Research

What can AI do in payments and finance operations?

Research on AI in payments and finance operations, published free: models tested on payments tasks, and what vendors offer for each process.

The research agenda

What

Which payments and finance operations jobs AI can do today, what its mistakes cost, and which vendors sell it for each process. The research covers work at merchants, acquirers, PSPs and fintechs under UK and European rules. It's written for the finance, operations and product leaders deciding whether to build or buy, and the risk teams who sign off the supplier.

Why

Payments firms are being offered AI agents for more and more of their operations, and new models and vendors arrive every month. Choosing between them means weighing what each gets right, what it costs at your volumes, how fast it runs, where your data goes, and what DORA and the EU AI Act ask of the supplier.

How

Each piece of research takes one process. A landscape scan finds the vendors that sell AI agents for it, compares them and gives a high-level view of how mature each agentic offering is.

Alongside the scan, a simple model test shows what a build could achieve and what it would cost to run, with frontier models tested next to open-weight models you can run on your own servers. Weighing the vendors against the effort to build points to one of three answers.

Buy

Vendors cover the process well, so the question is which one and what it has to prove.

Build

The gaps are too big, and the tests show which models can do the work and at what cost.

Hybrid

A vendor covers most of it, and the rest is built around it.

Read the testing method →

Latest research

The first paper tested 34 AI models on reading UK card acquiring statements, scoring every fee they got wrong in pounds against what each model costs to run. With good instructions, a model at half a cent a statement matched one at 25 cents.

With the expert prompt, all seven finalists got 0.07% of fees wrong or less
Plain promptExpert prompt
Cost per statement down the side, log scale, cheaper at the top. Fees wrong across, log scale, fewer to the right.
Cheap and accurateCheap, less accurateExpensive, less accurateAccurate, expensive$0.005$0.01$0.02$0.05$0.1$0.22%1%0.5%0.2%0.1%0.07%0.05%0.04%0.03%Claude Opus 5.5 (US · ZDR via Google)GPT-5.5 (US · ZDR via Azure)Grok 4.7 (US · ZDR direct)Gemini 3.8 Flash (US · ZDR direct)Mistral Large 3 (France · ZDR direct)GLM 5.3 (China · ZDR via Reka)DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (China · ZDR via third parties)
Cheap and accurateAccurate, expensiveCheap, less accurateExpensive, less accurate$0.005$0.01$0.02$0.05$0.1$0.22%0.5%0.1%0.05%0.03%Claude Opus 5.5GPT-5.5Grok 4.7Gemini 3.8 FlashMistral Large 3GLM 5.3DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
  • DeepSeek V4.1 Flash China · ZDR via third parties
  • GLM 5.3 China · ZDR via Reka
  • Mistral Large 3 France · ZDR direct
  • Gemini 3.8 Flash US · ZDR direct
  • Grok 4.7 US · ZDR direct
  • Claude Opus 5.5 US · ZDR via Google
  • GPT-5.5 US · ZDR via Azure

Seven finalists, round 2. Each arrow runs from the plain prompt to the expert prompt. The fees-wrong scale is stretched to the right of the 0.1% line. All runs used zero data retention (ZDR). Direct means the developer's own service qualified.

Cover of the white paper AI economics in fintech: reading card statementsWhite paper · PDFAI economics in fintech: reading card statementsDownload the PDF →

Bespoke work

I can run the same research on one of your own processes, or advise on whether to build, buy or combine the two, which model to use, and the record DORA and the EU AI Act ask for on how each model was chosen and tested.

Writing on AI

How to start

For custom research or advisory work, drop me an email and we can talk it through. Every piece of work is agreed in a fixed-price statement of work.

martin@scalepointpartners.com
Or connect with me on LinkedIn.