Fintechs promise speed, innovation and lower cost. Large banks prize resilience, control and regulatory assurance. The result is a persistent go-to-market gap: promising solutions stall in elongated sales cycles, InfoSec reviews, and onboarding mazes. This paper outlines why selling into major financial institutions (FIs) is hard, where the process typically breaks down, and practical steps both sides can take. It also highlights how initiatives like Finbridge Global aim to compress time-to-value by standardising due diligence, integration paths and commercial engagement.
Fintechs are optimised for rapid iteration; banks are optimised for risk control at scale. That cultural and operational mismatch shows up in four ways:
1. Timescales
o Typical enterprise buying journeys run 9–18 months from first meeting to production use—even longer for data-sensitive or customer-facing capabilities.
o “Pilot purgatory” is common: proof-of-concepts (PoCs) extend without a path to production, burning runway for the fintech and stakeholder goodwill at the bank.
2. Unwieldy processes
o Procurement requires multi-stage RFPs, competitive tension, and cross-functional approvals.
o Risk, legal, compliance and data-privacy reviews happen in parallel, each with different artefact needs and decision gates.
3. Onboarding friction
o Vendor onboarding includes financial viability checks, beneficial ownership, sanctions screening, cyber posture, BCP/DR testing, and often on-site (or virtual) audits.
o Access management (JML), data residency, encryption standards, key management, logging/monitoring and incident reporting mechanics must all align with bank policy—not just “industry best practice.”
4. Integration complexity
o Legacy systems, inconsistent APIs, and strict change-control windows complicate rollout.
o Non-functional requirements (latency, observability, failover, capacity planning) are as decisive as features.
· Ambiguous problem framing: If the bank cannot quantify the operational pain or regulatory exposure, the fintech’s ROI case remains abstract.
· Security documentation gaps: Missing pen-tests, incomplete SOC/ISO mappings, unclear data flows, or weak secrets management trigger rework and re-review.
· Misaligned commercial models: Start-up pricing tied to per-seat or MAUs may clash with bank budgeting; enterprise prefers predictable spend, outcome-based pricing, and flexible termination for regulatory cause.
· Change ownership uncertainty: Without a named production owner, run-book, and Level-2 support model, risk functions see operational fragility.
· Regulatory anxiety: New tech (e.g., AI) raises explainability, model risk, data lineage and third-country transfer concerns; banks default to “no” when controls are unclear.
For fintechs
· Enterprise-grade artefact pack:
Security whitepaper, data-flow diagrams, DPIA/ROPA drafts, encryption/KMS details, vulnerability management cadence, SBOM, pen-test summary, incident response playbook, BCP/DR evidence, and audit-ready logs.
· Bank-ready deployment options:
VPC-to-VPC, private link, on-prem/air-gapped options; clear SLOs, observability (metrics, traces, logs), and performance envelopes.
· Regulatory mapping:
Show how controls map to typical frameworks (e.g., outsourcing, operational resilience, cloud risk, model risk for AI).
· Commercial clarity:
Price tiers for PoC, pilot, and production with exit ramps; outcome or transaction-linked options; clear TCO comparison vs. status quo.
· Implementation recipe:
A step-by-step runbook for discovery → PoC → pilot → production, with artefacts, roles, and timelines (e.g., 4–6 weeks PoC; 8–12 weeks pilot).
For banks
· Single front door for fintechs:
A structured intake with standard artefacts and a triage SLA (e.g., 10 working days) to reduce random stakeholder hunting.
· Pre-approved control patterns:
Reference architectures, data-classification guardrails, and pre-agreed cloud patterns to avoid custom debates per vendor.
· Right-sized due diligence:
Risk-tier vendors and apply proportionate controls; reserve deep audits for material/critical suppliers.
· Time-boxed PoCs with production pathways:
Define success metrics, data scope, and a conversion plan before the PoC starts.
· Executive sponsorship and product ownership:
A senior sponsor to clear blockers and a named service owner to run BAU post-go-live.
Banks typically require the following before go-live. Fintechs that arrive “audit-ready” compress months of back-and-forth:
· Information Security: policy library, control matrix, SOC/ISO evidence, pen-test results, vulnerability SLAs, secure SDLC, secrets rotation, endpoint hardening.
· Data & Privacy: data inventory, classification, retention/erasure, encryption in transit/at rest, DPA terms, cross-border transfer basis, customer consent handling.
· Operational Resilience: recovery objectives (RTO/RPO), failover tests, capacity/DR drills, run-books, support tiers and escalation.
· Third-Party Risk: financial viability, insurance, subcontractor oversight, open-source license governance, SBOM.
· Legal/Commercial: negotiated liability caps, regulatory exit, audit rights, change control.
Platforms such as Finbridge Global seek to narrow the gap between fintech innovation and bank adoption by:
· Pre-vetting fintechs: Curating vendors against enterprise-grade criteria (security posture, compliance artefacts, operational maturity) to reduce first-line due diligence.
· Standardised artefacts: Providing templated security packs, DPIA scaffolds, control mappings and model-risk summaries—so banks review one consistent format.
· Regulatory alignment: Offering guidance on regional regulatory expectations (e.g., outsourcing, cloud, data transfer, AI governance), helping both sides speak a common control language.
· Faster procurement & onboarding: Facilitating structured intake, reference architectures, and integration runbooks that banks can adopt with minimal tailoring.
· Matchmaking with intent: Aligning bank problem statements to fintech capabilities and deployment constraints, avoiding generic “demo theatre.”
· Transparency & telemetry: Dashboards tracking PoC status, artefact completeness, and decision gates—creating accountability and momentum.
The net effect is a shorter path from first conversation to production, reduced compliance rework, and clearer commercial terms that fit enterprise budgeting models.
Selling fintech solutions into large banks is difficult—but not mysterious. Most delays stem from predictable gaps: unclear problem statements, inconsistent artefacts, misaligned commercials, and integration uncertainty. Fintechs that arrive enterprise-ready and banks that streamline intake and risk-tiering can convert months of friction into weeks of disciplined progress. Initiatives like Finbridge Global help both sides meet in the middle—standardising the artefacts, accelerating procurement and integration, and turning innovation into regulated, resilient production value.