The simple Inntron listings and straightforward data summaries now cover 75 significant vendors of interest in the International (i.e. not US-centric) and Asian context. The core banking resource pages alone attract hundreds of visits daily, and analysis of the unique visitor activity data is proving interesting as an indicator for the market.

Keeping track..

FlexCube from i-flex solutions - which stayed at number 2 in a our tracking from when we started counting in 2004 up till April 2008, then slipped to #3 - is always in contention. Since late 2005, we expected them to benefit from the Oracle takeover. We also wondered whether "Oracle", which was seen as an occasional added generic "core banking" search term, will become less visible in other vendor literature? As of April 2008, Oracle Financial Services is the name for a series of products including Flexcube, Peoplesoft, Siebel, Oracle Financials. The OFS rebranding for i-Flex Flexcube probably means that i-Flex solution implementations must have Oracle database and Oracle middleware now (Fusion middleware).

The UK's AttentiV (Summit system) has been part of the Scandinavian group TietoEnator since 2005. We no longer keep AttentiV listed and ranked separately even though inquiries continue for that brand.

Trapedza was bought by Misys in 2006 and the BankFusion product was slated to be rolled up into BankMaster Plus.

SAP has continued strengthening their recognition and position and moved up from the middle of the ranks with help from the retail Deposits Management product. In September 2007, an alliance between SAP and Misys was formed to work on an offering based on Misys BankFusion (ex Trapedza). That could run on the SAP NetWeaver platform, include SAP components like GL and they could also merge SAP's CRM with Misys software for an enhanced retail banking offering.

Temenos held the number 1 position every month we tracked from 2004 to March 2008 (then in April 2008 Fidelity tied at No. 1). First time enquiries and questions about Temenos core banking software find us mostly through Google search engine using T24, CoreBanking (TCB) and the earlier Globus names as key search terms. All is not going well for them in Thailand though.

FNS activity slowed before... FNS, from Australia, was finally taken over by the big Indian, Tata Consulting Services (TCS) in late 2005. Interest picked up on the back of the larger set of resources available around the Bancs product under TCS Financial Solutions banner and TCS BaNCS branding.

Singapore's System Access updated their image and was trying harder though interest in System Access and SYMBOLS waned subsequently (2005-6). Then they were taken over by the US Sungard group in 2006.

Silverlake Axis (SIBS, and the Islamic version, SIIBS developer) have a presence on the internet as the source of those systems, and so do Silverlake Group (as an implementer). [see our core banking system vendor links] Silverlake group is touting a new Silverlake Core Banking Solution as implemented in 2008 in CBI in the UAE. There still are plenty of interested parties searching for Silverlake (mainly Asian, African and Middle East enquirers).

When the US core banking market looks for the Silverlake system, they probably want to find Jack Henry & Associates. But Asian vendor Silverlake Axis / Silverlake Group comes up first most times. The main US market home-grown core banking system players are Jack Henry, Metavante, Fidelity, Open Solutions, Harland Financial, and Fiserv CBS.

With all the acquired entities like Alltel, Sanchez, Kordoba and Aurum, the market could be excused for having trouble keeping up with Fidelity. They are growing in recognition internationally, and Profile is being seen more in the market. Fidelity hit Number 1 in April 2008. Searches are more frequently for a product name like Systematics and some inquirers still indicate they do not know of Fidelity. Some have the impression that Fidelity's Corebank is not moving. In September 2005, Computer Sciences Corporation (NYSE: CSC) and Fidelity Information Services (Fidelity), a division of Fidelity National Financial, Inc. (NYSE: FNF), announced they have formed an alliance for the marketing, maintenance and support of three of CSC's Hogan core banking system components. Under the 10-year agreement, CSC and Fidelity will also develop and market new Hogan offerings aimed at lowering banks' total cost of information technology (IT). Almost too many systems with one vendor for them to be good at them all?

We like the concepts behind SlaterLabs collaborative Microsoft .NET based approach to core banking. There are some interesting people behind it as well. Their Etude-Virtuoso programme aims to streamline the way customers evaluate, purchase, implement and upgrade their next generation of core banking software (over the internet).

Middle East bankers still look for the ICBS system... and are looking for the banking solution of that name from BML Istisharat and not Fiserv ICBS. We still wonder who is losing out most through the ICBS confusion?

How to fast track the evaluation of Core Banking Software solutions?

1. Document your needs at a High Level: What Country or Countries? Sector (Retail, Wholesale, Corporate, Private or Universal) Scale Indicators (Number of Branches, Accts, Transactions, etc) Any Platform Preferences (Your Current Environment or Unix, MS, z-Series, Oracle, DB2, etc.)

2. Contact Inntron for independent initial input and practical guidance that no vendor can give, and some big consultancies only do with significant bias.

>> for the rest of the 75 ranked core banking systems vendors see Core Banking Vendors and Systems

• Before going to vendor and system selection, ensure business requirements are reviewed and rationalized as required, and up-to-date, fully documented and ready. It is best to involve all the key business users in workshops to draw out details of all business processes and to understand the related logical data models. Draw out and filter down the fundamental, real business requirements through analysis. Compile proper policy (with O&M / Audit involvement) and standards-based specifications. The outcome could include business process mapping to fully chart the workflows and dependencies.
• Do not rush to selection and purchase and expect the vendor to do the business review and gap analysis efficiently for you and with you as part of the implementation project.
• Neither party should accept and contract "scope" that says "all business requirements will be delivered" without them being properly specified, understood and agreed at the detail level. Make sure all stakeholders agree with and buy into the project definition (particularly of Scope) and resource requirements (numbers, commitment, workload and time allocation). The Project management charter including issue management methodologies and responsibilities must be accepted and entirely understood before commencement.
• For a project in Asia, place a high value on vendor experience in Asia - experience adapting to and pushing through the difficulties to deliver working outcomes counts even if they are not all "flagship" case study results that are absolutely on-time and within-budget.
• Do not underestimate local differences, how "flexible" products and processes are, and local requirements generally (e.g. regulatory reporting).
• Do not underestimate the language and understanding issues. International vendor teams have to comprehend the details of the client requirements often only fully understood and presented in the local language. Translation to English (client to vendor) and reverse translation of recommendations or outcomes after analysis and review (vendor to client) add considerable time and resource requirements to a project.
• If you feel any of the above seem to be statements of the obvious, and not worthy of mention, then good for you. But all come out of real situations i.e. there have been actual examples where we have witnessed such things and our analysis, review and advice was taken as "news" to some key stakeholders in projects.