Financial Institutions Sentiment Survey 2018 - Lloyds Bank · Financial Institutions Sentiment Survey 2018 UK economic and financial services sector sentiment 56% 4 2018: the year

By your side

Financial Institutions Sentiment Survey

2018

This year’s industry view: results and analysis

Financial Institutions Sentiment Survey 2018

Contents

2

Executive summary 3

Results at a glance 4

UK economic and financial services sector sentiment 6

2018: the year ahead 8

The future of the UK and Europe 10

Regulatory environment 14

Facing the future of technology 16

Cyber risk vs. cyber security 18

OLIVER KNIGHT

Managing Director, Head of Investors and Asset Managers,

Lloyds Bank Commercial Banking

MAX DONELAN

Associate Director, Client Experience,


TOM EDWARDS

Associate Director,Financial Institutions,


Contributors


Executive summary

Welcome to our annual Financial Institutions Sentiment Survey that explores the topics that will shape UK financial services throughout 2018. This year we canvassed the views of 107 senior executives across the broad spectrum of financial institutions that we serve, from asset managers and insurers to banks and private equity.

Amongst the headline results, executives are confident that the UK economy will remain resilient throughout 2018, with 48% expecting UK GDP growth to be similar to 2017. However, 70% of survey participants expect other developed nations that make up the G7 to experience stronger growth than the UK during 2018.

Many senior executives are worried about the effects of Brexit and this is causing significant uncertainty: 55% cite the effects of Brexit as a key concern for 2018, and a continuation from 2017 as the top risk for the year.

With negotiations between the UK and Europe entering phase two, there is some light at the end of the tunnel for UK financial services with political agreement to a transition period until December 2020. The EU has also proposed including appropriate market access after Brexit, based on existing regulatory equivalence arrangements. Last year, loss of market access due to Brexit was the biggest concern. It is no surprise that the subject still dominates UK financial services circles in 2018.

Despite the uncertainty, executives that we surveyed are still eyeing up growth opportunities versus defensive strategies. ‘Organic growth and expansion’ is once again identified as the top business priority (49%). This focus emphasises the capacity for expansion in current business models and markets.

While the post-financial crisis regulatory framework is now largely set, the industry still faces significant implementation challenges. Regulatory implementation was once again called out as a key risk in 2018: 58% of executives pointed to the volume of regulatory change as being their major concern.

That said, we have seen a softening of views on certain types of regulation. Last year, 42% of respondents told us that capital reform had gone too far. However, since the revelations that certain elements of completing Basel III capital rules were easing, views have softened, with 32% now believing capital reform has gone too far.

Technology continues to be a key focus for many financial institutions. Here at Lloyds Bank, we recently committed to investing £3bn in technology as part of our new three-year strategic plan. On an annual basis, this is as much as all FinTech companies invested in the UK last year.

Firms are continuing to invest and develop tech in-house (35%) and through partnerships (26%) versus acquisitions (9%). Cyber security continues to be a hot topic, with firms’ cyber security planning (87%) and spend (85%) up once again on 2017. This increased focus is working, with the vast majority (95%) confident that their firm could recover from a cyber-attack.

We will continue to collate views from across the broad spectrum of industry participants to provide timely insight. I hope you find this report useful. If you have any comments or questions please speak to your relationship manager.

ROBINA BARKER BENNETT

Managing Director, Head of Financial Institutions, Lloyds Bank Commercial Banking

Although there is still broad agreement that the UK’s economy will hold steady; firms are concerned that economic growth will be slower than in other advanced nations and that the UK will fall to the back of the G7 pack

3back to contents

Results at a glance


UK economic and financial services sector sentiment

56%

4

2018: the year ahead

Firms enter 2018 with a focus on growth opportunities

The effects of Brexit continue to be the number one risk to UK operations

70% of executives believe that UK economic growth in 2018 will be

weaker than G7 peers

70%

48% of respondents believe that UK economic growth will remain broadly stable compared to 2017

UK economic growth for 2018

2018 priorities

UK growth compared to G7

Firms’ performance Top risks for 2018

64% expect revenue growth for 2018, an increase of 3% on last year

69% expect assets under management to increase in 2018

64% 69% 49%

31%

39% 49%

Organic growth

Aquiring new clients

Focusing on new clients

Effects of Brexit

Economic uncertainty

Regulatory implementation

31%

55%

31%

56% 56% 48%

36%49%

31%31%

35%

49%

back to contents

88% expect the UK to remain the most prominent financial

services hub in Europe post Brexit

26% of respondents are considering shifting some

operations from the UK, compared to 19% in 2017

due to Brexit

The majority of firms are either developing tech in-house

or partnering with FinTechs compared to acquisition

95% of respondents are confident that their organisation can recover from a cyber-attack

87% of executives have increased firm’s cyber security

planning over 12 months


Technology

Regulatory environment

The future of the UK and Europe

Of the 26% that said yes, 57% expect to consider moving less than 10% of

UK operations

Frankfurt, Dublin and Luxembourg have been identified as part of respondents’ Brexit contingency plans

88%

5

Cyber

86% to move up to 30% of

operations 57% to

move up to 10% of

operations

26%

35%

Capital reforms and the conduct agenda are the biggest regulatory

challenges for 2018

believe that new capital regulatory requirements have gone too far

cite volume of regulation as a key challenge

58% 32%

26%

2018

19%

2017

DublinFrankfurt Luxembourg

Tech investment centred on improving customer satisfaction (49%); reducing operating costs

(49%); and improving cyber security (46%)

49%

49%

46%

49%

49% Develop partnerships and joint ventures

Develop internally

87%

95%

to contents

Given the unusually high economic and political uncertainty last year – not least due to Brexit and the new US presidency – the UK economy remained relatively resilient in 2017. The pace of economic growth picked up in the fourth quarter, with final year estimates in the range of 1.6% to 1.8%. This represents a mild slowdown from the 1.8% recorded in 2016 despite fears of a more dramatic slowdown in the run up to Brexit.

Looking further afield, the global recovery picked up pace in the second half of 2017, driven by faster growth in developed economies, which is set to continue into 2018. The Euro area saw broad-based acceleration of growth, while in the US, expansive growth is continuing, albeit slower than economists’ predictions. Unemployment continued to decline globally, with UK unemployment falling to a 43-year low and the EU’s unemployment rate reaching its lowest level in nine years.

Looking specifically at G7 developed nations – the UK was one of the fastest growing advanced economies in 2016 but dropped down the G7 rankings in 2017 and is expected to remain towards the back of the pack this year, along with Japan and Italy. The IMF1 consensus view now suggests that UK GDP growth in 2018 will slow to 1.5%. The UK’s OBR2 also forecast growth of 1.5% for 2018 in the Chancellor’s Spring statement in March 2018, revised up from 1.4%.

Firms surveyed this year are broadly in agreement with economists’ predictions and remain positive that the UK economy will continue to be resilient, avoiding a nose dive in the run up to the UK leaving the EU.

UK economic and financial services sector sentiment

Figure 1.

Real GDP growth change for G7 economies

Real

GDP

gro

wth

(A

nnua

l per

cent

chan

ge)

Figure 2.

How do you expect UK economic growth during 2018 to change relative to 2017?

0%

48%

29%

22%

1%

Significantly worsen

Worsen

Broadly unchanged

Improve

Significantly improve

1 International Monetary Fund 2 Office for Budget Responsibility

Source: International Monetary Fund


6

UK CanadaFrance Italy Japan GermanyUS

2016 2017 2018 forecast

1.8 1.81.6

1.20.9 0.7

2.2 2.12.3

3.0

2.0

1.0

1.81.91.71.5 1.5 1.5 1.5

1.11.5

back to contents

48% of respondents believe the UK will grow at broadly the same pace as 2017, with the balance of views expecting a worsening in UK economic growth. 2017 economic growth beat expectations, with views on 2018 showing the economy will remain resilient.

When asked how the UK economy would fare in comparison to G7 peers, the outlook is less positive: 70% expect G7 economies to see stronger growth than the UK in 2018. This represents a significant shift in sentiment over the past three years.

Focusing on UK financial services, we see a slight improvement on 2017. Over half (55%) of senior executives remain confident that the outlook for UK financial services will remain broadly unchanged and, while 27% expect growth to worsen in the sector, this is less than last year’s response.

Whilst expectation for growth in the sector is largely unchanged, interestingly optimism on the outlook for UK financial services has suffered – with 39% of respondents less optimistic for the future of UK financial services.

The lack of optimism coincides with Brexit continuing to preoccupy the country, where negotiations move into a second phase focusing on a new trading agreement after Britain leaves the bloc.

However, with revelations in March 2018 of an agreed 21-month transition period until December 2020 and the EU promising appropriate market access for UK financial services, a positive shift in optimism would be expected for the sector.

Financial Institutions Sentiment Survey data 2017 and 2016


7

Figure 4.

What is your expectation for growth in the UK financial services sector compared to last year?

Figure 5.

Over the past 12 months, has your outlook for the UK financial services sector changed?

42%

39%

18%

0%

Significantly less optimistic

Less optimistic

Stayed the same

More optimistic

Significantly more optimistic

1%

Significantly worsen

Broadly unchanged

Improve

Significantly improve

Worsen

28%

17%

55%

33%

23%70%

43%26%

4%

Figure 3.

How do you expect UK economic growth to compare with other G7 countries?

2016 2017 2018

Weaker than G7

In line

Stronger than G7

2017 2018

27%

55%

30%

50%

2%

0%

18%

0%

18%

0%

70% expect UK growth to be weaker than G7 peers, a significant shift in sentiment over the past three years

back to contents


2018: the year ahead

Despite the uncertainty, executives enter 2018 with growth in mind. It is apparent from the survey that there is a clear focus on growth strategies over defensive strategies and a sign that the sector is open for business.

Organic growth was the top business priority for the second year running with over 48% of respondents eyeing growth

in core business models and markets. M&A in the industry remains low, with the asset management and insurance sectors showing the highest potential M&A activity in 2018, albeit its priority moved down the pecking order compared to last year. Acquiring new clients (36%) again featured prominently and remained the second most significant priority as with last year’s survey.

A new priority for 31% of respondents is to focus on key existing clients. Many financial institutions have seen value in prioritising clients on the back of cost pressures impacting the industry and newly implemented regulations impacting returns for many client and customer segments. The same story continues from last year with the predominant focus remaining on organic growth within core markets and increased focus on clients.

Figure 6.

What are your firm’s top three strategic priorities?

Most significant

2nd most significant

3rd most significant

Organic growth

8

11% 12% 12%Acquiring new clients

13% 8% 9%Focusing on key clients

7% 16% 5%Expanding within core markets

2% 7% 6%

4% 4% 5%

2% 1% 6%

4% 10% 7%

3% 7% 11%

7% 9% 8%

4% 10% 8%

Introducing new products and services

Reducing fixed costs

Distributing earnings

Responding to regulation

Reducing operating costs

Improving core processes

1% 3% 5%

4% 1% 3%

2% 3% 2%

3% 0% 1%

0% 0% 3%

Increasing technology spend

Expanding into new markets

Mergers / acquisitions

Strengthening balance sheet

Investing in skills

Investing in sustainability

33% 7% 8%

back to contents

Most significant

2nd most significant

3rd most significant

Revenues

Figure 7.

Considering the performance of your UK operations, what do you expect to happen to the following areas in 2018?

Figure 8.

What are the top three considerations that pose the most significant risks to your UK operations in the next 12 months?


9

CostsAsset under

management (AUM)

28% 12% 15%

15% 11% 9%

16% 6% 3%

11% 10% 9%

6% 11% 8%

6% 5% 8%

4% 8% 6%

1% 7% 5%

1% 6% 3%

1% 1% 4%

1% 3%

1% 3%

4% 2%

1% 4%

1% 4%

1% 2%

3% 4% 3%

6% 10% 8%

Level of business investment in the UK

UK headcount

Cost of capitalReturn on equity

(RoE)

Increase

Stay broadly the same

Decrease

Looking at expected performance for UK operations across various metrics, we hear an optimistic tone: 64% of senior executives expect firm revenues to increase in 2018, up 3% from last year’s response, and 44% expect returns on equity to rise. In addition to the optimistic view on revenues, interestingly, 69% expect assets under management to increase.

Respondents broadly agreed that costs would remain constant. Just under half (45%) expect costs to remain flat, with the majority (58%) suggesting headcount will remain constant but over a third (37%) expect costs to rise.

Despite the agreement in December 2017 between the UK and EU to proceed to trade talks, executives’ concerns on Brexit have remained – 55% of respondents picked the effects of Brexit as the clear top risk for 2018, with many moving parts still in play. Once again, economic uncertainty and market volatility featured highly as with 2017, the latter perhaps unsurprisingly after the early equity and debt sell-offs in January.

Interestingly, the effects of regulation have returned to the fore, including both the threat of new regulation but, ahead of that, the burden of implementing existing reforms. The post-crisis regulatory framework is now largely set, with the final piece to the Basel III puzzle communicated in December 2017. However, there still remains a significant regulatory implementation challenge ahead in MiFID II, GDPR and many more.

Risks that see a clear drop in significance from 2017 include geopolitical uncertainty, cited by 39% of firms in 2017 down to 19% this year and increased market competition from 22% to 13%. Weaker demand for products and services is creeping up the list of potential threats, up by 10%.

As we heard last year, despite a complex trading environment, firms are optimistic about their own performance with a continued focus on organic growth strategies. The UK financial services sector has not been forced to retreat from growth.

64%

69%

37%

44%

24%

21%

18%

22%

22%

45%

35%

54%

76%

58%

14%

9%

18%

21%

22%

3%

24%

Effects of Brexit

Economic uncertainty

Regulatory implementation

Market volatility

Threat of new regulation

Weaker demand for products and services

Geopolitical uncertaintyCyber threats

Increased market competition

Significant asset repriceAccess to skilled workforce

Rate of technological change

Risk of higher inflation

Emerging risks (as yet unidentified and undefined risks)

Cost of financeSterling appreciation

Pension deficit

Sterling depreciation

back to contents

The future of the UK and Europe

Following an 11th hour deal on the UK’s withdrawal from the EU in December 2017, the European Commission authorised Michel Barnier’s task-force to initiate negotiations on the future trading relationship between the UK and EU. January arrived with anticipated optimism for many businesses. However, despite this, our respondents’ sentiment towards Brexit is no more optimistic: 62% of firms surveyed state that their attitude to Brexit over the past 12 months has remained the same with net 14% of firms less optimistic than 12 months ago.

This is a reflection of the number of Brexit-related financial services issues that the UK continues to face, foremost of which is maintaining access to the single market, which is a major source of concern for many executives. Respondents told us that loss of passporting and cross-border access was their biggest concern (48%), followed by lack of regulatory equivalence (25%) to access the single market.

This trajectory is exacerbated when firms were asked about the outlook for UK financial services. The optimism has overwhelmingly shifted with 39% of respondents less optimistic on the outlook of UK financial services. The balance of views is net 22% less optimistic for 2018.

However, with revelations in March 2018 of an agreed 21-month transition period until December 2020 and the EU promising appropriate market access for UK financial services, a positive shift in optimism would be expected from the sector.




10

Figure 9.

Over the past 12 months, how has your firm’s attitude to Brexit shifted?

Figure 10.

Over the past 12 months, has your outlook for the UK financial services sector changed?

62%

42%

25%

39%

11%

18%

1%

1%

1%

0%



Less optimistic

Less optimistic

Stay the same

Stay the same

More optimistic

More optimistic

back to contents

Confidence that the UK will remain a prominent European financial hub, however, is high with 88% of respondents expecting the UK to remain the most prominent European financial hub post-Brexit.

It is well understood why financial services in the UK has flourished over the years. In our Financial Institutions Sentiment Survey 2016 respondents told us that the UK has the appropriate skills, market and financial infrastructure firmly in place. The British regulatory and legal framework is referenced numerous times by senior executives when asked why they thought that the UK would hold on to its position, with the current framework stable and often gold-plated compared to other jurisdictions.

Respondents were equally certain that ultimately a deal will be struck with the EU, and that appropriate financial services needs would be addressed in the deal.

Senior executives that responded to the survey suggested that due to the sheer size of the UK financial services industry, there is no credible peer that could replace the UK. The only viable option would be a collection of financial centres as opposed to one dominant hub.

There has been much speculation that financial institutions will depart the UK post-Brexit over fear of a loss of financial services access to the single market. Financial institutions have been hedging


11

Firms’ efforts remain focused on tactical and operational changes needed to continue to serve clients, rather than wholesale strategic changes

back to contents

against the worst case outcome on market access. In last year’s survey we found that just under a fifth (18%) surveyed had plans in place to shift activities away from the UK to other countries, with many respondents having not formalised their plans yet.

Since then, we have seen an 8% increase in the number of firms considering moving, or who have moved operations to other countries, and a similar reduction in the number who said they were undecided on this. This indicates that those who are not considering moving are not changing their minds, but those that were undecided seem to lean towards a decision to move some of their operations.

Respondents’ efforts continue to focus on tactical and operational changes needed to serve clients, rather than wholesale strategic changes. Of those 26% of executives moving operations from the UK, 57% are to move less than 10% of operations, with a further 29% to move between 11% to 30%. This trend of moving a small proportion of operations out of the UK remains from 2017.

When respondents were asked which cities they were considering, a range of financial hubs across Europe were indicated.

Frankfurt leads the way with 43%, whilst 36% of executives select Dublin. 32%, predominantly financial sponsors and non-EU banks, select Luxembourg. This perhaps reflects the fact that Luxembourg already acts as the international private banking hub for many banking groups. Banks also say that Luxembourg’s highly-developed funds industry is a major draw, with potential benefits in having close proximity to funds in which their clients want to invest.

Of those firms that have moved or are considering moving some of their operations, the majority only selected one location under consideration, indicating that many organisations already have a very clear idea as to the preferred new home for their migrated operations.


12

What proportion of your operations is to be moved?

Prop

ortio

n to

be

mov

ed

Figure 12.

Are you considering moving, or have you already moved, some of the operations that you currently undertake in the UK to other jurisdictions, as a result of the UK’s decision to leave the EU?

2017

2018

Yes

18%

26%

No

54% 54%

Undecided

20%

28%

Figure 11.

88%

0%

1% - 10%

11% - 30%

31% - 50%

50% +

57%

29%

14%

Frankfurt

Dublin

Luxembourg

Amsterdam

Zurich

Berlin

Brussels

Geneva

Madrid

Paris

Stockholm88% expect the UK to remainthe most prominent financial

services hub in Europepost Brexit

back to contents


13

Figure 13.

Which cities are you considering moving to?

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

7%

43%

36%

21%

32%

Note respondents could select multiple cities

43%

36%

32%

21%

7%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

Frankfurt

Dublin

Luxembourg

Amsterdam

Zurich

Berlin

Brussels

Geneva

Madrid

Paris

Stockholm

back to contents


Regulatory environment

2017 was a pivotal year for financial regulation, with many reforms either finalised or nearing completion for implementation in 2018. The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) finalised the much anticipated Basel III reforms, which focused on restoring credibility in RWA calculations and the comparability of banks’ capital ratios. As well as the capital agenda, banks and investment firms in Europe were gearing up for the roll out of MiFID II – designed to offer greater protection for investors and inject more transparency into all asset classes, from equities to fixed income, exchange traded funds and FX – that launched on the 3rd January 2018. Over the pond, Donald Trump signed an Executive Order in February 2017 for his administration to review financial services regulation. In particular Dodd-Frank, with Donald Trump quoted as saying he will “do a big number” on financial services regulation.

Policymakers were also busy finalising rules relating to the accounting standard IFRS9 that replaced IAS39 in January 2018. Though not a regulation, banks are now required to capture potential future losses earlier thus impacting CET1 ratios across the board. The EBA3 suggest that IFRS9 will impact CET1 by an average of 59 bps and up to 75 bps for 79% of banks in the its latest surveyi.

While the post-crisis regulatory frameworks are now largely set, the industry is still grappling with significant implementation challenges. As such, it is not surprising that the impact of regulatory implementation has been called out as a top risk for financial institutions again this year, overtaking the threat of new regulation.

We saw that 31% of respondents identified regulatory implementation as one of their most significant risks in 2018.

The proportion that mentioned the threat of new regulation dropped from 43% in 2017 to 24% this year, highlighting the shift in focus.

Executives clearly pulled out that their firms had been impacted the most by the volume of regulatory implementation, with the majority (58%) of responses citing volume as the major impact. This dwarfed the number that were more concerned with the mechanics of achieving compliance (such as availability of experts or ability to understand the regulations).

Reflecting on the appropriateness of regulation, the majority believe that the industry has got it broadly right across the key pillars of reform. Respondents’

opinions have softened on certain elements of the regulatory framework, particularly on capital and structural reform. Last year, 42% of respondents believed capital regulation had gone too far compared to 32% in this year’s survey.

We saw this with the softening of certain elements of the Basel III package which was announced in December 2017.

Looking to 2018, firms expect the greatest impacts to come from capital requirements (32%), conduct agenda (24%) and structural and resolution reform (23%). When compared with 2017, executives’ worries on structural and resolution reform have increased by 6%.

14

Figure 14.

What type of regulatory activity has impacted your firm the most in the past 12 months?

Volume of regulatory implementation

Complying with new regulation

Understanding new domestic regulation

Complying with existing regulation

Understanding other jurisdictional regulation

Hiring regulatory experts

Lack of international alignment

58%

7%

6%

20%

3%

3%

3%

i EBA provides its views on the implementation of IFRS9 and its impact on banks across the EU

3European Banking Authority

back to contents

Figure 15.

Thinking about post-financial crisis regulatory reform, do you perceive the following to have gone too far or not far enough?


15

Capital requirements

Liquidity requirements

Structural and resolution reform

Conduct agenda

Stress testing

Competition agenda (including measures to increase

transparency)

Capital requirements

Conduct agenda

Structural and resolution reform

Competition agenda (including measures to increase transparency)

Liquidity requirements

Stress testing

Figure 16.

Which area of regulatory reform has impacted your firm the most?

7%

65%

70%

66%

74%

77%

67%

32%

27%

31%

22%

20%

24%

3%

3%

3%

4%

3%

9%

Remaining % indicates ‘other’

2018

2017

32%

10%

1%

23%

17%

16%

30%

24%

23%

10%

3%

Not far enough Broadly the same Too far

back to contents


Facing the future of technology

It is no surprise that technology continues to be a focus for financial institutions in 2018 with firms set to invest more in technology in the coming years. In comparison to last year’s survey, many technology investment strategies have remained in place for 2018.

The top three investment strategies for 2018 are a continuation of trends seen in 2017, with improving customer satisfaction for the second year running being the primary driver for investment in technology, cited by 49% of respondents in 2018. This supports the earlier findings regarding strategic priorities that showed a focus on clients is of increasing importance in the financial services industry.

Figure 17.

Thinking about your 2018 technology investment strategy, what are your firm’s top 3 objectives?

Improving customer satisfaction

Top objective

2nd objective

3rd objective

13% 8% 11%

8% 10% 11%

2% 10% 9%

1% 2%

2% 7% 6%

4% 4%

3% 2%

14% 15% 20%

17% 22% 9%

14% 17% 15%

4% 12% 18% 26% 3% 11%

16

Reducing operating costs

Improving cyber security

Revenue growth

Enhancing existing offering

Improving regulatory compliance

Reducing fixed costs

Competing with peers

Entering new markets

Improving conduct

Competing with new entrants

Revenue growth was called out as the most significant area of technology investment for 2018, 6% higher than last year. Over the past 12 months, there has been a shift in how financial institutions approach the challenge presented by FinTech: 35% of executives surveyed were developing FinTech internally, which is 10% down on last year.

back to contents


Figure 19.

Between now and 2025, what level of technological change do you anticipate?

Technological change will continue to be manageable, but the speed of technological change will increase between now and 2025

There will be significant technological disruption and it will be very challenging to manage

Technological change will be manageable, and this change will be slower than the rate of change since 2010 to now

Technological change will be manageable, and will be at the same speed as 2010 to now

17

69%

Figure 18.

What is your firm’s approach to meeting the challenge presented by FinTech?

Develop internally

Develop partnerships and joint ventures

Under review

Nothing

Acquisition and capital injection

Outsource

35%

26%

15%

15%

9%

0%

2%

18%

11%

back to contents


18

Cyber risk vs. cyber security

Whilst technological enhancements have led to positive changes in how financial institutions operate, the pace and magnitude of change has created new risks: 46% of respondents called out that their firm’s technology investment strategy for 2018 is to improve cyber security.

The survey identifies that the risks of cyber-attack are now an established issue for financial services: 86% of respondents reported an increase or a significant increase in their concerns about cyber risk in the past 12 months. 87% increased planning, and 85% increased spend. Firms’ increase in

concern, planning and spend for cyber risk is translating to confidence and preparedness to withstand and recover from a cyber-attack: 75% of senior executives surveyed were fairly confident of withstanding a cyber-attack, with 20% very confident.

For those 20% of respondents that say they are very confident that they are suitably prepared to enable their company to recover from a cyber-attack, 93% are well prepared in terms of cashflow and liquidity impact analysis compared with 57% in the overall survey: 71% are well prepared in terms of contingency planning

with banking providers, compared with 39% in the overall survey population.

Protecting and countering cyber- attacks, whilst remaining up to date with evolving technology, continues to be a complex challenge for business leaders. As cyber threats evolve, it is essential that financial institutions continue to develop mitigation approaches and share learnings across the sector. There needs to be joint responsibility working with key partners and governing bodies to ensure we learn, adapt and ultimately reduce cyber-attacks across the industry.

Figure 20.

How has a) your concern, b) your planning and c) your spend in relation to the risks of cyber, changed over the past 12 months?

Concern

Planning

Spend

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%Significantly

increasedSignificantly decreased

Increased Stayed the same Decreased

23%

14% 14%

63%

73%71%

13% 12% 13%

1% 1% 0%0% 1%0%

back to contents

Figure 21.

Are you confident that your finance and treasury functions are suitably prepared to enable your company to recover from a cyber-attack?

Not prepared – unsure we’ve done anything Somewhat prepared – we’ve done something, but more to do Well-prepared


19

Scenario planning to size potential financial exposure

Cashflow and liquidity impact analysis

Contingency planning with banking providers (e.g. payments)

Contingency funding and capital raising

Cyber insurance

Figure 22.

Please can you give us a sense of what preparations your organisation has made to recover from an attack?

1%

5%

7%

9%

10%

54%

38%

54%

41%

38%

45%

57%

39%

50%

52%

Very confident

Fairly confident

Not very confident

Not confident at all

20%

75%

5%

0%

Of the 20% very confident to withstand a cyber-attack, 93% are well prepared in terms of cashflow and liquidity impact assessment

back to contents

This document has been prepared for information purposes only and must not be distributed, in whole or in part, to any person without the prior consent of Lloyds Bank plc (together with its affiliates, “Lloyds Bank”). This document should be regarded as a marketing communication, it is not intended to be investment research and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements to promote the independence of investment research and should not necessarily be considered objective or unbiased. This document is not independent from Lloyds Bank’s proprietary interests, which may conflict with your interests. The authors of this document may know the nature of Lloyds Bank’s proprietary interests or strategies; Lloyds Bank may engage in transactions in a manner inconsistent with the views expressed in this document; and Lloyds Bank’s salespeople, traders and other professionals may provide oral or written market commentary or strategies to clients which may conflict with the opinions expressed in this document. Securities services offered in the United States are offered by Lloyds Securities Inc., a broker-dealer registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

Any views, opinions or forecast expressed in this document represent the views or opinions of the author and are not intended to be, and should not be viewed as advice or a recommendation. Lloyds Bank makes no representation and gives no advice in respect of legal, regulatory, tax or accounting matters in any applicable jurisdiction. You should make your own independent evaluation, based on your own knowledge and experience and any professional advice which you may have sought, on the applicability and relevance of the information contained in this document.

The material contained in this document has been prepared on the basis of publicly available information believed to be reliable and whilst Lloyds Bank has exercised reasonable care in its preparation, no representation or warranty, as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information, express or implied, is given. This document is current at the date of publication and the content is subject to change without notice. We do not accept any obligation to any recipient to update or correct this information. Lloyds Bank, its directors, officers and employees are not responsible and accept no liability for the impact of reliance on, or any decisions made based upon, the information, views, forecasts or opinion expressed.

Lloyds Banking Group plc and its subsidiaries may participate in benchmarks in any one or more of the following capacities; as administrator, submitter or user. Benchmarks may be referenced by Lloyds Banking Group plc for internal purposes or used to reference products, services or transactions which we provide or carry out with you. More information about Lloyds Banking Group plc’s participation in benchmarks is set out in the Benchmark Transparency Statement which is available on our website.

This document has been prepared by Lloyds Bank. Lloyds Bank is a trading name of Lloyds Bank plc and Bank of Scotland plc. Which are both subsidiaries of Lloyds Banking Group plc. Lloyds Bank plc. Registered Office: 25 Gresham Street, London EC2V 7HN. Registered in England and Wales no. 2065. Bank of Scotland plc. Registered Office: The Mound, Edinburgh EH1 1YZ. Registered in Scotland no. SC327000. Lloyds Bank plc and Bank of Scotland plc are authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority under registration numbers 119278 and 169628 respectively.

Lloyds Bank plc, Singapore Branch is a bank licensed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore under registration number UEN S97FC5348G.

Important information

Lloyds Bank Commercial Banking provides comprehensive expert financial services to businesses of all sizes, from small businesses, through to mid-sized businesses and multinational corporations. These corporate clients range from privately-owned firms to FTSE 100 PLCs, multinational corporations and financial institutions. Maintaining a network of relationship teams across the UK, as well as internationally, Lloyds Bank Commercial Banking delivers the mix of local understanding and global expertise necessary to provide long-term support and guidance to its clients. Lloyds Bank Commercial Banking offers a broad range of finance beyond just term lending and this spans import and export trade finance, securitisation facilities and capital market funding. Product specialists can work with you to tailor products and services, including cash management, international trade, treasury and risk management services, to suit your individual needs. With a proven relationship approach to supporting businesses across sectors and regions, and with a comprehensive understanding of business needs, Lloyds Bank provides guidance to clients throughout the economic cycle.

About Lloyds Bank Commercial Banking

Please contact us if you would like this information in an alternative format such as Braille, large print or audio.

March 2018

lloydsbank.com/financialinstitutions

http://lloydsbank.com/financialinstitutions

Documents

Financial Institutions Sentiment Survey 2018 - Lloyds Bank · Financial Institutions Sentiment Survey 2018 UK economic and financial services sector sentiment 56% 4 2018: the year