Posted by Social Science Research Network
The (Unfulfilled) Fintech Potential
By Aluma Zernik (Harvard)
Despite the high expectations of technology to come to consumers’ aid, detailed by academics, technological experts, and government officials, the largest Fintech companies that impact consumers’ financial choices have made only limited progress in resolving market failures that are derived from consumers’ bounded rationality, information, and attention. Analyzing the design of leading credit card comparison websites, financial management tools, and mobile wallets, the paper demonstrates that notwithstanding the significant benefits of such products, they don’t fulfill the potential ascribed to them. Even though the relevant technologies and information are available, Fintech intermediaries simply don’t take on such roles, the solutions envisioned aren’t coming into fruition, and in some cases, the design of these products even exacerbates existing market failures. There are several possible explanations for why such services, despite their potential benefits, aren’t appearing as significant participants in financial markets. First and foremost, just as bounded rationality distorts consumers’ demand for financial products, it also limits their ability demand products that help them overcome those same biases. Second, consumers prefer to receive free services, which often entail lowering the quality of the services they receive, while forcing companies to profit from back-end services. When companies design their services as a two-sided platform, they under-price the services offered to consumers, often providing them for free, while transferring such costs to other participants on the platform, such as retail businesses or credit card companies, which may lead to conflicting interests. Finally, such services may be impacted by the power and influence of existing incumbents, specifically banks and credit card networks. Despite these challenges, there are several ways that markets can develop to fulfill the potential for enhanced products that resolve behavioral market failures. Policy interventions that look to antitrust and competition considerations, as well as the imposition of existing fiduciary duties or regulations promoting fairness and prohibiting misleading practices, can go a long way in driving out certain problematic practices. Additionally, market actors whose interests are aligned with those of consumers, such as employers and wealth managers, can help create the market demand needed to fund such services.
Featured News
Lawmaker Probes FTC and EU’s Role in Amazon’s Failed iRobot Acquisition
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
FTC to Approve Exxon’s $64 Billion Deal with Pioneer Resources, Excludes
May 1, 2024 by
CPI
UK Competition Watchdog Raises Alarm Over Nvidia’s ARM Takeover
May 1, 2024 by
CPI
Sen. Klobuchar Urges Regulators to Probe Collusion in Healthcare Pricing
May 1, 2024 by
CPI
Multiple States Join Tennessee’s Antitrust Lawsuit Against NCAA Over NIL Rules
May 1, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Economics of Criminal Antitrust
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Navigating Economic Expert Work in Criminal Antitrust Litigation
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
The Increased Importance of Economics in Cartel Cases
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
A Law and Economics Analysis of the Antitrust Treatment of Physician Collective Price Agreements
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Information Exchange In Criminal Antitrust Cases: How Economic Testimony Can Tip The Scales
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI