Close Menu
Invest Intellect
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Invest Intellect
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram Pinterest
    • Home
    • Commodities
    • Cryptocurrency
    • Fintech
    • Investments
    • Precious Metal
    • Property
    • Stock Market
    Invest Intellect
    Home»Fintech»What could go wrong when fintech over-rely on AI, and how to fix it: By Martin Lewit
    Fintech

    What could go wrong when fintech over-rely on AI, and how to fix it: By Martin Lewit

    August 6, 20256 Mins Read


    Financial services is one of the best-positioned industries to leverage all the benefits AI has to offer. From underwriting to fraud detection, FIs are data-rich
    and driven by document-intensive processes, precisely the kind that AI excels at streamlining. 

    It’s no surprise, then, that AI investment across banking, insurance, capital markets, and payments is projected to reach
    $97 billion
    by 2027. The shift is already well underway:
    59%
    of bank employees use AI tools in their daily work.

    But history has taught us that technological leaps, when used without foresight, can be a dangerous game. The
    algorithmic
    trading boom
    of the 1980s and 1990s saw automated systems promise faster trades, greater efficiency, and higher profits—and they delivered. But it also introduced a new kind of instability.
    High-frequency trading led to flash crashes and liquidity gaps, a byproduct of a model designed for speed over control. 

     

    The same risk looms over AI in financial services. The allure of efficiency, cost savings, and improved customer experience is real. But rushing forward
    without proper frameworks could expose fintechs to faulty outcomes, reputational damage, or regulatory intervention.

    Where AI fails

    Twenty years ago, people may never have guessed that today in banking, life-changing decisions like approving mortgages or setting credit limits would be
    decided by computers and algorithms. Yet a warning buried in a
    1979
    IBM manual
    feels more relevant than ever: “A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a management decision.” But today, fintechs are testing that boundary. 

    Biased decision-making

    AI is increasingly being used for lending decisions. Research has shown that up to
    40%
    of loan approvals now use AI analysis. However, AI is only as unbiased as the data it’s fed, which is fundamental when applying it to decision-making. If a model learns from historic patterns that are themselves incomplete or discriminatory, financial institutions
    can quickly find themselves automating unfairness at scale.

    Lack of human governance

    Fraud detection is another area where leaders might overestimate AI’s capabilities. AI is exceptionally fast and can handle enormous volumes of transactions,
    but fraudsters are using AI as well to bypass detection. Deloitte predicts that GenAI could enable fraud losses to reach
    $40
    billion
    in the U.S. by 2027. When teams over-rely on automation, it dulls human vigilance. And without clear oversight and escalation triggers, it delays detection of new schemes that fall
    outside existing patterns.

    Predicting unexpected anomalies

    Risk modeling may be where over-reliance is most dangerous. AI does a fine job of spotting trends in historical data, as it performs well with known patterns—but
    most financial shocks don’t resemble historical data.

    A stark example: during the COVID-19 pandemic, around
    35%
    of U.K. banks reported a decline in machine learning model performance. This was because the pandemic triggered an unprecedented economic disruption, one that couldn’t be forecasted by models trained on historical predictors or conventional macroeconomic data.

    AI is a pattern recognition tool, not a prophet, and fintech leaders must understand where AI’s accuracy ends and human oversight begins. In a sector where
    transparency is non-negotiable, AI and human-in-the-loop processes become essential, not optional.

    Building guardrails for escalation

    AI can outperform humans, completing complex tasks in mere seconds. But that doesn’t mean it should work without human oversight. AI is smart but not infallible.  

    There should always be a mechanism for human oversight when decisions directly affect a person’s financial well-being. As the IBM manual stated, computers
    can’t be held accountable. And when decisions are based on probabilistic AI models—as is often the case in financial services—negative outcomes are always possible, whether the decision-maker is a human or a machine.

    Therefore, fintech leaders must focus on
    human-in-the-loop designs
    and escalation frameworks to challenge biased decision-making, blind spots, and increase oversight. That means setting decision thresholds, such as confidence scores or counterintuitive outputs, as triggers for human review. If AI returns low confidence scores
    or denies a long-term customer a small credit increase, that’s a signal to escalate. 

    For example, bias can appear subtly through
    proxy
    variables
    . If an AI system used an applicant’s email domain and phone model to infer income or education when reviewing a loan application, that’s correlation masked as insight. These proxies
    frequently reflect socioeconomic biases, not true creditworthiness. A human-in-the-loop system should assign a low confidence score here, alerting a human reviewer to step in and override.

    For unexpected anomalies, like economic shocks, escalation frameworks must include monitoring for AI drift. If a system starts delivering inconsistent results
    across similar cases, especially during volatile periods, that’s a red flag. This indicates human intervention is needed and potential retraining of the model.  

    Escalation shouldn’t be seen as a failure; AI can assist, but it can’t self-correct bias, validate fairness, or anticipate the next
    black swan.
    These frameworks build accountability and keep regulatory risk in check. A well-governed system knows when to defer to human judgment to ensure decisions remain contextual and transparent. 

    Balancing speed with scrutiny

    Fast-scaling fintechs naturally want to move quickly, but they must build explainability into the process, not bolt it on later. Fintechs can’t build trust
    on “ethical debt” and should incorporate explainability tools to understand how AI models make decisions. These not only improve regulatory compliance but help communicate decisions and build customer trust.

    One tool is the SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP.) This helps detect and mitigate bias in AI decision-making by assigning each factor a score on how
    much it contributed to a decision. If AI denies a loan, SHAP can show how much income or employment status influenced the outcome. If unexpected factors rank highly, like address, that may point to bias that needs to be reviewed.

    Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME) supports human oversight by building a simple model for each individual prediction. Teams can then
    explain to customers a loan application was flagged, for instance, and share that a recent late payment influenced the decision. This model creates accountability and helps humans validate whether the model’s reasoning aligns with policy and fairness goals.

    Counterfactual analysis helps address unexpected anomalies by asking: What’s the smallest change that would have led to a different decision? For example,
    had this applicant earned $5,000 more, the model would have approved the loan. But if the answer is unclear, this could point to model instability, especially during economic shocks. 

    Meanwhile, regulations like the
    EU AI Act
    are institutionalizing the need for these safeguards. Fintechs using high-risk AI systems—like those used in credit decisions—must document model logic, monitor for drift, and allow human appeal. The law reinforces the need for fintech to manage bias, maintain
    oversight, and catch anomalies before they scale.

    In financial services, the danger lies in fintech leaders treating AI as a decision-maker rather than a decision-support tool. But those who use AI responsibly,
    blending innovation with a willingness to intervene and question, will be able to scale safely, building trust with customers and regulators.



    Source link

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email

    Related Posts

    Fintech hub off Yamuna Expressway to be called ‘International Finance Centre’ | Noida News

    Fintech

    Cardtonic expands fintech operations in Nigeria, Ghana

    Fintech

    Banks, fintech companies seek RBI guidelines to implement Online Gaming Act

    Fintech

    Unveiling Future Fintech and AI Trends in Mumbai, ETCIO

    Fintech

    Step-by-step guide to obtaining a FinTech License in Ghana

    Fintech

    80-year-old fintech giant’s analyst drops big Bitcoin prediction

    Fintech
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Top Picks
    Investments

    Exploring Art Investment Success: An Interview with Felix Valentine, Senior Art Advisor.

    Commodities

    Aelea Commodities IPO: Aelea Commodities IPO: Issue size, price band, GMP among 10 things to know

    Commodities

    “Grunge ruined the party. Do you want to be in a band to be boring? I don’t get it”: How Rob Zombie brought the schlock back with killer metal sequel Hellbilly Deluxe 2

    Editors Picks

    How Digital Currencies Are Accelerating Motorsports in 2025

    July 7, 2025

    First Property Group prévoit un bénéfice avant impôts supérieur aux prévisions du marché pour l’exercice

    April 22, 2025

    Drug kingpin back behind bars after £17m property empire seized. | UK | News

    April 6, 2025

    Saviez-vous qu’un roi faisait fabriquer ses tiges de métal dans le Cotatay ?

    June 6, 2025
    What's Hot

    Cryptocurrency Compliance Risks Statistics 2025 • CoinLaw

    June 24, 2025

    Digital Tenge is No Panacea, Says Kazakhstan’s Top Fintech Official

    March 31, 2025

    Mortgage Rates And House Price Forecast – Forbes Advisor UK

    July 11, 2024
    Our Picks

    Private equity investments in Indian real estate jump 38% to $2.4 bn in H1 2025

    July 10, 2025

    Is John Doe coming after Calypso?

    August 27, 2025

    une entreprise familiale spécialisée dans l’installation de panneaux photovoltaïques en Rhône-Alpes

    February 25, 2025
    Weekly Top

    Eric Trump sees bitcoin hitting $1 million, praises China cryptocurrency role

    August 29, 2025

    13 Best Stocks to Buy for Retirement

    August 29, 2025

    Legendary metal band plays smallest show in a decade at Northeast venue

    August 29, 2025
    Editor's Pick

    Ozop Energy Solutions, Inc. Taps SENSORWORX to Supply

    July 24, 2024

    Why is the Silver Surfer a Woman in Fantastic Four: First Steps?

    July 29, 2025

    Helvetia (CH) Swiss Property lève des fonds pour des acquisitions -Le 20 mars 2025 à 07:31

    March 19, 2025
    © 2025 Invest Intellect
    • Contact us
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms and Conditions

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.