Please rotate your device to landscape mode to view the charts.

Key Findings

Value to Innovators

FinTech innovations create substantial private value, with median value of $35 million compared to $2.3 million for non-FinTech financial innovations. Blockchain, cybersecurity, and robo-advising are the most valuable categories.

Industry Impact

IoT, robo-advising, and blockchain bring the highest value to financial sector, with median impacts of $18.3B, $11.6B and $6.1B respectively. However, some innovations like data analytics can have negative industry effects.

Competitive Dynamics

Disruptive innovations from FinTech startups have more negative industry effects, but market leaders can mitigate impact through R&D investment.

Private Value of FinTech Innovation Categories

  • Blockchain shows highest median private value at $98.1M
  • Cybersecurity and robo-advising follow at $52.9M and $49.1M respectively
  • Data analytics is the only category showing negative median value

Industry-Level Value Impact

  • IoT innovations show highest median industry value impact at $18.3B
  • Robo-advising creates $11.6B in median industry value
  • Data analytics shows most negative impact at -$5.9B

Innovation Activity Over Time

  • Blockchain shows fastest growth, rising from 5% to third-largest category by 2017
  • Cybersecurity share declined from 70% in 2003 to 52% in 2017
  • Mobile transactions increased from 4% to 22% over sample period

Contribution and Implications

  • First large-scale empirical evidence on value creation from FinTech innovation using patent data and machine learning classification
  • Documents how disruptive technologies from startups affect incumbent firms and industry structure
  • Shows importance of R&D investment by market leaders in managing technological disruption

Data Sources

  • Private value chart based on Table 7 showing private value statistics by FinTech category
  • Industry value impact visualization derived from Table 9 median industry effects
  • Timeline chart constructed from patent filing frequency data presented in Figure 2