This article is a fun read and covers most of Fintech (Reg Tech appears to have been snubbed?). It is a great exposition on just how convoluted financial services have become as they take a sharp turn towards digital nirvana:
“This model demonstrates the variety—but also the limitations—of the BaaS space. You can stick as many logos as you want into the quadrants, but two realities exist:
1. Not every company (large or small) will embed “banking” services into their offerings, and
2. It will take time—my bet: a long time—for a significant number of US consumers to migrate from traditional banking (or “finance”) providers to non-finance providers with embedded “banking” services.
[Note: I’ve put quotations around “banking” because we have to start making a finer distinction between embedded banking, embedded payments, and embedded lending. They are not all the same thing. What we’ve been talking about in this post is embedded banking.]
The result, then, of these realities is that there is a limit to the total addressable market for embedded banking in the near future. Banking-as-a-service is not as large a segment as some observers may think it is.
What does this mean for the BaaS competitive space?
1) The winners in the BaaS space will have adjacent revenue models. This is what makes Stripe Treasury’s BaaS play so attractive—they have a strong revenue stream from embedded payments and expanding into embedded banking deepens their relationships and creates competitive barriers to entry.
2) BaaS players will specialize. Green Dot’s focus on the low- to middle-income consumer segment is a strong draw for potential BaaS partners serving that segment. Other BaaS players will need to pick their spots (much like Amount does today, serving the mid-size to large regional financial institution space).
3) BaaS players will need to hedge their strategies. This is why Green Dot is smart to play both sides of the fence with a BaaS service and a standalone challenger bank. Being a “rent-a-charter” player was OK for BaaS 1.0, but as the space moves into version 2.0, competition is picking up and a strong tech stack is becoming a lot more important.
4) BaaS players will migrate towards becoming fintech-as-a-service providers or develop partnerships with the nascent players in that space. As 11:FS demonstrates in its report on BaaS, BaaS clients often turn to multiple BaaS providers to complete the BaaS stack.
This isn’t optimal—and that’s why emerging firms like Moov, Synctera, and Unit, with emerging “fintech-as-a-service” services will become more popular as: 1) current BaaS players partner with FaaS providers to fill out their stack, and 2) potential BaaS customers bypass today’s BaaS players and go straight to the FaaS providers.”
