Three in 5 Singapore banks still review fraud cases manually

75% of upgrade seekers are assessing behavioural biometrics and 20% plan to examine it.

Most banking leaders in Singapore believe their institutions’ fraud controls are effective, but 62% said their banks manually review fraud cases, one of the highest rates globally.

The survey found that 84% of respondents considered their fraud controls effective, with 77% describing them as very effective, according to a BioCatch survey. 

Confidence was broadly consistent across business functions, seniority levels and institution sizes.

Half of the respondents said their organisations usually complete investigations in less than a day, twice the global average.

Banks are also investing in new fraud prevention systems. About 35% of respondents said their institution was buying or implementing new technology, whilst 22% were evaluating vendors. 

The remaining 43% said their bank was considering future upgrades.

Behavioural biometrics, which analyses how customers interact with digital banking services, was the most common priority. Some 36% said their institution had already introduced the technology. 

Amongst banks considering upgrades, 75% were evaluating behavioural biometrics and another 20% planned to examine its use.

The survey also found that Singapore banking leaders were more concerned about the direct financial impact of fraud than its effect on reputation. 

Overall, 63% ranked financial risk as equal to or greater than reputational risk. 

This included 37% who viewed financial losses as the larger concern and 44% who considered both risks equally important. Another 19% placed greater weight on reputational damage.

Views differed by job function. Amongst respondents working directly in fraud, 76% identified financial losses as their main concern. 

This fell to 25% amongst those in financial crime roles and 0% amongst anti-money laundering staff.

Senior executives took a different view. About 59% of C-suite respondents considered reputational damage the greater risk, whilst 33% were more concerned about direct financial losses. The remaining 8% viewed both risks as equally important.