ABA 2020 Core Processor Survey Results

Banks’ relationships with their core providers are crucial to their ability to deploy the modern, innovative tools they need to compete in today’s marketplace. Member banks have indicated to ABA that their primary non-policy concern is their relationship with their core provider.

To address this concern, in December of 2018, ABA formed the Core Platforms Committee. The banker-led group has been working to identify areas of concern, educate ABA members on their options, and identify actions that can strengthen the relationship between banks and core providers so banks can deliver the innovative products and services customers want and need.

The committee met with 23 core providers and asked each to respond to direct questions in three key areas: APIs, data access and contracts.

ABA surveyed bankers in September 2020 to help gauge progress in these key areas and give us a better sense of bank-core provider relationships across the industry. The following is a summary of what we learned.

Executive Summary

The ABA Core Platforms Committee’s work brings attention to the issues experienced by many banks with their core providers and providing guidance on how banks and cores can work together to offer customers innovative solutions. A full 68% of responding banks are aware of ABA’s Principles for Strong Bank-Core Relationships. And most bank respondents said that the ABA Core Platforms Committee helped move the needle when it came to convincing their core provider to address outstanding issues and to managing their relationship going forward.

The average satisfaction score for core providers was 3.38 out of 5, with 25% of banks stating they will likely leave their core when their contract expires. Both are key indicators that core processor relationships have room to improve. When looking to the future, 80% said they would consider migrating to a cloud-based core. While reliability is the most valued attribute, banks noted separately that they have concerns with lack of efficiency and differences between valued attributes and what they are receiving.

The committee’s work is focused on three areas: data access, APIs and contract fairness, and banks responding to the survey gave their opinions on those three areas. Satisfaction levels of data tools and offerings available from core providers rated 2.8 to 3.2 out of 5, and rated 2.4 to 2.8 out of 5 for API offerings. Half or more of all responding banks said that third-party implementation fees, upgrade fees and termination penalties were the most problematic contract provisions experienced with core providers.

Download the survey to read the full text.