Software capital is the moat in BaaS
Peter Hazlehurst and Kris Hansen, co-founders of Synctera, on BaaS in 2023
The real moat in BaaS is no longer just having a bank charter, it is having enough software capital to build bank grade controls and developer grade product at the same time. A bank that wants to compete directly has to fund engineers, compliance tooling, workflow software, and bank operations in parallel. That is why few sponsor banks have become true tech forward platforms, and why a middleware layer like Synctera can still matter even when banks like Cross River and Column have strong franchises.
-
Synctera describes the core problem as a dual build. Banks need systems to run the bank itself, then separate software to give fintechs APIs, dashboards, case management, and downstream visibility into FBO accounts. That is a large fixed cost before any one program scales.
-
The economics are thin enough that scale and capital matter. BaaS platforms share interchange with fintechs, banks, networks, and processors, while also carrying heavy engineering and compliance costs. That makes undercapitalized banks especially vulnerable, because they are funding software like a SaaS company on bank style margins.
-
The market has split into two workable models. Cross River and Column invest heavily to own the charter and the software stack in one place. Middleware players like Synctera instead spread software cost across many banks, then route fintech demand to whichever bank has the right risk appetite and capacity.
Going forward, the winners are likely to be either a small number of deeply capitalized infrastructure banks, or software platforms that aggregate many banks and make each one more productive. The middle ground, a normal community bank trying to become a modern fintech platform with limited software budget, looks increasingly hard to sustain.