Are neobanks the opposites of traditional banks, or their alter ego?
Disclaimer
This analysis covers only the most functional forms of neobanks: EMIs (Electronic Money Institutions) licensed and regulated in the European Union. Lighter forms of neobanking, such as Payment Institutions (PIs), are outside the scope of this analysis. A separate study of neobanking-light is forthcoming.
Summary
-
Neobanks are no longer an exotic form of financial activity. Traditional banks are among the main beneficiaries of the opportunities provided by neobanking. Around 13.6% of neobanks in the EU are controlled by traditional banks. The synergy between traditional banks and neobanks is gradually becoming the Yin and Yang of financial infrastructure. Many banks create their own neobanks; others make active use of services provided by third-party neobanks.
-
The number of banks owning neobanks has increased by 21% over the past two years.
-
Neobanks are owned not only by large traditional banks, but also by medium-sized and smaller banks.
-
Banks and financial companies — including Pioneer, Nium, Airwallex and Alipay — collectively own at least 25% of the EU neobanking market.
-
Adding financial crypto companies — including Coinbase, Gemini, Kraken and Ripple, as well as privately held crypto companies — increases this share to 33.8%.
-
Financial companies own approximately the same number of neobanks as banks: 46 and 55 respectively.
-
Neobanks in the EU are also owned by non-EU banks, both officially and unofficially. At least 16 neobanks are confidentially controlled by non-EU banks (unofficial data).
-
If lighter forms of neobanking, such as Payment Institutions, are included, the number of “bank neobanks” increases by 270%. These neobanks often become part of a bank’s internal infrastructure.
-
If the analysis includes neobanks licensed in Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States, Singapore, Hong Kong, South Africa and other regions, banks and financial companies control up to 42% of the global market.