What’s Breaking Big Data in Finance Sector

Featured Image

Financial teams often sit atop mountains of data—trades, transactions, documents—yet without structured pipelines, this data becomes a liability. Big data in finance it’s about building a transparent systems that withstand scrutiny from Basel III, GDPR, and SEC audits. 

What 2025 Audits Reveal About Financial Systems

In the context of the groundbreaking Financial Markets Regulatory Outlook 2025 by Deloitte EMEA, financial systems face three non-negotiable demands: Security, Support, and Simplification

As François Villeroy de Galhau, Governor of the Banque de France, framed it:

“The 2S’s – Security for the financial sector and Support for economic development. But there is a third S, which can help to achieve this compatibility: Simplification.”

Yet inside most FS firms, the operational core remains anything but simple.

Despite billions spent on compliance tech, many institutions still rely on fragile processes: Excel spreadsheets, hardcoded SQL queries, disconnected dashboards. These setups give the illusion of control—until regulators ask a simple question: Where did this number come from?

Snapshot Views Mask the Real Picture

Most financial dashboards show a single point in time. But big data in finance industry regulators now demand full historical transparency—what’s known as “data lineage.”

Without it, teams can’t prove how a transaction was calculated or reconciled.

In one audit, a Tier 2 bank needed seven days to locate the source of a misfiled number. After replacing fragmented scripts with an ETL pipeline based on Apache NiFi and metadata tagging, the delay dropped to 24 hours. Each data batch is passed through parser stages with rule-based classification, version control, and audit logging. Metadata was indexed in a lineage graph, allowing the compliance team to trace any value across time, model, and user interaction, without manual reconciliation.

According to the BCBS 239 benchmark:

“A decade after BCBS 239, very few global banks have achieved full compliance.”

The ECB has responded with action, not more guidance.

“The ECB… recently issued stricter guidance on risk data aggregation and reporting, signaling severe consequences if shortcomings persist.”

This isn’t just inefficiency—it’s regulatory exposure. Clean-looking data becomes a liability without traceability.

Legacy Processes Delay Detection

From missing trade records to delayed suspicious activity flags, manual checks don’t scale. Deloitte found:

“Two-thirds of large US banks are assessed as ‘less-than-satisfactory’… most of these issues relate to governance and controls.”

That means audit risk isn’t just about tech debt—it’s often leadership failure. Boards now face increasing pressure to show they actively oversee IT and risk reporting, not just sign off.

“Supervisors in both the EU and UK have proposed requirements that directly link executive remuneration to remediation of supervisory findings.”

Documents Stay Siloed and Unread

KYC documents, loan disclosures, and contract clauses often sit buried in PDFs. No classification, no tracking, no searchable tags. Deloitte notes:

“When infrastructure lacks audit paths, classification logic, and event-level visibility, even clean-looking data becomes untrustworthy.”

This is why regulators like the FCA are shifting focus:

“The UK’s FCA has called for urgent action… The review identified widespread weaknesses in fundamentals.”

The underlying message? You can’t fight fraud—or survive audits—if your documents can’t be interpreted, linked, or validated.

Compliance Requires Traceable Logic

Today’s big data analytics in financial industry regulatory climate sees fraud, compliance, and even AI governance as national security concerns:

“Safeguarding financial stability, combating financial crime, and integrating new technologies are increasingly intertwined with national security.”

Audit visibility is no longer optional. It’s a control function that regulators and boards expect as standard. That includes:

  • Logging every update
  • Explaining every change
  • Showing who touched what, when, and why

In 2025, regulators aren’t impressed by more dashboards or “AI-enabled” reports. What they demand is simple: proof.

And proof only comes from structure:

  • Structured data flows
  • Searchable documents
  • Versioned audit logs
  • Transparent governance

As Deloitte puts it, “data remediation must connect directly to strategic execution.” And fixing these it’s the foundation of risk culture and regulatory survival for big data analytics in finance.

In response, a growing number of data engineering consultancies now build systems where auditability is baked in, not added later. GroupBWT, for instance, helps financial institutions implement compliance-first workflows based on regulatory architecture—version control, data classification, access logging—aligned with 2025 supervisory demands.

Why Big Data Still Fails Financial Teams

Before big data analytics in financial services can deliver insight, it must survive operational reality: brittle pipelines, missing tags, and last-minute compliance fixes. And in 2025, the stakes are higher than ever.

Most financial firms have built analytics tools without fixing the underlying infrastructure. Deloitte notes that even clean dashboards are often backed by undocumented logic, unclassified documents, and no audit trail. This means what looks accurate on screen may still fail under regulatory scrutiny.

Legacy banks often process thousands of transactions per hour, but can’t always explain how one value was calculated, especially when it spans systems or formats. That’s why regulatory bodies now treat “untraceable data” not as a technical issue, but a governance failure.

To fix this, firms must build systems where auditability is a design input, not a post-facto patch. Without versioning, logging, and document traceability, even the most sophisticated reports remain legally fragile.

Big data analytics in financial assistance must evolve from performance-focused to structure-first. In an era where AI models influence decisions, explainability and traceability aren’t features—they’re requirements.

From Volume to Verifiability: What Finance Must Build Next

The conversation around big data use in finance is shifting—from how much you can collect, to how well you can prove what you’ve done with it.

Supervisors don’t want more insights. They want lineage: which model touched this data, which rule transformed it, which human approved it? That’s why storing raw data is no longer enough. Firms need event-level logs, classification rules, and access control across every document, model, and dashboard.

As Deloitte emphasizes, the weakest links aren’t analytics tools—they’re uncontrolled documents, manual checkpoints, and unclassified files. To survive a modern audit, your data must be complete, tagged, explainable, and reversible.

Big data in finance now means showing your work. The next generation of systems will be measured not by speed or scale, but by how well they prove what happened, when, how, and under whose authority.

What’s Next for Big Data in Finance

By mid-2025, regulators will have made one thing clear: fragmented, unverifiable data will no longer be tolerated. Compliance is no longer a reporting function—it’s a structural obligation.

Moving forward, financial institutions will face pressure on three fronts:

  • Regulatory depth: With BCBS 239 enforcement tightening, lineage, classification, and control will become baseline expectations.
  • Operational accountability: Boards will be directly tied to audit outcomes and remediation speed, as outlined in the latest EU supervisory proposals.
  • AI oversight: As more firms adopt automated decision-making, explainability and version control will define audit success or failure.

What does that mean in practice?

Firms must treat data not just as an asset, but as an obligation. From fraud detection to real-time pricing, the use of big data will shift from insight generation to compliance validation. The focus will move from volume to verifiability. From dashboards to defensibility.

Success will belong to those who build systems where governance is built in, not bolted on.

FAQ

1. How is big data used in finance?

Big data is used to detect fraud, manage portfolio risk, monitor transactions in real time, and comply with regulations like GDPR and Basel III. But in 2025, regulators now expect firms to explain how data is sourced, labeled, transformed, and reported. Without this structure, analytics may be seen as legally unreliable.

2. Why aren’t dashboards enough for audits?

Dashboards provide snapshots, not traceability. They often show outputs without version logs, change histories, or source trails. Auditors now require data lineage: proof of where a value came from and how it was derived. Without that, even correct numbers may be rejected.

3. What’s the minimum structure needed for compliance?

To meet today’s standards, institutions need:

  • Structured data ingestion with tagging
  • Document classification and searchability
  • Real-time logging and access control
  • Version history for all key data points

These aren’t enterprise extras—they’re becoming audit minimums.

4. How does AI regulation affect financial data?

AI models used in lending, insurance, or trading must now be explainable and traceable. That means storing model inputs, recording inference events, and versioning model updates. Without this, firms risk non-compliance under both AI governance rules and financial laws.

5. What makes big data analytics in finance different?

Unlike generic analytics, big data analytics in finance must operate under intense regulatory scrutiny. It’s not just about insights—it’s about legal defensibility. Every transformation, classification, and calculation must be documented and reversible. That’s what separates compliant systems from broken ones.

Receive afreecost analysis

In Touch
andy
andy
Sales Team
Online now
In touch
Call now
(779) 217-8932