Is there really a wave of fintech M&A coming?

is there a wave of fintech M&A on its way?

Could we be looking at a wave of M&A in the coming years?

There are many reasons to believe the answer to that question could be “yes.” Keeping up with a changing global financial landscape since the turn of the millennium has proved to be a challenge for many global financial institutions, many of whom still operate on cumbersome legacy technologies. At the same time, energetic, imaginative startups have re-written the global rules of communication and finance, with mobile and internet companies now offering a host of low-cost, convenient alternatives for payments, investing, and automated money management platforms.

The large incumbents in the finance industry certainly aren’t planning to leave the playing field and hand over the finance sector to the startup and internet world. Banks are some of the biggest consumers of technology – they spent $486 billion in 2015, 18% of worldwide IT spending. And some analysts predict that the global banking industry will grow to $163 trillion in assets by 2017, with a 5 year CAGR of 8%.

In addition, according to a white paper released in March by UK firm FirstCapital, 92% of bank executives understand that their systems and processes must be upgraded to comply with constant regulatory change. Leaner, meaner newcomers have challenged retail banks with enhanced user experiences, competitive rates and a consumer centric approach.

But, the same research estimated that new technologies and fintech startups stand to siphon $4.7 trillion in assets away from today’s largest finance companies. Venture capitalists are betting on a disruption of the finance industry, upping their investments in fintech companies over the past six years, from $366 million in the first quarter of 2010 to more than $4.845 billion in the third quarter of 2015.

All of which raises a host of questions. Can large banking and financial institutions adapt to the new millennium? Can an industry that has long been dominated by MBA professionals adapt to a world of roboadvisors, one where professional-quality technology is available to non-industry players, often in their teens or early 20s, with professional levels of competence, and a global exposure via social media?

And what about traditional banks, long accustomed to financing new cars, vacations or new businesses but who have suddenly been challenged by crowdsourcing and peer-to-peer lending platforms, or by non-bank money transfer platforms used by tens of millions of people in Africa that have no other access to banking and financial services.

In many ways, the answer is clear: The finance industry is adapting to a new reality, if reluctantly. For example, look at how the mutual fund industry is responding. Many asset managers and investors have switched their focus from expensive, actively managed mutual funds to cheaper exchange-traded (ETF) and index funds, to the tune of about $250 billion in 2015 alone. That’s a boon for investors, who enjoy lower fees. But for asset managers, the new reality is an ugly one that cuts directly into their revenue.

“ETFs have $2.1 trillion in assets, with an asset-weighted average fee of 0.27 percent, producing annual revenues of about $5.5 billion,” Bloomberg reported on April 7. Traditional index funds have 2.1 trillion in assets but have an asset-weighted fee of just 0.10 percent, producing $2.2 billion in annual revenue,” Bloomberg says. Those same assets would have generated over $30 billion in fees if they had been managed in actively-managed mutual funds — that’s $27 billion of revenue that’s just evaporated from the industry.

In addition, FirstCapital says that the largest US banks have made “strategic investments” in over 30 fintech companies. Some incumbents such as BBVA, HSBC and Sberbank CIB have launched dedicated fintech funds topping $100 million to be invested in early stage technology firms. Others, like BBVA, have acquired online challengers. Industry majors IBM, Microsoft, HP and Thomson Reuters have upped their games to service financial clients, investing heavily in enabling technologies, including fraud prevention and risk management software, infrastructure management for banks, data security and more.

To meet the challenge posed by disruptive startups and technologies, FirstCapital predicts a wave of mergers and acquisitions over the next three years as “financial incumbents [will] look to catch up with widespread innovation from new entrants… We expect a wave of M&A activity in the next 3 years as financial incumbents look to catch up with widespread innovation from new entrants, the internet majors scale up in financial services and the technology/software majors add new technology to deepen their offerings in this sector.”

In addition, the white paper expects “the internet majors scale up in financial services and the technology/software majors add new technology to deepen their offerings in this sector, particularly via the use of blockchain technology for payments, regulatory reporting and share trading.

Could be. Last August, asset manager BlackRock acquired automated investment advisor, FutureAdvisor, and is already rolling it out to financial advisors who work for the firm. Spanish bank, BBVA has purchased two challenger banks. It is certainly not inconceivable that major industry institutions could move to acquire upstarts into their basket of services in the coming years.

But that is far from certain. The incumbents’ sheer scale gives them the luxury of being patient and the ability to weather the challenges posed by newcomers calmly and carefully. At the institutional level, banks and lenders are already testing blockchain technology developed in-house and with he help of service providers. And Goldman Sachs still employs more engineers than Facebook. This could indicate that the traditional industry leaders are biding their time not until it is the right time to go on a buying spree, but rather until they have analyzed the industry, mapped out the future and they are ready to roll out their own, in-house technologies on their own terms.

Photo credit: pmarkham via / CC BY-SA

Update: Fintech M&A, circa 2013

fintech M&A 2013

From Berkery Noyes, an independent iBank with some great industry data, comes an update on mergers and acquisition activity in the fintech space.


  • Total transaction volume in Q3 2013 increased by 21 percent over Q2 2013, from 77 to 93.
  • Total transaction value in Q3 2013 rose by 55 percent over Q2 2013, from $5.5 billion to $8.5 billion.


  • Davis + Henderson’s acquisition of Harland Financial Solutions, a provider of software and services to fi nancial institutions, was the largest transaction in Q3 2013, with an acquisition price of $1.6 billion.
  • The industry’s most active acquirer year-to-date was Thomson Reuters with nine transactions. Five of these occurred in Q3 2013: BondDesk Group LLC, Bisk CPE and CPA Test Prep Division from Bisk Education, Inc., Omnesys Technologies, SigmaGen

For more transactional information on fintech, check out MandASoft

Predict the next M&A – with Arye Schreiber

M&A crowdsourcing

By most account, the M&A process is fundamentally flawed.

Incentives aren’t aligned — from advisors to bankers to CEOs. All want more M&A, not more successful deals.

This week’s guest on Tradestreaming has created a crowdsourced model for investors to help predict the next successful merger and acquisition. Arye Schreiber, founder of Merjerz,  has created what he feels is a better model to align incentives, encouraging fundamentally more successful M&A activity.

And investors can be first to know.

Listen to the FULL episode

About Arye Schreiber

Arye is the founder of Merjerz. His previous experience has been in corporate law, advising multinational companies on M&A.

Continue reading “Predict the next M&A – with Arye Schreiber”

Best way to trade the rumors? Bloomberg (and Tradestream) says short ’em

To a philosopher, all news as it is called, is gossip, and they who edit and read it are old women over their tea — Henry David Thoreau

Gossip is called gossip because it’s not always the truth — Justin Timberlake

With stocks, there is so much noise and pumping going on that investors can feel like they’re at a Motley Crue concert again.  So, how do investors using smart strategies and historical data profit from rumors?

Bloomberg is out with proprietary data today that suggests shorting stocks caught up in merger rumors is a viable, profitable strategy.

Electronic news services, brokerages and newspapers reported at least 1,875 rumors about potential buyouts of 717 companies between 2005 and 2010, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. A total of 104, or 14.5 percent, were acquired, the data show. While stocks that were the subject of takeover speculation initially jumped 2.9 percent, betting on declines yielded average profits of 1.2 percent in the next month, an annualized gain of 14 percent.

In Tradestream, I devote an entire chapter, Grind the Rumor Mill, to rumor mongering and how that plays out for investments – essentially short-selling a basket of M&A rumors.  This strategy works because while real acquisition targets see above-average appreciation, most rumored M&As don’t actually come to fruition.

I included a rumor model developed by Nudge’s Cass Sunstein that he used in his recent book, On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, What Can Be Done (affiliate link).  This included identifying propagators, qualifying their prior beliefs, and predicting the cascading effect from any change/reinforcement of those priors.

Much of the guts and data behind this strategy was documented by Gao and Oler in “Rumors and Pre-Announcement Trading: Why Sell Target Stocks Before Acquisition Announcements?” (June 2008)


The Strategy

  • Research: Scan the WSJ’s Heard on the Street for reported, but unsubstantiated merger and acquisition rumors
  • Adjust for market cap: The strategy works better when you remove companies with market cap >$20B
  • Short basket trade: Short sell a basket of these rumored targets and hold for 70 days after the rumor first appeared.  Cover.  Hedge if you like.
  • Timing best for hot M&A years: if M&A heats up (like now, right), the data show the strategy works even better

Last thing

The Bloomberg research found that this short-the-rumor strategy worked (+14%) even when it coincided with other contradictory bullish signals like call buying.

Call volume in New York-based Jefferies Group Inc. jumped amid unconfirmed takeover reports on Feb. 27, 2008. Calls on the company changed hands 12,692 times that day, 24 times the four- week average and the most in almost a year, and the shares gained 3.7 percent. A deal never occurred and Jefferies dropped 3.4 percent the next day, 10 percent the next week and 20 percent in 30 days. The S&P 500 lost 4.7 percent in a month.

Caveat emptor: I have not actually used this strategy in portfolios (I’m pretty much long only) and I think it would take balls of steel to really stick to it.

Further Reading on Investing and Rumors: