trending
Financial institutions are entering a new era in which cyber risk and fraud can no longer be treated as separate battlegrounds.
As cybercriminals refine their tactics and operate with increasing agility, the traditional silos that have long defined fraud and cybersecurity teams are becoming liabilities.
A new executive brief from Datos Insights, prepared for Mastercard, underscores the urgency of integration—and the strategic gains already being realised by early adopters.
Criminal Agility vs. Institutional Inertia
Cyber fraud: FIs must rethink playbook
The study paints a stark picture: 78% of fraud and risk leaders say their organisation’s lack of agility is their top concern, noting that criminals are outpacing institutions in speed and sophistication.
Operational silos exacerbate this gap. Two-thirds of global leaders identify these divides as a critical challenge, with the issue particularly acute in North America and Asia-Pacific.
These silos are not accidental; they are remnants of legacy technology stacks—fraud teams working from transaction-monitoring platforms, cybersecurity teams from SIEMs and endpoint detection systems—joined only by fragile manual bridges.
The consequences of this fragmentation are significant. Sixty per cent of fraud executives learn of cyber breaches only after fraud losses begin to surface, and fewer than four in ten detect fraud patterns during that vulnerable window before notification.
In Europe and North America, as many as 44% of institutions lack formal integration processes altogether—an astonishing oversight in an environment of escalating threat.
Integration Delivers Tangible Gains
Despite the headwinds, the institutions pushing ahead with cyber-fraud integration are reporting measurable benefits. According to the research, 81% have accelerated their risk-response capabilities, with Europe and Asia-Pacific leading the performance curve.
Faster detection of account takeover attempts, improved card security, and enhanced threat intelligence are among the standout achievements. In some cases, fraud losses have fallen dramatically: one UK institution reported a 15-point improvement, while a Brazilian counterpart noted a 13-point gain.
The business case is reinforced by improvements in incident containment.
Seventy per cent of global institutions now resolve and triage attacks more rapidly, a shift attributed directly to integrated data flows and shared analytical insight.
Yet these gains remain unevenly distributed. Real-time or near-real-time sharing of cyber and fraud intelligence exists in only 27% of institutions worldwide, leaving a vast opportunity gap.
Threat Intelligence: The Untapped Accelerator
Cyber threat intelligence (CTI) emerges as one of the most powerful yet underutilised levers. Although nearly three-quarters of institutions have procured CTI tools, most lack the integration necessary to translate intelligence into actionable fraud prevention.
In Asia-Pacific, 83% of leaders cite this problem, pointing to brittle infrastructures and inconsistent data standards. Meanwhile, 16% of global institutions have no CTI feed at all—a striking vulnerability.
A Strategic Imperative, Not a Technical Upgrade
The findings make one message unmistakably clear: integration is as much an organisational challenge as a technological one. Lack of cross-domain talent, limited executive alignment, and uncertainty over suitable solution classes are among the top barriers to progress.
But the direction of travel is inevitable.
As fraud and cyber threats converge, institutions that fail to integrate their defences will fall behind—operationally, financially, and reputationally.
The institutions investing now are not just reducing losses; they are building a shared risk ecosystem fit for the modern payments landscape.
Comments