Obsolescence of traditional banking? Or rather, structural transformation underway.

In 2025, the digital financial ecosystem is marked by a profound transformation, not by the extinction or obsolescence of banking. Technological innovation – driven by FinTechs, DeFi, artificial intelligence, APIs, among others – has redefined the evolution of financial products such as digital capture, automated credit and electronic payments. However, this transformation must be understood within a framework of institutional continuity, not as an absolute replacement of traditional banking.

‍

Key considerations:

– Regulatory Compliance and Innovation (Credit, Capture and Digital Payments)

‍
Banking is subject to regulatory standards that cannot be replaced by operational speed. Regulations such as Basel III, capitalization rules, AML, KYC and fiduciary duties ensure systemic stability and user protection. Efficiency cannot replace regulatory integrity.

The possibility of offering digital deposit products -such as limited-amount, payroll or savings accounts with yields- has grown significantly. However, only authorized entities can capture funds from the public on a regular basis and with reserve, liquidity and savings protection obligations. This activity is subject to strict supervision by authorities such as Banxico or the CNBV in Mexico. Compliance with these obligations prevents unrestricted adoption by unregulated entities.

The automation of risk analysis through artificial intelligence has reduced origination times, especially in microcredit and consumer products. However, in structured products, syndicated loans or secured financing, there are still regulatory and legal requirements that demand complex validations, verifications and contractual processes. In addition, all professional lending activities are subject to registration, transparency and anti-money laundering obligations.

Payment platforms, wallets, acquirers and aggregators have optimized real-time transactions through APIs, SPEI and blockchain technology. However, these operations are subject to specific operational rules, prudential provisions, and cybersecurity and privacy requirements. Entities that provide payment services without being regulated financial institutions present greater operational, business and technological risks, so they ultimately require licenses or regulated registrations (IFPE, money transmitters, etc.) and must comply with technical rules from Banco de México, CNBV and other authorities.

‍

– DeFi Limitations

‍
DeFi platforms still face scalability constraints, lack of consumer and savings protection, cybersecurity, operational guarantees and legal risks associated with true decentralization. Without a clear legal framework, their mass use as an alternative to regulated banking services remains limited.

‍

– Convergence and acquisition as a dominant strategy

‍

The narrative does not point to the obsolescence of traditional banking, but rather to its strategic redefinition within a more dynamic and distributed financial ecosystem. Far from being replaced, banking institutions have opted to integrate FinTech solutions through acquisitions, alliances, direct investment or proprietary technology development, while remaining the regulated core of the system.

In parallel, in contexts of high economic volatility and international trade tensions, technology companies, e-commerce platforms, telecommunications companies and large non-financial corporations are expanding their presence in the FinTech industry, either by obtaining licenses, creating their own financial entities or buying already regulated infrastructure.

However, these new entities do not operate outside the traditional system. On the contrary, they functionally depend on banks for key aspects such as: savings protection, corporate and structured credit, trust and stock market operations, clearing and settlement of funds; access to concentrator accounts and interbank networks (such as SPEI, SWIFT or ACH); custody of resources; compliance infrastructure (KYC, AML, fraud prevention), among many others.

This dependence underscores a fundamental reality: banking has not been displaced, but reconfigured as the critical infrastructure on which the new layer of financial innovation is built. The sustainability of the FinTech model – however agile it may be – inevitably requires deep integration with the legal, technical and regulatory underpinnings that only traditional banking offers.

– Conclusion:

‍
Technological disruption in credit does not imply disappearance, but transformation. The challenge lies in structuring agile solutions that comply with the fundamental legal principles of certainty, legality and oversight. The sustainability of the model depends on both its speed and its regulatory soundness.

For any question related to this subject, you may contact José María Morales Oliveros