implementing mobile and electronic payments, big data, cybersecurity, and cloud computing.

Financial Surveillance Technology Solutions: Chinese Digital Banks

After an exhaustive search through the industry publications, media articles, financial blogs, regulatory databases, and websites and filings of key digital banks in China, we were unable to identify any Chinese digital bank players who are looking to license or sell their financial crime solutions to other financial institutions. We were able to only find examples of Chinese fintech firms that are providing their financial surveillance solutions to the Chinese banks. Given the fact that the digital banking space in China is still developing, it is likely that these banks are currently focusing on first strengthening their own internal financial surveillance framework before starting to commercialize the same. Below is an overview of our helpful findings related to the research.

Helpful Findings

  • Since 2014, China has licensed four digital-only banks. These include WeBank (backed by Tencent), MYbank (an Alibaba offshoot), AiBank (backed by Baidu), and China Citic Bank. The People’s Bank of China is in the process of finalizing laws for digital banking in China and is counting on technology to oversee China’s fintech, blockchain, and electronic financial services.
  • The incumbent banks in China are actively pursuing partnerships with tech firms to drive fintech adoption as part of their digital strategies. As per an analysis by, in 2019, more than ten commercial banks in China had inked partnership deals with tech or fintech companies. In June 2019, Everbright Bank had entered into a collaboration with Du Xiaoman Financial for smart voice robots, risk-control and anti-fraud, robo-advisory, smart sales, and smart outlet conversion. In April 2019, Tencent announced a partnership with Bank of Gansu for establishing an online loan management platform, including improved marketing tools and risk controls.
  • The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) has an ongoing collaboration with financial services technology company Pintec. The bank has implemented Pintec’s small business risk management technology to augment its own small-to-medium-sized business (SMB) lending operations.
  • In December 2019, Chinese digital bank WeBank announced that it had formed new partnerships with the “cloud computing platform Tencent Cloud and deep learning research Mila to protect data privacy while enabling cross-organization collaborations in both AI and fintech.” FinVolution is another China-based fintech firm that is considered to be a pioneer in China’s online consumer finance industry. It offers services such as credit risk assessment, fraud detection, big data, and artificial intelligence to various financial institutions in China.
  • Tongdun Technology is another key fintech firm that operates as an internet risk control and anti-fraud service supplier based on big data analysis in China. It has been ranked as “one of Red Herring Global Top 100 and Forbes China Fintech 50.” It provides its services across various industries such as internet finance, banking, insurance, e-commerce, online-to-offline (O2O), third- party payment, social network portals, and entertainment. The firm is currently working on the application of AI for fraud detection and face verification.
  • Jack Ma backed fintech firm Ant Financial Services Group has witnessed a 175% jump in the number of customers paying for its digital technology during the coronavirus outbreak. An increasing number of Chinese banks are leveraging the firm’s technology to keep their business flowing during the pandemic. The firm has also entered into a partnership with China’s largest lender, Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd., to develop fintech services in December 2020.
  • 360 Financial, a Shanghai-headquartered and NASDAQ-listed fintech platform, is working with Chinese regulators to help combat domestic fintech fraud. The fintech firm is taking up a leading role in the establishment of a new anti-fraud league for the fintech sector in China.

What are The Top Cities for Financial Crime?

This report collects cities around the world with a notably high level of financial crime. A ranked list or comparative numerical values could not be provided to a lack of publicly available knowledge (as outlined in the Research Strategy below). The cities assembled include London (notable for its high rate of money laundering), Richmond, VA (where the number of financial crimes is high), Chicago, IL (the highest ranked on the High Intensity Financial Crime Area list), and Frankfurt, Germany (with 66 percent of German businesses experiencing a financial crime in 2018). The U.S. is considered to have the highest rate of financial crimes in the world, per a 2018 survey.

Global Cities with a High Level of Financial Crime

top 10 us cities financial crimes

  • Chicago, Illinois, United States: Chicago is the only city listed by name on the High Intensity Financial Crime Area list maintained by the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (and one of the few regions in bright red for the highest level of financial crimes). However, statistical data related to why Chicago is on this list is not provided by this agency. An external agency list Chicago as having the greatest number of fraud rings in the country, indicating substantial financial crime.
  • Miami, Florida, United States: Miami is 4th in the U.S. for the number of fraud rings it hosts and second for the number of money laundering scams in the country (4,237.27 per 10,000 people). It was listed as top in the country for overall fraud.
  • Columbus, Ohio, United States: Columbus, Ohio is notable for having the highest rate of identity crime theft in the United States with 367.89 crimes per 10,000 people as well as the highest rate of forgeries. This is more than double the second-ranked city, San Francisco, which has 138.67 crimes per 10,000 people. The full listing is shown below:

identity theft in US

Related Findings

  • The UN estimates the amount of money laundered globally to be between $800 billion and $2 trillion.
  • The U.S. is perceived to have the highest rate of occurrence of all types of financial crime, including bribery and corruption, money laundering, fraud, theft, cybercrime, and slavery, according to a 2018 survey of international business leaders.

Research Strategy

An aggregate list of global cities ranked by the highest amount of financial crime does not appear to be publicly available based on a media scan, a U.S. federal government scan, and a scan of industry news. This may be due to a lack of sufficient law enforcement for investigation and reporting in some areas, a lack of domestic and/or international reporting to a centralized body, or a lack of involvement by financial institutions. Additionally, international agencies that publish risk assessments for money laundering are subject to manipulation by countries with financial sway.
However, several cities were able to be identified individually based on media reports and U.S. federal data. These cities or regions were outlined above, though comparative numerical figures for each listing could not be provided.

Financial Crime: Overview, Global

The size of global financial crimes was estimated at approximately US$5.8 trillion in 2018. The three biggest global financial crimes include fraud (US$2.6 trillion), counterfeit and piracy (US$1.9 trillion), and drugs trafficking (US$580 billion); and they all account for 90% of all global financial crimes. Additional details have been provided below.

Size and Growth of Financial Crime

  • In 2009, a report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) puts the size of global financial crimes at 3.4% of the global GDP, which was approximately US$2.1 trillion.
  • A more recent report authored in 2019 shows that the size of global financial crimes has risen to become 6.7% of the Global GDP, which is approximately US$5.8 trillion.
  • The three biggest global financial crimes include fraud (US$2.6 trillion), counterfeit and piracy (US$1.9 trillion), and drugs trafficking (US$580 billion). The top three types of financial crimes represent 90% of all global financial crimes.
  • Other types of financial crimes include theft and trafficking of stolen goods (US$270 billion), environmental crimes (US$200 billion), human trafficking (US$160 billion), smuggling (US$90 billion), and arms trafficking, kidnap & ransom & currency Counterfeiting (US$5 billion).
  • Cybercrime is valued at US$1.5 trillion but not placed separately because it is categorized under fraud and theft.
  • Illegal gambling and oil theft could be worth as much as US$150 billion and US$170 billion, respectively, but there is insufficient reliable data available to provide estimates.
  • By and large, most of the proceeds from financial crimes are laundered. Of the US$5.8 billion in financial crimes proceeds, about US$4.4 billion was laundered.
  • In Europe, only 1% of proceeds from financial crimes are confiscated by the relevant authorities.

Financial and Non-FinancialEffects of Financial Crime

  • There are multiple effects of financial crimes on the global populace, governments, financial institutions, and other corporations. For businesses and financial institutions, they have to spend extra money on meeting regulatory requirements, whether through investments in technology, people, or systems. For example, “corporate and bank respondents to a recent survey indicated they had collectively spent an average of 3.1% of global turnover over 2018 to prevent criminal intrusion into their group-wide operations, equating to $US1.28 trillion.”
  • These companies also face potential outlays in legal fees over allegations of negligence, which comes with its attendant legal fees and potential payouts in lost legal battles; potential outlays or losses can also include fines levied by regulatory agencies, restrictions on operations, and client churn. A report by Refinitiv puts the amount lost to financial crimes for businesses at US$1.45 trillion or 3.5% of global turnover based on “over 2,300 senior executives in large companies, across 19 countries.” There is also the potential loss in revenue from a damaged reputation should they be convicted of financial crime — whether knowingly or unknowingly.
  • For governments around the world, especially in developing nations, money meant for development are often siphoned into individual pockets. Additionally, criminals take advantage of weak regulatory requirements in these countries to launder their illicit funds. According to a report by Deloitte, the “analysis of trade-related financial flows in 148 developing nations between 2006-2015 has indicated that on average 27% were potentially related to illicit finance, of which 45% ended up in offshore financial centers.”
  • Nations known for weak controls that fuel rife corruption and rampant kleptocracy may lose the confidence of investors. This can affect the foreign direct investment flowing into the country, which can in turn weaken the country’s economy and threaten important development projects.
  • According to a report by Deloitte, “financial crime also impacts the most vulnerable members of society and can lead to financial exclusion, in direct contradiction of the goals of the G20 and the wider global community.”
  • Financial crimes such as bribery and fraud also have microeconomic effects as they can result in individuals losing money — sometimes leading to the death of the business — and their homes.
  • Furthermore, crimes such as human trafficking and drug dealing “lock the economically disadvantaged into a cycle of dependency with the risk of major health consequences and violence.” Research puts the victims of human trafficking at 40.3 million people.
  • Also, “tax bases can be eroded through the funneling of proceeds offshore or via the intermingling of legitimate economic activity with criminal assets.”

Financial Crime: Bank Spend, Global / APAC

According to the ‘True Cost of Financial Crime Compliance Study’ published by LexisNexis Risk Solutions, financial institutions across the globe spend a collective $180.9 billion for fighting financial crimes. The total spending in the APAC region is $6.1 billion. The average spending by financial institutions globally on the fight against financial crimes is $4.2 million (for financial institutions with total assets <$10 billion) and $24.7 million (for financial institutions with total assets $10 billion and above). The corresponding average spending by financial institutions in the APAC region is $1.9 million and $11.4 million, respectively. In the absence of data pertaining exclusively to traditional banks, financial institutions like banks, investment firms, asset management firms, and insurance firms have been considered as suitable proxies. The key findings from the report have been presented below.

Overview of the ‘True Cost of Financial Crime Compliance Study’

  • The ‘True Cost of Financial Crime Compliance Study’ conducted by LexisNexis Risk Solutions (dated April 2020) provides the spending incurred by financial institutions for fighting financial crime in key markets around the world.
  • This global report provides an overview of the various factors driving financial crime compliance efforts by financial institutions around the world. The report borrows insights from the 2019 regional studies conducted by LexisNexis Risk Solutions on the ‘True Cost of Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Compliance.’
  • The report covers the following financial crime compliance: Anti-money laundering (AML) transaction monitoring, sanctions monitoring, Know Your Customer (KYC) remediation, and other compliance operations.
  • The financial institutions covered in the report are banks, investment firms, asset management firms, and insurance firms.
  • The report describes small financial institutions as those with total assets <$10 billion and mid/large financial institutions as those with total assets $10 billion and above.

Spending Data From the Study

  • The report states that financial institutions globally spend a collective $180.9 billion for fighting financial crimes. The total spending in various key markets are as follows:
  • The average spending on fighting financial crimes per financial institution (based on institution size) are as follows:
    • Global average: $4.2 million (for small financial institutions) and $24.7 million (for mid/large financial institutions).
    • Asia Pacific (APAC) average: $1.9 million (for small financial institutions) and $11.4 million (for mid/large financial institutions).
    • Europe and the Middle-East (EMEA) average: $7.7 million (for small financial institutions) and $42.0 million (for mid/large financial institutions).
    • North America average: $1.5 million (for small financial institutions) and $14.2 million (for mid/large financial institutions).
    • Latin America average: $2.4 million (for small financial institutions) and $7.0 million (for mid/large financial institutions).
  • The highest average spending on fighting financial crimes is by the financial institutions of the UK ($53.8 million), followed by The Netherlands ($49.3 million) and Germany ($46.1 million).
  • The average increase in spending on fighting financial crimes on a global level over the past 24 months was 7%.

Key Challenges Facing Financial Crime Compliance Across Regions

Financial Crimes: Typical Bank Solutions

Banks worldwide still heavily rely on manual processes to handle financial crimes, despite increasingly technology adoption. AI and ML are expected to be widely utilized in the next five years. However, for now, a large proportion of financial crime compliance budgets are still being allocated towards labor, not technology.


  • Banks usually employ an incident-driven approach to solve financial crimes, with “lean teams managing response to events or changes in regulatory developments.” However, they are facing “some fundamental challenges in current risk management approaches, including over-reliance on rules-based monitoring systems and a dependence on manual investigation and human analysts for decision-making.”
  • A large percentage of banks adopt a risk-based approach (RBA), meaning they “identify, assess, and understand the ML/TF risks to which they are exposed and take appropriate measures to the identified risks to mitigate them effectively.” Even though most banks undertake risk assessments as part of their compliance programs, they are usually superficial. For example, only 16% indicate they undertook business risk assessment or IRA.
  • Banks also use the RBA approach for customer due diligence and known-your-customer (KYC) processes; still, they typically rely on outdated, static models. Financial institutions reported looking for new risk rating models, using data such as network analysis, dynamic risk ratings, and transaction patters. Still, 72% of bank executives said that their financial institution only updates customers’ information when there is irregular/unusual account activity, as opposed to when changes to the KYC are available or “new relationships/parties are added or identified.”
  • Furthermore, many banks admit they still rely on “key performance indicators (e.g., measuring the percentage of attacks defended against, regardless of severity) as opposed to key risk indicators (e.g., measuring the percentage of most severe attacks defended against).”

1. Manual versus Automated

  • Traditionally, financial institutions “have relied heavily on manual, human intervention in the regulatory reporting process; humans literally putting pen to paper. This remains common practise today, particularly in the case management workflow. Several levels of case investigators physically review details and write disposition narratives before suspicious activity and other compliance obligations are reported to regulators.”
  • However, with the “enormous amounts of data flowing in and out of banking systems,” associated with changes like open banking and contactless payment methods, this system is no longer sufficient. According to Bain & Company, at most large banks, “the legacy compliance processes designed to fight financial crimes such as money laundering have grown so complex as to be barely manageable.”
  • These systems typically require multiple handovers and iterations, and rely on too many manually controlled processes that are not genuinely effective or efficient. The consulting firm adds, “Excessive complexity has led to greater operational risks and a spate of large fines.”
  • Interviews with bank executives revealed that this complexity affects their daily activities. Some common complaints include: “Relationship managers spend hours every week resolving false alarms,” “Our automated rules are not sophisticated enough. Clients have been getting flagged because of the name of their street, ” and “Operations cannot make fast decisions on alarms, because everything is escalated and it takes ages to get a green light.”
  • Compliance processes and handovers typically incorporate a high level of “manual work for screening, alerts processing, and other activities.” As a result, 80% of bank executives surveyed by Deloitte report that the most challenging aspect of complying with AML regulations are the time-consuming manual processes.
  • There is a trend to leverage technology to deal with financial crimes. Nonetheless, banks still describe that manual processes persist. According to McKinsey, “banks say that as much as 85 percent of financial-crimes compliance and anti-money laundering activities remain administrative or nonanalytical in character (such as the manual collection of data from some systems to import into others).”
  • Overall, banks use a mixture of customer reporting, automated systems, and manual systems to detect fraudulent activities and solve financial crimes. KPMG explored how banks recognize fraudulent activity specifically and reported that manual systems are still widely used.
  • Despite concerns with sophisticated crimes and regulatory burdens, compliance budgets are typically allocated more towards people, not technology, to “deal with the volume of processing and reporting required to remain compliant with regulation.”
  • Each global region has its own challenges and drivers that impact compliance costs. The APAC region is dealing with tighter regulatory oversight and requirements after the 1MDB scandal, while Latin America struggles with money laundering associated with criminal activities. Therefore, there is a difference regarding the distribution of compliance costs. For instance, European financial institutions typically spend more on manual labor due to regulatory hurdles and political issues unique to the area, which require increased labor hours and larger compliance teams with “more skilled and higher-salaried professionals.”

2. Technology

  • The International Institute of Finance (IIF) states that banks worldwide are investing more in cybersecurity and risk tools, but are still evaluating the return of these investments, particularly midsize and small banks
  • Research suggests that technology alone is not enough to prevent financial crimes. For example, banks worldwide stated that it takes hours of manual labor to clear false positive alerts, and over half of bank executives surveyed by KPMG reported “false positives hampering efficiencies in fraud detection.”
  • Another issue reported by IIF is how quickly technology is developing, leaving banks “constantly playing catch-up on cybersecurity.


  • The maturity of technological capacity varies across banks. First-line cyber reporting and metrics are more mature now, however, there is “still a long way to go.”
  • Financial crime technology is constantly evolving. Still, regulatory burdens, such as data privacy concerns and increasing financial crime regulations are connected to the slow adoption. In 2019 alone, Thomson Reuters reported that “over 220 international regulatory changes occurred every day, amounting to 80,000 updates in that one year.” As a result, banks are aware they need to embrace new tools but are still slow to adopt and effectively use these new technologies.
  • One analysis of banks in the UK and Ireland could explain the slow adoption. It suggests that these institutions understand the benefits of technology, but “are operating legacy infrastructure which they believe restricts their capability to invest in newer and more agile technologies and solutions. They believe the costs of stripping out and replacing existing technology would greatly outweigh the benefits, certainly in the short term.”
  • On the other hand, EY claims that the industry is “on the cusp of change. It is gradually moving to industrializing ML and AI across the bank, especially in first-line operations.” Automating operational tasks, such as financial-crimes surveillance alerts, and monitoring financial crimes are the most common current applications. Breaking down AI and ML adoption, it is possible to see that some areas are expected to face more significant disruption.

AI and ML adoption

3. Third-Party Risk Management

  • According to analysis conducted by IIF and EY, the “industry’s decade-long transition from procurement to vendor management to third-party risk management has shone a light on the role of second-line risk management. Today, almost half (47%) of banks have their second line set the policy framework, rather than the first line, and about the same proportion (52%) challenge how the first line implements the bank’s third-party risk management framework.
  • Larger banks have taken on these roles “somewhat more than their smaller competitors, suggesting the industry is maturing toward a model where the second line takes a more prominent role as banks grow in size. About a quarter (28%) of banks’ second-line functions focus on identifying emerging risks and trends associated with third parties, while nearly as many set firm-wide risk appetite statements (23%) and metrics (22%) around those risks.”
  • The vast majority of banks maintain a list of critical third-parties (97%). However, the criteria used to assess these providers have changed over the last decade. Initially, “it was heavily weighted toward total spending and financial impact. Today, key determinants include the impact on the firm’s resilience strategy (66%), the type of data and systems accessed (61%), and the sensitivity of data used (54%).”

Banks that are Considered Best in Class Around the Prevention, Monitoring/Detection and Resolution of Financial Crime

1. Marks and Spencer Bank (M&S)

  • Based on a survey conducted by Which? Magazine in the U.K., one of the best banks that got the highest score when dealing with fraud-related concerns is the Marks and Spencer (M&S) bank.
  • The bank got a 90% helpfulness score from the respondents.
  • M&S is a traditional bank that provides financial services in its physical branches and on its online channels.
  • The M&S Bank mentioned that keeping their clients’ money safe is their topmost concern.
  • The bank mentioned that it is always investing in “technologies, processes, and people, to shield its clients and the entire financial sector from fraudulent elements.
  • Some of its solutions include password protection tools, advanced encryption solutions, and other advanced fraud detection methods and innovations to protect the data and money of its clients.
  • The bank also provides helpful links to external websites that can help its customers understand more about fraud and how to keep their data and money from being exposed to criminal elements.

2. Koho Bank

3. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MUFG)

4. Nationwide Building Society Bank

  • Based on a survey conducted by Which? Magazine in the U.K., one of the best banks that got the highest score when dealing with fraud-related concerns is the Nationwide bank.
  • The bank got a 90% score in the overall response to fraud category from the respondents.
  • Nationwide BS is a traditional bank that provides financial services through its physical branches and on its online channels.
  • The bank stated that it is constantly looking after the safety of its depositors’ money. It also mentioned that it is encouraging its clients to continue to know more about the impact of fraud.
  • The company has a dedicated Fraud division that provides all-day support to its clients. It has also established a solid process for detecting fraud.
  • The bank has also kept a “culture of fraud awareness and prevention” as it continues to build “safe and secure” solutions.
  • The bank also stated that it aims to be always compliant with regulations to help prevent fraud.
  • It is also continuously evaluating its fraud controls to maintain its effectiveness and robustness.
  • The bank also ensures to aid law enforcement entities in any suspected fraudulent activities or ongoing cases.
  • The bank also ensures to educate its clients to keep them safe from fraudulent elements. It regularly posts detailed guidelines and instructions on its website and social media accounts to ensure that its customers are aware of the various ways to detect and avoid any fraudulent incidents. The bank also gives out flyers at its branches to further educate its clients on fraud prevention.

5. Monese Bank

  • https://.com/69560/25-direct-online-digital-banks/
  • Financial Brand. Monese is one of the notable banks that was featured in the list of digital-only banks by
  • The bank allows its customers to open “current accounts with a contactless prepaid debit card.” Opening an account is free and can be accomplished within two minutes from any smartphone.
  • The bank’s services can be accessed in 20 countries by European residents.
  • Monese was accepted as a member of Cifas, the biggest fraud sharing association that encompass all industries. As a member, Monese will collaborate with the group to combat fraud.
  • The digital bank is also establishing its internal team of data scientists to build advanced artificial intelligence solutions that can help in detecting fraudulent activities even without human intervention.
  • The bank has also posted several instructional materials and guidelines on its website to help its customers detect fraudulent transactions on their accounts. The instructions also include details on how to protect their account, get help, and prevent other fraudulent activities.
  • Monese’s app already got over a million downloads and has gotten positive responses from its users.
Glenn is the Lead Operations Research Analyst at The Digital Momentum with experience in research, statistical data analysis and interview techniques. A holder of degree in Economics. A true specialist in quantitative and qualitative research.


Previous article


Next article

You may also like


Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.