Research

Executive Summary Thank you for reading this edition of the Non-Bank Financial Institution (NBFI) Survey. This survey was underwritten by Kyriba for the 2nd year in a row as they continue to serve an...

Executive Summary Thank you for reading this edition of the Non-Bank Financial Institution (NBFI) Survey. This survey was underwritten by Kyriba for the 2nd year in a row as they continue to serve an increasing number of companies in these industries. This survey and the report were written and produced by Strategic Treasurer. The previous iteration of this survey focused solely on insurance companies, but by expanding this research in 2022 to related industry verticals, we have been able to capture a greater breadth of “treasury intensive” financial companies. The majority of survey respondents were headquartered in North America (Canada, United States, Mexico), with European companies representing the next highest level of coverage. Asia-Pacific headquartered firms made up 4% of respondents. With this year’s research, we sought to better understand the priorities, plans, and activities that financial institutions were focused on. The results didn’t disappoint. You are invited to read through the top ten items from the research and see what is dramatic and notable, as well as what hasn’t changed much. We learn from each of these situations, and knowing what others are doing informs our thinking and may help adjust our priorities. Disbursement Preferences: Staff, Technology, and Then Structure NBFIs are centralizing their staff and using specialized payment technology most heavily. However, the use of pay-on-behalf-of (POBO) structures is in the early stages of adoption while showing strong signs of likely growth. Highest Priorities: Security, Compliance, Efficiency NBFIs face numerous competing demands, and security/fraud prevention (66%) dominates all other priorities, including compliance (45%). Efficiency matters too in a more limited measure. Benchmarking — Achieving a Personal Best What are companies measuring? They are most frequently tracking their current performance against their own historical numbers (62%), while a minority of firms currently perform external benchmarking: 41% against similar company types, and 24% against companies of the same size or complexity. Thank you for taking the time to read through this report. For those who invested the time to take the moderate-length survey, you have our deep appreciation. You are helping out this vital industry. Your input allows us to understand what is happening and what professionals are thinking and doing in the NBFI space. As always, those who take the survey receive more information and details from the research. It is one additional way of thanking you for your time. Key Finding Analysis 1. Heavy Users of Accounts The NBFI world uses multiple account types, and a notable minority have a high volume of accounts. These accounts cover operating activity (in this survey, we use the term “demand deposit accounts” or DDA), investment activity (custody accounts), and trust accounts (trust). DESCRIPTION OF ACCOUNT TYPES: Demand deposit accounts and current accounts: These are transactional accounts at the organization’s operating bank. Various deposits and disbursements flow in and out of these accounts, and cash is held in them. Custody accounts: These are accounts at custodial banks that hold investments/securities for the organization making investments. Securities are held in these accounts. Trust accounts: These are accounts that are managed by a trustee (typically a bank) on behalf of a third party. Activity running through these accounts is approved and executed by the trustee based upon valid and appropriate instructions. 2. Disbursement Preferences: Staff, Technology, & Then Structure How are NBFIs organizing their staff, leveraging technology, and using payment structures? The use of “centralized staff” (payment factory or shared service center) and “centralized technology” are both likely to achieve majority status shortly. POBO looks to continue its strong growth and is expected to achieve a one-third adoption level within a few years. Centralized staff: Service centers (49%) are the most used option (amount in use or being implemented). Specialized technology: Payment hub technology is highly popular, with 48% using or implementing these tools, and another 11% indicating that they are evaluating the use of this technology. Payment structure (POBO): The pay-on-behalf-of structure is in use or being implemented by 29%, with another 14% evaluating it. DESCRIPTION OF ACCOUNT TYPES: Centralized staff: This refers to a shared service center or center of excellence that handles the operational activity for, in this case, disbursement activity. These can be either regionalized or centralized on a global basis. Specialized technology: A payment hub is a common name for the technology that can support all aspects of payments. This is a system or service that allows for 1) an approval process for payments, 2) data transformation, or putting payment instructions into the proper format, 3) operational management, delivering and confirming payment information to the right payment rail or messaging platform, and 4) other services: security, validation, confirmation, etc. Payment structure (POBO): The pay-on-behalf-of structure allows a company with many subsidiaries or affiliates to use a single structure for disbursements. This structure may be a separate entity that is created for this purpose or may be an existing entity. The disbursements are routed through this POBO structure, and the individual entities/companies transfer the value of the payments and the related liabilities to that entity for processing and management. Instead of having 10 disbursement accounts with 10 similar processes, this is collapsed into one for efficiency of capital and time purposes. 3. INSURANCE COMPANY. Insurance Liquidity Concentration, & Aggregation Techniques Institutional money market funds (MMF) are the most common tool for aggregating investment balances among insurance companies. Sweep mechanisms are used by over half of insurance companies and represent an easy way of automatically ensuring all cash is invested. Notably, only 2 out of 9 companies are using insurance liquidity pools currently. This service allows for consolidated investing and segmented tracking for the participants in the insurance liquidity pool. When we combine the responses for currently in use, implementing, and evaluating, the numbers stack up as follows: Insurance liquidity pool: 50%. (Currently in use: 22%.) Investment sweep: 73%. (Currently in use: 56%.) Institutional MMF: 95%. (Currently in use: 67%.) DESCRIPTION OF ACCOUNT TYPES: Insurance liquidity pool: Primarily in the United States, insurance companies may have the options of establishing their own investment pools that support multiple companies and investment portfolios. The company can combine shorter-term funds from multiple portfolios and insurance activity and invest them in larger blocks. This reduces the number of trades and effort while allowing the individual portfolio managers to have greater liquidity while earning higher rates. Individual ownership is tracked. There are specific rules that must be followed. Many companies refer to their liquidity pool or pools as “STIP” for “short-term investment pool.” Investment sweep: Excess cash left in operating accounts or investment accounts is moved to an investment fund automatically. The excess funds are “swept” into an investment account and in many cases are returned the next day automatically 4. Non-Insurance NBFIs Have More Waterfall Payments than Insurance Companies One-third of NBFIs overall generate 11 or more waterfall payment series each year. Nearly half (46%) do not have any. Stratifying the respondents between insurance companies from the rest of the NBFIs shows that the use of waterfall payments among insurance companies is roughly half of other NBFIs: Insurance companies: − 22% have 11 or more each year. − Majority (61%) do not have any waterfall payments in a year. Non-insurance company NBFIs: − 42% have 11 or more each year. − 29% do not have any waterfall payments in a year DESCRIPTION OF ACCOUNT TYPES: Waterfall payments: There are multiple situations where an investment arrangement requires payments to be made to an entity that is at the top or middle of an entity hierarchy. Payments made to the first entity are then cascaded down through other entities until everything is completed. This cascading is referred to as a “waterfall payment,” and typically these payments flow downstream on the same date. 5. Highest Priorities: Security, Compliance, Efficiency NBFIs face numerous competing demands. Priorities help determine the emphasis and order for which activities and initiatives are staffed, funded, and completed. For this question, seven options were provided for respondents to rank in order of priority. Looking at what respondents ranked 1st and 2nd for highest priorities, it was clear that there seems to be a strong consensus about the top of the house. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION: Willie Sutton is famous for his response to the question of why he robbed banks: “That is where the money is.” We could imagine the corollary in response to this in a similar question-answer style: “Why are you (NBFIs) focused on security/fraud prevention?” “Because there are many more Willie Suttons out there with far more automation and sophisticated tools trying to rob us.” Compliance is always a top priority for regulated businesses like most NBFIs. Fines, fees, and reputational damage are some of the key motivators. Only security/fraud tops compliance. Is this due to the cost and reputational damage being an even higher concern for NBFIs? 6. Payment Controls Are a Continuum of High to Low Adoption. Fastest Expected Growth: AI/ML Limited access and encryption (all payment files) are the only two methods used by the majority of companies. Four other services sit between 30% and 47% adoption, and another 10-17% of firms expect to add to these services. Use of AI/ML to protect against payment fraud has a 30% “plan to use” response. This represents nearly double the rate of the next highest controls. Machine learning is highly effective at detecting patterns. This pattern detection can also spot anomalies — instances where a pattern isn’t consistent. Fraudulent items can often be detected based upon the “patterns” of changes, access, and frequency, and a user can review those items before payments leave the company ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION: The principle of least privilege requires companies to restrict the access of users and credentials to only those areas/systems/data that are relevant. Then, if a credential is stolen or if an individual seeks to steal information or money, their ability to act or move around is greatly limited. This mitigates the amount of damage that can occur if one credential is compromised. Encryption of all payment files should make it more difficult to see and edit confidential banking information. The public/private key process also renders editing a file far more difficult, as the encryption/decryption process will alert the system or users of the error. AI/ML. Anomaly detection capabilities can be learned by an ML tool, and various rules for detection can also be programmed in. When this is done, the user is alerted to anomalies that need to be reviewed by a human. The alerts can be informational only (and the payment continues unless stopped by the person), or they can be part of an interdiction (the payment stops unless and until a human reviews and approves the interdicted item). 7. Measurements: Financial Performance Wins Over SLA What gets measured, we are told, gets improved. What is being measured? Two-thirds of companies trace various financial performance metrics. Staff performance is a distant second at 41%, followed by quality-related performance measures (38%). ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION: It is not surprising that in finance areas, measuring financial performance takes the top spot in this survey. However, why do not even 3 out of 10 companies measure staff professional development if people are the most valuable asset? Is there little correlation between staff development and success? Is it related to the fact that measuring staff development is highly challenging? What is the benchmark? 8. Benchmarks — Personal Best What do companies want to improve? It may be that they are measuring what is most important to them. It may be that more companies measure what they can most easily get measurement data for. Most companies track their current performance against their own historical numbers, while some performed external benchmarking. 62% measure themselves against themselves. The external benchmarks are as follows: − 41% measure themselves against similar companies (similar industry verticals). − 24% measure against companies of about the same size ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION: Company complexity has a variety of dimensions. The most common factors companies think about for comparable numbers are 1) revenue/sales and 2) industry vertical. Other factors of complexity include 1) number of systems in use, 2) how many countries the organization operates in, and 3) the number of underlying processing systems. Benchmarks are used for a variety of reasons, including: − Staff size/resources − Efficiency purposes − Confirmation as to the position of the company via leading practices − Progress over time against their own performance and others in their “peer group” 9. Collateral Management: The Most Common Manager Is…Treasury Collateral management is a risk related function that supports the operational and investment activities of many NBFIs. Treasury is the department that is most frequently responsible for managing collateral (31% of firms). More than one-fourth of firms don’t assign this role. 10. Collateral Management’s Impact on Cash Positioning: Tracked Separately. Collateral management within NBFIs appears to be relatively immature (non-integrated). Just over a third (34%) indicated that they have visibility or links to the collateral and underlying exposures. − Collateral and exposures can be seen together: 17%. − Clear view into collateral pools: 14%. − Can see the exposure and collateral within the cash positioning and forecasting process: 3%. Most firms (66%) track collateral and cash positioning in separate channels with no cohesive or unified view. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION: The practice of collateral management appears to be, on average, somewhat informal for many NBFIs, as can be observed from the following data points: − 28% of companies don’t have collateral management assigned to a particular area. − 66% lack a unified view of collateral or track it in a separate channel than their cash positioning activity Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse is a warning for all finance leaders. Check out  this on-demand webinar and hear Kyriba's top treasury and payments experts discuss the collapse, subsequent fallout, and how your organization can mitigate risk with improved liquidity planning.

Advanced treasury management and data-delivery capabilities enable finance organizations to see their global cash, liquidity, and risk exposures and create value for the business. Recent disruptions, such as the pandemic and current inflationary conditions,...

Advanced treasury management and data-delivery capabilities enable finance organizations to see their global cash, liquidity, and risk exposures and create value for the business. Recent disruptions, such as the pandemic and current inflationary conditions, have thrust treasury management into the spotlight. With rising interest rates and a strengthening US dollar, many finance organizations are turning to their treasury departments to proactively mitigate currency impacts upon foreign earnings and to enhance the use of internal liquidity over capital markets. Some are also looking to reduce costs in response to inflation. These factors are putting pressure on treasury departments to elevate their operating models and to digitally transform their capabilities around financial risk, balance sheets, working capital, and payments while simultaneously reducing costs. Some organizations are responding to these pressures by accelerating their digital transformation agendas and moving core capabilities into the cloud. They are also seeking to use internal and external data more extensively by enhancing their analytical capabilities. One way to accomplish these objectives is to combine a leading, cloud-based financial system, such as Workday Financial Management, with the enhanced treasury management capabilities of a cloud-based, supplemental system, such as Kyriba. Eight potential ways to achieve ROI Greater process efficiency via treasury automation and standardized reports. Timely and accurate cash visibility. Reduced banking fees and transaction costs. More effective hedging programs to manage FX and IR risk. Enhanced liquidity management and funding opportunities. Decreased IT support and required maintenance. Improved operations and fraud detection. Greater agility and enhanced business continuity via global SaaS platforms. Treasury as a value lever Supplemental treasury management systems (TMS) generally offer in-depth functionality across treasury management and accounting, bank connectivity and payments, control and compliance, risk management, and supply chain finance. Accordingly, the business case for implementing a supplemental TMS can be compelling, especially for companies that need to perform complex intercompany lending, hedging, risk valuation, foreign exchange, and other intricate financial operations. However, modernizing the treasury management function requires a combination of capabilities, including industry-specific knowledge of leading practices; functional specialties such as strategy and operations, risk management, financial advisory, tax, and cyber security; and highly experienced professionals with technical skills across the various ERP ecosystems such as Workday and Kyriba. Deloitte not only offers these diverse capabilities but also integrates them efficiently. Deloitte is also a recognized market leader in finance transformation; it has achieved the highest quality rating on Workday implementation scorecards and it is Kyriba’s only enterprise-certified alliance relationship, having received implementerof-the-year awards for the last three consecutive years. With these qualifications, Deloitte is well-positioned to help you combine a cloud-based financial management system with a supplemental TMS. This can open up many opportunities for cashmanagement cost savings and improved treasury function performance. Cloud-based solutions to enhance visibility and management of cash, liquidity, and risk exposures Leverage Deloitte’s extensive finance transformation experience, knowledge of leading practices, and familiarity with the financial management and treasury management capabilities found in leading platforms such as Kyriba and Workday. Tailored for treasury optimization As detailed in Table 1, finance leaders have the ability to alleviate many common ERP treasury-management pain points by tapping Deloitte’s extensive finance transformation experience, knowledge of leading practices, and familiarity with the financial management and treasury management capabilities found in leading platforms such as Kyriba and Workday. How can we help Deloitte can assist you in taking the next steps to modernize your treasury management capabilities by guiding you through an initial scoping session to determine a personalized path forward. During this session, we can apply our technical acumen, treasury knowledge, and finance transformation experience to help you: Assess the current state. Develop a digital finance strategy based on combining leading cloud-based systems. Identify finance transformation opportunities and create a roadmap for realizing them. Design the solution and develop an implementation plan according to leading practices. System integration and implementation support for your selected solution. Ultimately, through proprietary accelerators and pre-defined data integrations, we can help you streamline your TMS implementation, delivering it simultaneously with a cloud-based financial management implementation, or after it is complete. Time to get strategic? Treasury-management trends triggered by digital disruption several years ago have only intensified under recent economic conditions. The role of the treasury function continues to grow as a value-add partner of the CFO and a strategic advisor to the business—all while core treasury goals and mandates, such as liquidity risk management and being a steward for financial risk management, have become even more important in a world of volatile markets, tight supply chains, and rising interest rates. Could it be time for your organization to get strategic about liquidity management with a cloud-based financial management system and a supplemental TMS? To find out, contact us.   This document contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this document, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This document is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person who relies on this document. Product names mentioned in this document are the trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners and are mentioned for identification purposes only. Deloitte is not responsible for the functionality or technology related to the vendors or other systems or technologies as defined in this document. As used in this document, ‘Deloitte’ means Deloitte & Touche LLP, which provides audit, assurance, and risk and financial advisory services and Deloitte Consulting LLP, which provides strategy, operations, technology, systems, outsourcing and human capital consulting services. These entities are separate subsidiaries of Deloitte LLP. Please see www.deloitte.com/us/about for a detailed description of our legal structure. Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting. Copyright © 2023 Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved.   Want to learn more? Check out this webinar to hear how Deloitte helped Exelon and Constellation Energy modernize their Treasury organization through a Kyriba implementation.

The IDC White Paper commissioned by Kyriba validates the emergence of a new practice area in Enterprise IT that includes risk management, payments, real-time connectivity, treasury management and working capital optimization. Download this report...

The IDC White Paper commissioned by Kyriba validates the emergence of a new practice area in Enterprise IT that includes risk management, payments, real-time connectivity, treasury management and working capital optimization. Download this report to understand more about the emerging trends and critical areas of practice that define how leading companies can outperform in operational efficiency, technology adoption, and process maturity. Enterprise Liquidity Management: 51% of leaders can produce a consolidated view of cash and liquidity in under one hour compared to 8% of the less equipped companies; Risk Reduction: 79% of leaders have implemented very effective payment fraud prevention and 69% of them effectively hedge to protect their liquidity; Real-Time Decisions: 93% of leaders leverage real-time insights, while 85% of them have integrated data from partners and third-party members into their enterprise platforms. Situation Overview For CFOs, treasurers, and corporate boards, the COVID-19 pandemic represented a moment of clarity. Seemingly overnight, CFOs were faced with a crisis bigger in many ways than the 2008 financial crisis. In the space of days, treasurers had to shift from managing long-term strategic initiatives of the business to ensuring immediate access to cash to fund basic business operations. Corporate finance leaders long burdened by dwindling IT budgets and limited head count were forced to lean heavily on their treasury and cash management tools. Unfortunately, some treasurers were hampered greatly by their legacy software packages, thwarted by a lack of agility and visibility with their legacy software. Yet, as with all major events, CFOs are often the powerful catalyst for change. The role of the CFO was already changing, but now, because of the past year, the CFO’s environment has changed as well. Corporate finance leaders long burdened by dwindling IT budgets and limited head count were forced to lean heavily on their treasury and cash management tools. Key Pain Points for Today’s Liquidity Management Teams To better understand these changes, IDC conducted a survey of more than 800 corporate finance leaders and practitioners in August 20211 to explore the emerging importance corporate finance leaders are assigning to liquidity management, both during times of crisis and to leverage opportunities for growth. The results of the survey were compelling in many aspects including findings that strongly indicate urgency for CFOs, treasurers, and other financial leaders to design and deploy strategic initiatives to manage liquidity holistically. Effective and efficient liquidity management is among the top priorities for survey respondents2. Here are a few reasons driving increased urgency for liquidity management for treasurers and other financial leaders: Ineffective communication of key treasury/financial metrics to key stakeholders through the company. Many financial leaders struggle to gather the data needed to effectively surface the key metrics to the executive teams and board members. A major part of this issue is the relative lack of real-time access to liquidity data. The survey shows that less than 30% of treasurers can leverage treasury insights in real time. Managing points of revenue leakage including fraud and payment optimization. Given the current environment of uncertainty, financial leaders are doubling their focus on areas of revenue leakage including bank fees/changes and fraud management issues. Only 42% of leaders would characterize their ability to protect their cash/liquidity against fraud as very effective. Given the average company will experience 5–10 fraud incidents per year, the impact on liquidity/cash is immense. Fraud is not the only source of revenue leakage, according to the survey; the reduction of transaction costs and fees paid to third-party payment providers was among the top 5 priorities for treasurers seeking to improve their ability to move cash and liquidity. Managing constant regulatory changes. The regulatory landscape is in constant flux for treasury operations including VAT changes, open banking implementation, and upcoming LIBOR changes. The CFO must have the tools to cope with these regulatory shifts. It seems that CFOs understand the urgency around this as the survey shows that increasing the budget for treasury technology and tools is the number 1 priority over the next two to three years. Liquidity Management Emerges as a Practice Area The events of 2020 have forced CFOs to prioritize business resiliency and continuity by optimizing liquidity management. This will mean a greater focus on working capital management3 including sourcing external funding and providing financing for critical suppliers efficiently. Given the current economic uncertainty, cash and liquidity management have been top of mind for financial leaders. The pressure to maintain liquidity is tremendous as companies of all sizes fight to retain market position and, in some cases, simply stay alive. As a result, businesses have found themselves needing to reforecast their liquidity and cash flow more frequently (weekly or even daily). However, this is a difficult proposition for any company considering the following survey data points, according to the IDC survey of more than 800 corporate finance leaders: Enterprise liquidity management is a “practice area” for 15% of the organizations. Survey leaders are well underway to operationalizing the building blocks of enterprisewide liquidity management (see Figure 1). Only one in eight companies has extensive visibility into the company’s current cash positions (i.e., real-time view of more than 90% of cash). Less than 5% of organizations can reliably forecast cash beyond three months, with most companies being able to only reliably forecast their company’s cash position out to four weeks. Further, less than 20% of organizations can forecast their company’s liquidity beyond one month. Only half (51%) of the businesses were able to build a consolidated view of their cash and liquidity within the same day of the request. In addition to being able to forecast and reforecast quickly and efficiently, financial leaders found that they desperately needed the ability to simulate future what-if scenarios and to create plans based on those what-if scenarios4. The benefit of this capability is that business leaders can remain in lockstep around core business objectives even as the business environment changes rapidly. Unfortunately, many financial leaders don’t have the tools to support scenario planning for liquidity, and as such, they must cope with limited visibility for decision making. The most prominent area of impact is in decision making for treasurers and their executive teams. CFOs with limited visibility are slower to make decisions regarding money movement, internal funding of projects, or M&A activity. Furthermore, a lack of visibility can even impact the bottom line as companies may choose to be less aggressive in moving money into/out of the exchange markets and may opt for expensive external funding sources unnecessarily. Managing Liquidity Enterprisewide Requires Unification More and more, organizations are coming to the realization that liquidity management is not only a critical aspect of functioning in this “new normal” but also a team sport. Organizations must have a unified approach to all data, processes, and human capital related to liquidity management5. Here are the key characteristics of an enterprisewide unified liquidity management process: Centralized liquidity / cash data The centralization of liquidity data streamlines financial operation, allowing for better control for financial leaders. Centralization provides financial leaders with the opportunity to standardize cash management across all legal entities, reduce the number of bank accounts in use, and provide a more holistic view of bank or FX exposures. Deep liquidity analytics Having access to deep analytics provides users with the ability to better predict future liquidity. More importantly, it allows them the chance to find patterns or overlooked items that have business significance (e.g., identifying cash as a revenue-generating asset and monitoring bank fees and deposit rates). Partnering environment Financial line-of-business professionals are often left on an island. This is often the case for finance directors, controllers, and heads of accounting. In fact, only 20% of survey respondents have their CEO as their champion who initiates unified liquidity management initiatives. The key to executive participation goes beyond simply getting the CEO involved in liquidity management decisions. The key here is to develop a partnering environment for all operational decision makers and stakeholders. This can be exceedingly difficult without the proper tools to support partnering and collaboration across business leaders. Dedicated tools to quickly expose key liquidity metrics to all stakeholders within the business are essential. Seamless integration Data must flow between all the relevant cash functions, including treasury, accounts payable, accounts receivable, FP&A, order management, and procurement6. In addition, the data must flow outside of the finance teams as well including investors and lenders, certain government agencies, credit rating organizations, and evens to certain customers and suppliers7. Only then will financial leaders be able to gain a holistic view of the organization’s current cash/liquidity position. Real-time massive data Finance leaders need real-time information to optimize decision making, but often they must wait till the end of day/period/quarter to get an accurate and holistic view of the current state of enterprise liquidity. Today’s liquidity managers need real-time data to build accurate forecasts and market simulations8. Real time is also essential in effective communication of the business cash position between stakeholders. Follow the Leader The process of managing treasury at the corporate level is complex and ever changing. In these cases, it is not unusual for CFOs and their treasury managers to reach out to gather advice from trusted sources. Leader companies, as defined by the survey, are more likely to reach out to their fintech partners and their accounting/audit partners for guidance than their laggard counterparts9. This is an example of how leader companies create a road map for other companies to follow. Here are a few other areas where leaders are blazing a trail for other companies: Involvement of the top management: A unified liquidity management strategy, when done properly, incorporates feedback from all departments. In short, a unified liquidity management strategy demands a unified approach from top finance leaders and even from the broader business leaders. For example, sales and supply chain have a massive impact on liquidity. As such, the leadership in these areas must also move in a coordinated fashion regarding liquidity management for the business. Visibility for financial leaders and decision makers: Leaders are significantly more aware of their real-time cash availability. Over 79% of leaders were able to get >75% visibility of past liquidity compared with <20% of laggards. Over 75% of all firms can predict their cash up to four weeks reliably; however, beyond four weeks is a struggle for all firms. The logistics of cash and liquidity: All (100%) leaders are very efficient at using pooling and sweeping to manage cash and liquidity; almost no laggards are. Leaders are focused on increasing the adoption of new and existing payment systems. Keeping cash and liquidity protected: Close to 100% of leaders are effective at using business continuity and contingency planning, payment fraud protection, and hedging compared with 35–55% of laggards. Leaders are focused on greater digitalization of end-to-end payment authorization. Setting financial operation up to grow cash and liquidity: Nearly all (99%) leaders have adopted business intelligence techniques to make better decisions regarding liquidity compared with 25% of laggards. Close to 100% of leaders are effective at using business continuity and contingency planning, payment fraud protection, and hedging compared with 35–55% of laggards. Benefits of Enterprise Liquidity Management Liquidity and cash management will be important to adapt to the rapidly changing business environment going forward. Importantly, liquidity management is essential amid any rapidly changing business environment, whether it is a global crisis, supply chain disruption, shifts in a competitive environment, or rapid internal growth as seen with many technology companies. Here are the key benefits of a cohesive and unified enterprise liquidity management strategy: Improved visibility: During the height of the pandemic, business decisions needed to be made within a matter of hours. Unfortunately, in the survey, IDC found that about 50% of organizations need more than one full day to build a consolidated view of their cash and liquidity. Decisions like layoffs and supplier payments had to be made quickly, and in nearly half the cases, according to the survey data, decisions were made without a consolidated current view of cash and liquidity. Companies can’t see upcoming shortfalls or dips in cash flow, which limits their ability to invest in long-term business initiatives like digital transformation, expand into a new geographic market, migrate to a new technology platform, or broaden product and service offerings. Better risk management: Today’s financial leaders are swimming in data and are finding FX, with all its moving parts, to be particularly difficult. Speed is another area of concern for treasurers that desire the ability to move money around the clock and in real time into and out of currency markets. However, with increased speed comes the need for more powerful real-time risk management capabilities. To highlight this, liquidity risk and fraud risk, collectively, were the most important strategic commitments, for financial leaders, to pursue over the next two to three years. More effective compliance: The tax and regulatory environment is constantly changing directly and significantly impacting treasury management processes. Today’s liquidity management professionals must be proactive to understand how these will impact treasury and other financial operations today and how they may impact these operations in the future. Greater process efficiency: The role of the average liquidity management professional is rapidly changing. While cash management and cash forecasting continue to be strategic priorities, liquidity managers and CFOs must also now focus on supply chain finance, insurance, and commodities. Even amid a period of expanding roles and responsibilities, many liquidity managers find themselves working with the same number of resources. The need to do “more with less” among financial professionals represents an opportunity for financial management technology vendors. According to the IDC survey, currently, 77% of financial leaders felt they lack either skills, head count, or budget to modernize their financial operation. Greater flexibility in financing: Businesses with an enterprise liquidity operation are better able to take advantage of a wider spectrum of asset-backed debt solutions including invoice financing, lines of credit, and demand loans. The visibility and control provided by unified coordinated liquidity management allow financial leaders greater working capital options. Further, this financing flexibility also provides a boost in business resilience, which is essential in times of uncertainty. As a result, establishing a receivables financing program was the top priority to improve cash and liquidity enterprisewide. The visibility and control provided by unified coordinated liquidity management allow financial leaders greater working capital options. APIs Unify the Practice of Holistic Liquidity Management The benefits listed previously and the road map laid out in the Follow the Leader section are all predicated on the smooth and rapid flow of data between various stakeholders and their corresponding applications. Specifically, unified liquidity management demands that the data from back-office applications be made available for processing and analysis. In many ways, topics such as cash management, liquidity forecasting, and treasury management efficiency all stem from robust data management practices and tools. The importance of data management has put the spotlight on application programming interfaces (APIs) and the promise they hold when deployed properly. The survey reveals that nearly 88% of respondents consider the adoption of APIs as important or very important. Liquidity management applications exist within a spiderweb of adjacent back-office applications and external data sources. Also, the liquidity/cash management process is a collection point for data from other multiple back-office systems/processes. Working capital management is an example of a process where data must be gathered from multiple systems/processes (e.g., ERP, procurement, accounts payable, reconciliation, and inventory). This interdependency places heightened importance on the smooth flow of data between these systems. This is where application programming interfaces become essential for liquidity management teams. The value of APIs can potentially extend beyond the four walls of the organization. APIs can be leveraged to incorporate external data sources to sharpen financial agility in areas such as FX, banking payments data, credit decisioning data, and even geopolitical factors that may impact the global flow of goods. Yet, according to the survey, just three of five companies are using APIs to integrate and optimize their internal system infrastructure (e.g., ERP, TMS). Further, a similar percentage uses APIs to extract/analyze internal data for reporting/management (e.g., dashboards). Leaders are always looking to adopt technology to support efficiency and agility in treasury operations. It is one of the essential differences between leaders and their laggard counterparts. For leaders, APIs are a core element of liquidity management operation. For example, 92% of leaders consider the adoption of APIs important or very important compared with 58% of laggards. APIs from a Global Perspective Major technology and economic hubs in Europe are significantly lagging behind the global average in terms of API adoption, according to the survey data. This represents hesitancy among major European Union (EU) players to adopt APIs (see Figure 2). Data residency and data privacy initiatives within Europe have tempered the demand slightly for cloud-native financial applications. However, this is changing rapidly as initiatives like the EU-funded project Open Clouds for Research Environments (OCRE) continue to grow and aid in accelerating cloud adoption in Europe. APIs Are Only the Beginning APIs, while important, are only the beginning. They are simply pipes that allow data to flow between systems, but it is not until this flow of data is harnessed that the real power of APIs emerges. APIs can potentially form the foundation of a platform where liquidity analysis and insights are harvested and shared with key stakeholders in real time. As such, the API layer must be paired with an additional layer of software that allows for data to be analyzed and structured into actionable insights. In a sense, APIs move financial data to a larger financial operating system where financial leaders get the business-critical information they need to make liquidity management decisions in real time. Future Outlook Liquidity Management Has Changed Permanently in the Past 24 Months CFOs and treasury managers suddenly find themselves facing a new reality where liquidity management is more strategic and more critical to the business than ever before. As a result, there will be permanent changes to the finance department going forward, including: The velocity of liquidity flow data will increase. Over 50 countries have adopted some form of real-time payment schemes in the past few years, with more to come. This has dramatically increased the speed at which treasury payments can move. This increases the need for improved security and enhanced reporting tools to manage enriched data sets from real-time payment platforms. Liquidity management becomes more essential. The pandemic will force treasurers to prioritize business resiliency and continuity by optimizing liquidity management. This will mean a greater focus on working capital management including sourcing external funding and providing financing for critical suppliers efficiently. The role of the CFO continues to expand. The role of today’s CFO is rapidly changing and expanding. While cash management and cash forecasting continue to be strategic priorities, CFOs are also increasing their focus on supply chain finance, insurance, and commodities. However, many financial leaders find themselves working with the same number of resources. Today’s financial management professionals require more advanced and innovative technology to keep up with the challenge. There will be a greater focus on advanced technology. To keep pace with rapidly changing market dynamics, treasurers will require their tools to be powered/enabled by cutting-edge technologies such as machine learning (ML), big data and analytics, microservices, and enhanced application programming interfaces. Digital banking / payments will be a focus area. Payment management was critically important during the pandemic and will remain so in the post-pandemic treasury world. As a result, digital banking platforms and bank connectivity will be a strong focus area for treasurers going forward. Finance departments long burdened by dwindling IT budgets and limited head count were forced to lean heavily on their treasury and cash management tools during the recent uncertainty. Unfortunately, some finance departments were hampered greatly by their legacy technology. But the survey data reveals that this is set to change (see Figure 3). Here are a few key future technology trends that will shape enterprise liquidity management going forward: Artificial intelligence (AI) is highlighted. Financial leaders for product-centric companies often must move quickly to secure supply chain obligations and financing. Many turned to advanced technologies such as machine learning and advanced analytics to help lower the data analysis/management burden and allow for more accurate decisions regarding financial management at speed. Cloud is leading the way. The most obvious takeaway is that organizations are planning on spending more on SaaS versus traditional (on-premises, single-tenant, and managed hosted) software. IDC research shows that organizations are already seeing a shift toward the public cloud for treasury, FP&A, and accounting software, but the survey results also suggest that this trend is accelerating considering recent disruptions. Aim to bridge the gap between finance and IT: For finance leaders, the top hurdle to digital transformation is the friction between often restrictive IT/security policies and the desire of the finance department to move quickly and be more agile. In IDC’s December 2020 Worldwide C-Suite (CXO) Survey, the most common hurdle for finance leaders to effective digital transformation agenda was the IT and security leaders slowing them down. The data reveals that financial leaders feel hampered by an inability to gather and disseminate that business-critical information to the necessary stakeholders at speed. As a result, financial leaders need more tools and features geared toward agility so that they can more quickly respond to rapid market shifts. Rapid payment technologies / initiatives see growth: For liquidity management professionals, time is of the essence when it comes to making payments. As a result, there has been growing momentum around faster payment programs. Recently, several payment initiatives were introduced/expanded, including SWIFT gpi, SEPA instant payment, and same-day ACH. Enterprisewide Liquidity Key Aspect of New Normal In the past, much of the financial leader’s role was to manage rear-facing details like closing the period, reconciling GL transactions, invoice matching, or cash application. While these will always be important, the uncertainty of 2020 put more of a focus on forward-looking activities like forecast, budgeting, and planning. With the pace of change in overdrive post-2020, financial leaders are investing a large amount of time trying to anticipate and plan for the next major change in business dynamics. A larger amount of the CFO’s time must be devoted to trying to develop a financial strategy to anticipate future shifts in market dynamics. For example, prior to the event of 2020, many CFOs and financial leaders would update their cash flow and liquidity plans quarterly or on a halfyearly basis. However, the financial and regulatory landscape is shifting so quickly, due to the shock of the pandemic, that many CFOs and their teams are now updating their cash flow and liquidity plans weekly or even, in some cases, daily. This new normal requires/demands a more unified approach to financial operations to cope with the new hyperspeed pace of economic change. It is more important than ever that financial data flow freely and quickly between key departments and key financial applications. Businesses on the leading edge have heard the call and are already making the necessary changes to thrive within this new normal. In fact, the survey shows that 15% of survey leaders are already operationalizing the enterprisewide management of liquidity as a practice area cross-functionally. Prior to the event of 2020, many CFOs and financial leaders would update their cash flow and liquidity plans quarterly or on a half-yearly basis. Emerging Need of a Chief Liquidity Officer As stated previously, the importance of liquidity has increased dramatically, and the need for an enterprise liquidity management approach has grown in importance as well. When taken together, they reveal the growing need for a dedicated chief liquidity officer. This position will act as a central point of authority and accountability for a unified liquidity management approach. This position would develop, manage, and optimize a holistic liquidity management strategy to ensure alignment with overall business objectives — especially as those objectives change/evolve/shift over time. However, a business looking to add this position must also invest in the tools, skills, and resources to manage liquidity at an enterprise level including forecasting/simulation, data visualization, and dashboarding tools as well as an API-driven platform that leverages automation and artificial intelligence to quickly gather and disseminate business-critical financial data. As the demand for business resiliency and proactive liquidity management continues to grow, so too will the demand for a dedicated chief liquidity officer. As the demand for business resiliency and proactive liquidity management continues to grow, so too will the demand for a dedicated chief liquidity officer. Challenges / Opportunities Ecosystems that must be curated: Liquidity management operations require data flows from many internal and external data sources. These data sources must be constantly curated to make sure that the financial leadership has access to the latest information and cutting-edge technology advancements. Curating ecosystems around the liquidity management solution takes effort and resources from a department that is often lacking in resources. Getting buy-in: Data shows that many line-of-business financial managers (e.g., controllers, accounting managers, and treasurers) don’t have support for liquidity management operation transformation. While this was the case for line-of-business financial managers prior to the pandemic, according to the survey data, this phenomenon is still a reality for many line-of-business financial managers. Data security risks: While APIs have tremendous promise for data integration, they also have the potential to expose sensitive data when not managed properly. API keys, for example, must be handled with great care or risk giving unlimited read/write access to financial information. Conclusion The CFO’s role has evolved into a strategic business partner for the rest of the organization, and the capability that’s required to deliver actionable intelligence downstream to the decision makers at the edge of the business or the lines-of-business leaders is evolving as well. For context, IDC believes the total available market for an enterprise liquidity management software (e.g., treasury, B2B payments, corporate payments, supply chain, and receivables financing) approached $30 billion in 2020. This is a massive opportunity for vendors to step in and help the CFO as their role changes. To access data is just the beginning of the journey to enterprise liquidity management. The ever-evolving remit of the office of the CFO is to be the lightning rod for data within the business and users of that data to power coordinated, data-driven financial business decisions throughout all facets of the organization. This demands a system that is built to aggregate, analyze, and disseminate data. This need is driving the emergence of centralized intelligent financial data platforms built upon APIs and strong data management principles. This new liquidity management platform may also necessitate the emergence of a chief liquidity officer to sit at its helm. In any case, the world of liquidity management is changing rapidly, and a unified enterprisewide liquidity management approach is no longer a luxury — it is a must for today’s business environment. References n = 440 European organizations, $100mil+ revenue. Enterprise Liquidity Management Is a Focus Area for Senior Execs Among Leader Organizations: CFO, CEO, Board of Directors. In 23% of the most advanced corporates, Liquidity Management is a focus area for CEOs, whereas it mainly remains a in the hands of the treasurers for the laggards (23%) Leaders Are Focused More on Integrating Working Capital Data, While Laggards Target Transitioning to Real-time Visibility And Improving Quality of Data Common Priority. They are more focused on integrating working capital data (43% against 27% of the less equipped companies). 80% of Leaders have adopted business intelligence techniques to make better decisions regarding liquidity. Survey Readout slide 40–48% of Leaders Encounter Greater Disconnected Priorities Between Finance and IT Departments. Most Leaders (75%) have transparent and well-connected corporate finance and treasury teams compared to ~30% of Laggards. This is visibly reflected in the adoption rates across APIs for different purposes: • To integrate and optimize their internal system infrastructure – 80% Leaders vs 10% Laggards. • To leverage internal data for reporting – 90% Leaders vs 15% Laggards • To send data to partners and others – 80% Leaders vs 27% Laggards • To receive data from partners and third-party members – 85% Leaders vs 10% Laggards >90% of Corporate finance and treasury teams of Leaders can effectively leverage real-time insights compared to only 33% of Laggards. 39% of Leaders Have a Wider Set of Fintech Partners to Support Enterprise Liquidity Management Initiatives Compared to just 7% of Laggards. Source: IDC Enterprise Liquidity Management Study, sponsored by Kyriba, August 2021. Want to learn more about Enterprise Liquidity Management? You are welcome to join Kyriba's upcoming monthly live demo sessions to see the Kyriba ELM platform in action. An on-demand demo session is available here.

A Quarterly Report Assessing the Impact of Foreign Exchange to North American and European Corporate Earnings About the Report The January 2023 Kyriba Currency Impact Report analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North...

A Quarterly Report Assessing the Impact of Foreign Exchange to North American and European Corporate Earnings About the Report The January 2023 Kyriba Currency Impact Report analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ earnings during the third quarter of 2022. To obtain this information, Kyriba analyzed the earnings calls of 1,200 publicly traded North American and European companies as part of a continued effort to provide insight into how foreign exchange impacts organizations. The companies included in this data set are large multinational firms doing business in more than one currency with at least 15% of their revenue coming from overseas. Kyriba Currency Impact Report -Key Findings The collective quantified negative impact reported by both North American and European companies totaled $47.18 billion in Q3 2022, a 26.6% increase from Q2 2022. 24% of corporates studied (289/1200) quantified +/- impacts totaling $64.22 billion ($47.18 billion headwinds), ($17.04 billion tailwinds). The euro was the currency most mentioned as impactful by North American and European companies, the Argentine peso was the most volatile currency. 256 North American and European companies reported currency headwinds in Q3 2022. Of those companies, 244 companies quantified their FX impacts. Total Quantified Currency Impacts by North American and European Companies (Billions) North American Companies’ Quantified Currency Impact (Billions) European Companies’ Quantified Currency Impact (Billions) Top 5 Volatile G20 Currencies Top 5 Volatile Currencies as Weighted by GDP Percentage Currency Impact on North American Corporate Earnings

2022 Treasury Technology Analyst Report: The Definitive Guide to Treasury Technology Solutions This special edition provides an exclusive look at the solution set offered by Kyriba.

2022 Treasury Technology Analyst Report: The Definitive Guide to Treasury Technology Solutions This special edition provides an exclusive look at the solution set offered by Kyriba.

Kyriba’s Currency Impact Report (CIR), a comprehensive quarterly report which details the impacts of foreign exchange (FX) exposures among 1,200 multinational companies based in North America and Europe with at least 15 percent of their revenue coming from overseas, sustained $49.09 billion in total impacts to earnings from currency volatility.

A Quarterly Report Assessing the Impact of Foreign Exchange to North American and European Corporate Earnings About the Report The October 2022 Kyriba Currency Impact Report analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ earnings during the second quarter of 2022. To obtain this information, Kyriba analyzed the earnings calls of 1,200 publicly traded North American and European companies as part of a continued effort to provide insight into how foreign exchange impacts organizations. The companies included in this data set are large multinational firms doing business in more than one currency with at least 15% of their revenue coming from overseas.

The Kyriba July 2022 Currency Impact Report Reveals FX Impacts Surge to $24 Billion for Multinationals. ​North American corporations experienced a $14+ billion hit to their earnings, more than 200% single quarter spike in...

The Kyriba July 2022 Currency Impact Report Reveals FX Impacts Surge to $24 Billion for Multinationals. ​North American corporations experienced a $14+ billion hit to their earnings, more than 200% single quarter spike in headwinds. Download the CIR now to gain insights that will allow CFOs and risk managers to benchmark exposure and inform decision-making.

Kyriba’s Currency Impact Report (CIR), a comprehensive report detailing the impacts of foreign exchange (FX) exposures among 1,200 multinational companies based in North America and Europe, revealed $12 billion in total impacts to earnings...

Kyriba’s Currency Impact Report (CIR), a comprehensive report detailing the impacts of foreign exchange (FX) exposures among 1,200 multinational companies based in North America and Europe, revealed $12 billion in total impacts to earnings from currency volatility.

Are you a treasury professional working in or planning to expand into the Asia-Pacific region? With 12 chapters on topics such as liquidity management, short-term borrowing and financial risk management, this handbook gives guidance...

Are you a treasury professional working in or planning to expand into the Asia-Pacific region? With 12 chapters on topics such as liquidity management, short-term borrowing and financial risk management, this handbook gives guidance on the core tasks of a regional treasury center and explores the topics and emerging trends that shape the Asia-Pacific region.

Kyriba’s Currency Impact Report (CIR), a comprehensive report detailing the impacts of foreign exchange (FX) exposures among 1,200 multinational companies based in North America and Europe, revealed $27.87 billion in total impacts to earnings...

Kyriba’s Currency Impact Report (CIR), a comprehensive report detailing the impacts of foreign exchange (FX) exposures among 1,200 multinational companies based in North America and Europe, revealed $27.87 billion in total impacts to earnings from currency volatility.

Robotics Process Automation (RPA), Machine Learning (ML) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) are no longer buzzwords and concepts. As technology advances and the applicability of various scenarios grow, treasury and the larger finance organization find...

Robotics Process Automation (RPA), Machine Learning (ML) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) are no longer buzzwords and concepts. As technology advances and the applicability of various scenarios grow, treasury and the larger finance organization find themselves in a new position: how to take advantage of tools and technology driving greater efficiency while, at the same time, focusing on core, valued activities.

Kyriba’s Currency Impact Report (CIR), a comprehensive report detailing the impacts of foreign exchange (FX) exposures among 1,200 multinational companies based in North America and Europe, revealed negative impact from currency volatility of $6.16...

Kyriba’s Currency Impact Report (CIR), a comprehensive report detailing the impacts of foreign exchange (FX) exposures among 1,200 multinational companies based in North America and Europe, revealed negative impact from currency volatility of $6.16 billion.

Based on ratings collected in IDC’s 2020 SaaSPath Survey (IDC #US46933620), Kyriba placed in the highest-scoring group of vendors serving the SaaS Treasury Management (TM) application market and has been awarded IDC’s 2020 SaaS...

Based on ratings collected in IDC’s 2020 SaaSPath Survey (IDC #US46933620), Kyriba placed in the highest-scoring group of vendors serving the SaaS Treasury Management (TM) application market and has been awarded IDC’s 2020 SaaS TM Customer Satisfaction Award.

The October 2020 Kyriba Currency Impact Report analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q2 2020 earnings. The report serves as a key benchmarking tool for global corporations.

The October 2020 Kyriba Currency Impact Report analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q2 2020 earnings. The report serves as a key benchmarking tool for global corporations.

The July 2020 Kyriba Currency Impact Report analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q1 2020 earnings. The report serves as a key benchmarking tool for global corporations.

The July 2020 Kyriba Currency Impact Report analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q1 2020 earnings. The report serves as a key benchmarking tool for global corporations.

The April 2020 Kyriba Currency Impact Report analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q4 2019 earnings. The report serves as a key benchmarking tool for global corporations.

The April 2020 Kyriba Currency Impact Report analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q4 2019 earnings. The report serves as a key benchmarking tool for global corporations.

The October 2019 Kyriba Currency Impact Report analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q2 2019 earnings. The report serves as a key benchmarking tool for global corporations.

The October 2019 Kyriba Currency Impact Report analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q2 2019 earnings. The report serves as a key benchmarking tool for global corporations.

The July 2019 Kyriba Currency Impact Report, compiled by FiREapps, a Kyriba Company, analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q1 2019 earnings. The report serves as a key...

The July 2019 Kyriba Currency Impact Report, compiled by FiREapps, a Kyriba Company, analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q1 2019 earnings. The report serves as a key benchmarking tool for global corporations.

INTRODUCTION Corporate treasurers are aware that the personal computing systems used for handling administrative and repetitive tasks are quickly becoming unfit to deal with frequent market changes and to manage complex data transactions between...

INTRODUCTION Corporate treasurers are aware that the personal computing systems used for handling administrative and repetitive tasks are quickly becoming unfit to deal with frequent market changes and to manage complex data transactions between multiple parties and institutions. Therefore, corporate treasurers (especially in small and midsize enterprises [SMEs]) are replacing their basic personal accounting system with a more robust TMS and are in the process of learning how to select the right solution. It is not so infrequent that corporate treasury officers are put in front of myriad alternative solutions that only confound their selection process, as treasurers remain entangled in product demos and features-and-functions “fireworks” that make the short-listing decision harder. Aite Group is fully aware of this and proposes an evaluation approach that factors in all the key elements for a successful selection and, more important, an ongoing positive business relationship with the chosen vendor. This Aite Matrix evaluation report explores some of the key trends within the TMS market and discusses the ways in which technology is evolving to address new market needs and challenges. This report compares and contrasts the leading vendors’ offerings and strategies, and it highlights their primary strengths and challenges. In particular, it assesses each vendor’s readiness to offer product functionalities that Aite Group expects will become mainstream in the next two years. Finally, to help corporate executives make more informed decisions as they select new technology partners, this report recognizes specific vendors for their strengths in critical areas. METHODOLOGY Leveraging the Aite Matrix, a proprietary Aite Group vendor assessment framework, this report evaluates the overall competitive position of each vendor, focusing on vendor stability, client strength, product features, and client services. The following criteria were applied to develop a list of vendors for participation: International presence Functional coverage for corporate treasuries, assessing the vendors’ capabilities to offer a portfolio beyond the “basic” functionalities of a TMS: cash and liquidity management, payments initiation, bank account management, and cash forecasting Focus on companies with annual revenue over US$500 million Participating vendors were required to complete a detailed product RFI composed of both qualitative and quantitative questions, conduct a minimum 60-minute product demo, and provide active client references. THE PLAYERS This section presents comparative data and profiles for the individual vendors that participated in the Aite Matrix evaluation. This is by no means an exhaustive list of vendors, and firms looking to undergo a vendor selection process should conduct initial due diligence prior to assembling a list of vendors appropriate for their own unique needs. Table A presents basic vendor information for the participating solutions. THE MARKET The following market trends are shaping the present and future of the TMS market (Table B). KEY STATISTICS This section provides information and analysis on key market statistics as well as projected IT spending related to the vendor market. ANNUAL REVENUE ESTIMATES ANALYSIS The market presence of TMS vendors is evenly distributed among various revenue tranches (Figure 1). The consolidation of the largest players has opened space for lower-tier vendors that have improved their international presence and enlarged the scope of their product portfolio. PROFITABILITY ANALYSIS Although TMS vendors still find some resistance to change by corporate treasurers who prefer to remain loyal to their proprietary electronic spreadsheet tables, the demand for robust treasury software applications is strong. TMS vendors that are capable of corresponding to purchasing requirements (i.e., features and service) of their corporate prospects enjoy healthy returns (Figure 2). GROWTH RATE ANALYSIS The positive results of vendor profitability are reflected in the breakdown of the assessed vendors’ growth (Figure 3). A consistent majority (63%) experienced a double-digit growth over 15%. Only a relative minority (12%) had limited—yet still positive—business success. The results were lower than expected in only one case. CLIENT BREAKDOWN BY TYPE An analysis of the distribution of number of clients among TMS vendors (Figure 4) suggests a form of correlation with the vendors’ business profitability (Figure 2); the more clients served (a client is a registered company—multiple installations at same registered company count as one), the higher the profitability. As soon as the client base diminishes, the profitability drops significantly, only to increase again when there are fewer than 100 clients. The explanation may reside in the fact that profitable clients are large or very large corporations with budgets that recognize the value of the software and services combination and are ready to pay for it. With such a group of clients, TMS vendors are ready to expand their sales campaigns and are confident of two important elements: They have a good set of client references to leverage, and the profitable returns can subsidize the costs for extended sales programs that conclude with an increase in the market share and new client acquisitions. As soon as the resources to invest diminish, however, the client base is reduced, and this may create a vicious circle. Only by focusing on a limited—yet more controllable—pool of clients, the TMS vendors can generate efficiencies and offer standardized solutions that allow them to see their returns increase again. AITE MATRIX EVALUATION This section will break down the individual Aite Matrix components, drawing out the vendors that are strong in each area and how they are differentiated in the market. THE AITE MATRIX COMPONENTS ANALYSIS Figure 5 overviews how each vendor scored in the various areas of importance. Each vendor is rated, in part, based on its own data provided when responding to the RFI distributed by Aite Group as well as on product demos and follow-up discussions as part of the Aite Matrix process. Ratings are also driven by the reference customers of the examined vendors to support a multidimensional rating. VENDOR STABILITY Kyriba leverages its long-lasting presence in the market and global geographical presence. It also has a robust workforce with significant treasury management experience. CLIENT STRENGTH All vendors serve clients in multiple geographies and in a diversity of industry segments. Kyriba, in particular, received high scores from client reference checks for vendor reputation. CLIENT SERVICE Kyriba stands out from the competition. This must not induce in error believing that the other vendors are not careful to their clients. They all offer global and localized support as a standard service with no additional fees. They also measure their performance by contractualizing service-level agreements. The elements that differentiate Kyriba are relative to client reference feedback for service and support, as well as the low implementation costs relative to its pure Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) offering. PRODUCT FEATURES All analyzed vendors deliver fundamental treasury management features of cash and liquidity management, cash forecasting, risk management, payments, investments, funds trading, and debt and equity deal management. The analysis for this report has gone deeper in assessing the vendors’ capabilities to deliver product features closer to the needs of the evolving role of the corporate treasurer: artificial intelligence (AI)-based application that suggests course of action based on the standards being followed in the country of reference, alerts from supply chain events that impact treasury operations (e.g., large purchase order will require funding, delivery delay to client requires cash inflows rescheduling, peak in production requires liquidity to pay extra working hours and temporary staff), and direct integration with major supply chain finance (SCF) platforms via APIs. The above are the specific features that Kyriba displays alongside an already robust TMS applications portfolio. THE AITE MATRIX RECOGNITION To recap, the final results of the Aite Matrix recognition are driven by three major factors: Vendor-provided information based on Aite Group’s detailed Aite Matrix RFI document Participating vendors’ client reference feedback and/or feedback sourced independently by Aite Group Analysis based on market knowledge and product demos provided by participating vendors Figure 6 represents the final Aite Matrix evaluation. BEST-IN-CLASS VENDOR: KYRIBA Kyriba emerges as the clear winner among the examined contenders. Aite group appreciates the vendor’s extended product footprint to cover a large portion of a treasurers’ daily routine operations—namely, supply chain, trade finance, and bank account operations management from the corporate ERP or TMS. Kyriba excelled in the following: Vendor strength: Kyriba has a clear vision of corporate treasury’s needs and expectations. Its out-of-the-box thinking led the vendor to anticipate the benefits of integrating a supply chain finance engine as part of its core product’s stack. Its attention to leveraging APIs to create ERP and bank plug-ins is a further testament of this continuous attention. Product performance: Of particular relevance are cash forecasting tools, bank connectivity interfaces, and ease of use and implementation due to its native SaaS construct. BEST IN CLASS: KYRIBA Kyriba began operations in France in 2000 as a spin-off from Sage XRT (now part of Aritmos). The headquarters was relocated to the U.S. in 2004. Private equity firm Bridgepoint Capital became a majority shareholder in April 2019 and added a US$160 million growth investment to help Kyriba continue its product innovation and growth strategy. Kyriba delivers an in-house-developed pure SaaS finance software platform with integrated bank connectivity. Through its fully virtualized, multitenant treasury cloud, Kyriba offers a suite of solutions for corporate treasury and finance: treasury, payments, risk management, and working capital. The SaaS nature of the solution allows the firm to keep implementation time typically between six and nine months. Smaller, less complex projects can be rolled out in weeks. Kyriba is a SWIFT-certified application for cash management and an authorized reseller of SWIFT Alliance Lite2 for business applications. Kyriba’s SWIFT Service Bureau offers clients their own SWIFT BIC, fully managed by Kyriba, alongside an outsourced MT Concentrator model that allows organizations to utilize a SWIFT BIC specifically provisioned for Kyriba clients, instead of becoming a SWIFT member. The bank or corporate subsidiary data is consolidated, normalized, and integrated into a portal that provides liquidity dashboards, cash flow forecasting, daily cash positioning, and zero-balance account structure, as well as intercompany loan balance and transaction data, FX capture, tracking, and revaluation. After the injection of fresh funds from Bridgepoint Capital, Kyriba is focused on product development and continued customer support while expanding its partnership ecosystem. While the full list of implementation partners cannot be disclosed, the vendor employs an extensive partner program spread across regions, ranging from large partners such as Accenture to smaller domestic treasury-specific associates. Kyriba’s SaaS cloud-based solutions automate an “on-demand” collection of data from multiple banks and company subsidiaries, leveraging connectivity channels for both treasury and ERP that reach over 100 international banks with a prebuilt inventory of bank formats. Kyriba supports over 125 payment formats with over 45,000 different payment scenarios (e.g., by type, geography, bank). Relevant attention and investment are dedicated to APIs. The API integration builds upon Kyriba’s leading connectivity options, considering that recently published figures tell that the vendor processes more than 83 million bank transactions, 30 million payments, and 530 million ERP transactions on behalf of its clients each month through its global connectivity hub. Kyriba’s main target is to be recognized as the treasury management and payments hub solution provider that offers real-time payments to its bank partners’ corporate customers. In February 2019, Kyriba announced an API-based integration with Citi.1 Later in May, it announced a real-time payments feature using JP Morgan’s API that will enable joint Kyriba and JP Morgan clients to send real-time corporate payments in the U.S. through The Clearing House’s RTP network.2 Commenting on how the competitive environment will evolve over the next two years, Kyriba representatives believe that there is a possibility for further consolidation, as some competitors are challenged financially. It is unlikely that more competition will emerge, as recent entrants have struggled. As new technologies such as RPA and AI become mainstay requirements for treasury, the vendor expects a divergence between platforms that can evolve their technology and those that cannot. Another variable is the broadening of treasury responsibilities into areas such as risk management and procure to pay. Competitors that cannot extend their functionality to meet these additional requirements will find themselves uncompetitive. Kyriba is predicting growth across all sizes of organizations, including smaller midmarket businesses, with the Americas and the Asia-Pacific representing the highest growth markets. AITE GROUP’S TAKE Kyriba’s strong tradition of long-term partnerships and its one platform that blends typical treasury and risk management functionalities, with additional features for payments and working capital optimization, create unique selling points that set a benchmark in the TMS market. Reference clients told Aite Group that the deciding factors to select Kyriba were the vendor’s company viability, its history of long-term well-established partnerships, the richness of treasury functionalities, and Kyriba’s value engineering support during the final evaluation process that provided the corporate decision-makers with the right elements to build the business case. An element that still creates a barrier to further adoption by prospective clients is the price of the TMS that may discourage companies with smaller treasury budgets than those traditionally served by Kyriba. Other business challenges are represented by the continuous demand from corporate treasurers to have immediate TMS solutions to manage unexpected FX volatility, adapt to innovative cash optimization techniques (e.g., dynamic discounting, real-time invoice discounting), and apply data intelligence algorithms to unstructured data sources (e.g., website transactions, social media data flows). Aite Group finds that Kyriba is well poised to exert and maintain competitive leadership by further investing monetary and intellectual resources to leverage the top technology trends that impact its corporate clients’ business: APIs, open banking, data visualization, real-time data analysis, RPA, and AI. BASIC FIRM AND PRODUCT INFORMATION Headquarters: San Diego, California Founded: 2000 Number of employees: 700 Key financial information: Annual revenue US$110 million (estimated 2018) Key products and services: Kyriba (with modules that can be sold separately: Treasury, Payments, Risk Management, and Working Capital) Target customer base: Large and midsize corporations Number of clients: 2,000 Average client tenure: 10 years Global footprint: Global Implementation options: Pure SaaS Pricing structure: Based on module use, complexity, and number of users KEY FEATURES AND FUNCTIONALITY BASED ON PRODUCT DEMO AI-based application that pops up relevant KPIs based on business event triggers (e.g., bank change of price conditions, change in insurance premium) Cost accounting structure for treasury managed costs (e.g., staff, bank accounts, commissions) Alerts from supply chain events that impact treasury operations Alerts relative to political events in countries in which the client company does business—these alerts pop up any time the treasury office is executing operations related to that country What-if scenario planning triggered by financial event Integrate directly with major SCF platforms (e.g., Premium technology, Taulia, C2FO) via APIs TOP THREE STRATEGIC PRODUCT INITIATIVES OVER LAST THREE YEARS Real-time fraud detection for treasury and supplier payments End-to-end risk management from exposure identification and analysis to hedge accounting and compliance Data warehousing, business intelligence, and data visualization TOP THREE STRATEGIC PRODUCT INITIATIVES IN THE NEXT 12 TO 18 MONTHS Standardize API development across the entire banking and ERP community Further introduction of AI and machine learning throughout the platform Working capital management and analysis CLIENT FEEDBACK Interviewed clients appreciate Kyriba's commitment to security and risk prevention. By improving efficiency and automation with the TMS, clients recognize they have made substantial time and resource savings. TMS-enabled cash pools and in-house banks have enabled corporate treasury departments to reduce bank charges, lower borrowing costs, and achieve tax efficiencies. Clients like Kyriba’s SaaS architecture, as it gives them access to a mission-critical platform from any location, without any hardware investment and without the headache of upgrades. Alongside the cloud-based structure, corporate users enjoy more basic, yet important for the daily routine, gained efficiencies of their cash operations. The TMS provides the tools to forecast cash more accurately and effectively, especially when accompanied by efficient implementation and support teams. Totally cloud-based software may be seen by customers in different ways. Large multinational treasury departments prefer a standardized set of modules that do not require (nor are designed for) customization. Smaller firm clients may expect the possibility to change the software features to adapt to their preferences. Over time, though, these users appreciate the opportunity to use software modules continuously adapted and upgraded based on the input of thousands of users that run the same software. The requests to change and adapt the software to every specific requirement significantly diminish, although some form of parametrization (i.e., configuration) is expected for functionalities that have natively high levels of personalization, such as FX exposure management, business intelligence, data visualization, and connectivity APIs. Table C displays the vendor’s strengths and challenges. CONCLUSION Buyers: Evaluate the overall competitive position of each TMS vendor by focusing on multiple selection criteria: vendor stability, client strength, product features, and client services. Don’t ask for continual customizations; rather, rely on the vendor’s acquired experience of working with numerous corporate clients and leverage the offered solutions that bear the fruits of industry best practices and techniques. Look for TMS vendors that don’t require a total transformation of your treasury operations but that allow for a smooth transition that blends your current information systems with the newly introduced treasury software. ABOUT AITE GROUP Aite Group is a global research and advisory firm delivering comprehensive, actionable advice on business, technology, and regulatory issues and their impact on the financial services industry. With expertise in banking, payments, insurance, wealth management, and the capital markets, we guide financial institutions, technology providers, and consulting firms worldwide. We partner with our clients, revealing their blind spots and delivering insights to make their businesses smarter and stronger. Visit us on the web and connect with us on Twitter and LinkedIn. AUTHOR INFORMATION Enrico Camerinelli +39.039.21.00.137 [email protected] CONTACT For more information on research and consulting services, please contact: Aite Group Sales +1.617.338.6050 [email protected] For all press and conference inquiries, please contact: Aite Group PR +1.617.398.5048 [email protected] For all other inquiries, please contact: [email protected] 1. “Kyriba Unveils API Integration With Citi,” Finextra, February 26, 2019, accessed July 18, 2019, https://www.finextra.com/pressarticle/77412/kyriba-unveils-api-integration-with-citi.2. David Heun, “JPMorgan, Kyriba Turn to Open Development for Real-Time Corporate Payments,” Kyriba, May 23, 2019, accessed July 24, 2019, https://www.kyriba.com/company/media-coverage/jpmorgan-kyriba-turn-open-development-real-time-corporate-payments.

The May 2019 Kyriba Currency Impact Report, compiled by FiREapps, a Kyriba Company, analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q4 2018 earnings. The report serves as a key...

The May 2019 Kyriba Currency Impact Report, compiled by FiREapps, a Kyriba Company, analyzes the reported effects of currencies to North American and European companies’ Q4 2018 earnings. The report serves as a key benchmarking tool for global corporations.

The ever-shifting regulatory landscape and growing geopolitical uncertainty have forced companies to look inward more than ever to fund business growth. The treasurer must take the lead in finding and mobilizing internal sources of...

The ever-shifting regulatory landscape and growing geopolitical uncertainty have forced companies to look inward more than ever to fund business growth. The treasurer must take the lead in finding and mobilizing internal sources of funding. However, treasurers, especially those in multinational companies, often run into the problem of “trapped” liquidity.

Executive Summary As custodians of the company’s monetary assets, CFOs are responsible for safeguarding the enterprise from threats to its financial health, especially those that can result from processes within the finance domain, such...

Executive Summary As custodians of the company’s monetary assets, CFOs are responsible for safeguarding the enterprise from threats to its financial health, especially those that can result from processes within the finance domain, such as accounts payable and treasury. According to market research, payments fraud is rising. It is therefore critical that CFOs adopt effective strategies to alleviate the potential hit to the bottom line and investor confidence. We have identified five approaches that can help minimize fraud risk: Comprehensive and enforceable payment policies and rules. Embedded fraud prevention and detection procedures. Automated/digitized payment processes. Consolidated payments workflow. Mandated education for employees about fraud detection and prevention Introduction Businesses are falling victim to payments fraud at an increasing rate. In the U.S., this is in part because of the still-dominant use of paper checks as a payment medium. At the same time, and at a global level, the situation is exacerbated by fast, new electronic payment options, such as same-day automated clearing house (ACH) service. In the January 2018 edition of the Kroll Global Fraud & Risk Report, 84% of global business executives reported that their companies experienced at least one instance of fraud in the previous 12 months, up from 74% in 2017. According to statistics collected by Kyriba, a treasury system vendor, 52% of treasury teams were victims of fraud in 2018. Yet nearly one-quarter of companies have done nothing new to combat fraud risk in the past 12 months. Payments fraud occurs when an account is compromised through a counterfeit check, unauthorized ACH transaction or electronic/wire transfer. While treasury payments are at risk, the largest exposure is in executing supplier payments due to the high volume of transactions, potentially large dollar amounts, as well as often-decentralized workflow. This is especially true for large organizations with different methods for paying vendors, complex contractual agreements, and multiple locations, business units and payment centers. The potential for fraud is compounded by rapid company growth, acquisitions and the migration of more finance activities to global business services organizations (GBS). Most research shows that fraudulent payments are initiated by non-employees through counterfeit checks or company checks with forged signatures; unauthorized wire transfers or ACH transactions; the interception and redirection of confidential financial information through cyberattacks; forged or stolen procurement cards; and business email compromise (BEC). The latter is a sophisticated and increasingly pervasive scam targeting businesses working with foreign suppliers and businesses that regularly execute wire transfers. BEC scammers use official company emails to send seemingly valid payment instructions that direct unauthorized transfers of funds. Of course, insiders commit fraud, too. For example, an accounts payable employee may issue checks to fictitious payees and mail them to a post-office box, where they are picked up and cashed or quickly transferred to an offshore account. Five Steps to Limit Phony Payments As discussed above, finance is experiencing an escalation in payments fraud incidents. There are several steps finance can take to minimizing their occurrence and effects. 1. Develop comprehensive and enforceable payments policies and rules: Anti-fraud policies should consider the array of potential sources of fraud and prioritize those with greatest potential impact on the business. For example, there should be stringent controls around payments made to parties in high-risk countries. At organizations with a large and dynamic supplier base, policies must govern the handling of newly established and recently modified accounts, and include screening rules that prescribe how to enforce those policies (Fig. 1). As an organization’s payments environment and operations evolve and become more complex, it is important to periodically review and update payments policies and detection mechanisms. FIG. 1 Linking policies to screening rules Payment policy Screening rule Payments should only go to approved suppliers in approved countries. All payments to non-approved countries must be stopped. Payments initiated by accounts payable in the ERP must be approved by the treasury department. Any payments that are modified after import must be stopped. Single or multiple payments to the same beneficiary may not exceed a specified limit. Hold for review any payments that cumulatively exceed specified limit per day/week/month. All payments to a new bank account must be reviewed by the treasurer. The first payment to a new or modified bank account must be held for review. Source: The Hackett Group Exceptions create opportunities for fraud. Therefore, finance must stringently limit the number of irregular payments. Even payments requests from the highest levels of the organization must be channeled through defined controls and approval processes. Sometimes, asking corporate officers to personally verify unusual requests can be the quickest way to stop bogus payments. Finally, the organization must reinforce an environment of zero tolerance for fraud by unambiguously communicating its consequences, e.g., fraud incidents will be reported to the relevant legal authority and guilty parties will be punished to the full extent allowed by law. 2. Employ best-of-breed fraud detection and prevention practices: Screening and detection are critical elements of the payments workflow. They ensure compliance with established rules and identify and quarantine suspicious activity. Today, tools including AI and robotic process automation can automate the screening process. It is also important that approvers watch out for red flags. For example: Cases in which there are two or more vendors with the same address and/or phone number. When vendors have names that are similar but not identical to those of familiar partners of the organization. Vendor accounts with no phone number, an unlisted phone number, a non-business phone number such as a mobile phone, or a number that is always answered by a machine or voicemail. Situations when the address is a post office box or mail drop, or when the address is the same as the home address of an employee. Incidents when a vendor’s master data records have not been updated in a year or more. Invoice abnormalities, e.g., two or more invoices with the same ID number, or that are from the same vendor but are not sequentially numbered, photocopied or scanned. Duplicate payment requests. Payments that vary from historical levels in dollar amount and/or volume of invoices. Invoices for amounts that are just below the threshold that requires additional review. Vendors presenting a large number (or higher-than-average percentage) of invoices with rounded dollar amounts. 3. Deploy smart automation to permit real-time screening and detection: As payments volumes increase, employees cannot be the only line of defense for identifying and stopping suspicious activities. Rather, finance leaders must enhance protections by automating payments processes while streamlining different activities into a single, well-governed workflow. Digital transformation may increase the speed with which fraud can occur and open fresh avenues for infiltrating the payments process, but companies can also wield digital technology to fight back, integrating payments and automatically scanning all activity using both defined and open parameters. Most respondents to The Hackett Group’s Purchase-to-Pay Performance Study report that they already have systems to conduct specific activities, for example, to quickly identify and stop payments for identical invoice numbers for the same supplier (84%), as well as track payments against a purchase order (77%). However, less than half conduct an automated post-payment review to analyze returned checks that represent duplicate payments (Fig. 2). FIG. 2 Practices for managing compliance across accounts payable Percentage of respondents System edits prevent identical invoice numbers for the same supplier, even when the invoice dates are different 84% System controls track payments against a purchase order 77% Perform post-payment review to identify root cause of returned checks that represent duplicate payments 46% Process controls require original invoices; copies and faxes permitted only when necessary to resolve a late-payment issue 43% Source: Purchase-to-Pay Performance Study, The Hackett Group, 2015 The same study revealed that top-performing purchase-to-pay organizations are leading the transition to more advanced solutions for fraud and error detection, including payments analysis tools, enabling more core ERP functionalities, and implementing an ongoing compliance monitoring solution (Fig. 3). FIG. 3 System functionality to detect and report recovery/error/fraud risks Source: Purchase-to-Pay Performance Study, The Hackett Group, 2015 Our research and work with clients also show that companies are increasingly deploying customer-facing technologies, which also play a role in preventing payment fraud. For example, supplier portals require vendors to enter and maintain all of their master data records (e.g., name, address, tax ID and bank routing information) so that information can be automatically verified by comparing the details to external databases. Meanwhile, e-invoicing solutions build an additional barrier by eliminating paper invoices and facilitating three-way matching of purchase orders, receipts and invoices. Both supplier portals and e-invoicing enable organizations to block unauthorized users upfront, and eliminate risks inherent in less codified processes such as triggering payments through internal email communications. The digital transformation of the payments process can also simplify the interface with financial institutions, by creating a common payments format and approval procedures. Finance must educate its bank partners about its internal policies and always keep and share its updated list of authorized users. 4. Consolidate the payments workflow: Many organizations maintain separate processes and oversight for treasury payments and accounts payable, and even within AP in different regions. To strengthen controls without hampering efficiency, finance needs to overhaul currently siloed practices to merge payments workflows using virtual payment factories, which pull all transactions from the ERP (AP) and treasury into a single processing engine equipped with the latest fraud-detection capabilities. By consolidating workflows, finance can standardize fraud prevention and detection practices that cover payment requests, initiation, approval, documentation and transmission. Further, by combining all payment activities, best-practice payments policies and procedures can be applied consistently across all forms of payment, in all geographies, by all staff involved in payments processes, and within specific payments systems. At the same time, finance can adapt more quickly to evolving bank interchange requirements, such as compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and Know Your Customer regulations. In addition, the payments process output can be reformatted to meet global banking requirements like those issued by SWIFT dealing with bank-to-bank and corporate-to-bank connectivity. 5. Employee education on fraud detection and prevention: Staff involved in the payments workflow must receive training on payments policies and procedures. That requirement should extend to employees responsible for recording vendor data in the company system. The curriculum should include practical information about when employees should escalate the incident before processing a payment. It should also encourage them to ask questions, for example when a vendor is unwilling to provide complete information (e.g., address or phone). Given that fraud risk and policies are constantly evolving, training should be conducted at least once a year. To be fully aligned with finance payments policies and procedures, employees must understand that fraud can originate from a variety of sources, for example, bogus but official-looking email instructions, which come from a web-based email account. It’s important to verify that the company’s domain is used in company personnel emails, and take a second look at domain names that are similar, but not identical, to the company’s official name. The “reply” option should never be used when authenticating emailed payment requests; rather, staff should be required to forward the request by typing in the address or selecting from an official company address list. Staff should never share passwords, user names, authentication credentials, or account information when contacted by employees or individuals pretending to work at a partner bank or a vendor. Conclusion and Recommendations Too often, payments fraud is not painful enough for companies to do something about it. In fact, some may not even realize it has even occurred. Nevertheless, as risks and costs rise, CFOs must be prepared to prove that fraud-prevention controls are embedded in their governance structure and are in line with internal compliance and risk policies. Here are three actions to minimize the risk of payments fraud: 1. Finance should not wait for a fraud incident or assume the organization is fully sheltered from fraud risk: Past actions to halt payments emanating from a specific fraud type may not suffice in other areas. Thus, finance must continuously update its controls and adapt to new fraud patterns. As cyber risk grows, collaborate with the IT organization to deploy new defenses. 2. Finance should conduct a baseline assessment of its payments-fraud defenses, develop a list of future/desired capabilities, and prioritize new initiatives: These include process redesign, consolidation of payments activities, and adoption of smart technologies and tools. 3. Finance must apply common fraud-prevention policies and procedures across the enterprise and for different payment types: A big step in this direction is consolidating activities in a payments hub or the company’s GBS organization and deploying smart technologies to standardize workflows and controls.   Interested in learning how to build out incident response programs to maximize protection end-to-end? Check out this on-demand webinar. Cybersecurity and fraud experts from Corelight and Kyriba outline fraud defense strategies.

Who are the biggest players in treasury and risk management, and how are cloud-based solutions driving transformation? IDC, one of the largest technology analyst firms in the world, tackles these questions and more in...

Who are the biggest players in treasury and risk management, and how are cloud-based solutions driving transformation? IDC, one of the largest technology analyst firms in the world, tackles these questions and more in its new MarketScape report: “Worldwide SaaS and Cloud-Enabled Treasury and Risk Management Applications 2017–2018 Vendor Assessment.”

Kyriba, the #1 global provider of cloud treasury and financial management solutions, today announced it has been named as a “Leader” in the IDC MarketScape Worldwide SaaS and Cloud-Enabled Treasury and Risk Management Applications...

Kyriba, the #1 global provider of cloud treasury and financial management solutions, today announced it has been named as a “Leader” in the IDC MarketScape Worldwide SaaS and Cloud-Enabled Treasury and Risk Management Applications 2017–2018 Vendor Assessment.