Back End Platform and APRA issues


In the May investor update the status of the Back End Platform was coloured as Red/Yellow with the reason being regulatory concerns the APRA has with the cloud based platform the Xinja was looking at implementing.

Is it possible to get more details as to what the issues are and how Xinja will be working around them?


Would be interested as well, in hearing what alternative back-end platform Xinja has chosen.


As Voltbank just received their license, it would be interesting to know what systems they are going with.


Great Question! Thanks Max. In Australia there has not been a cloud based core banking system approved for use in an ADI to date. As a new business we have to balance the need for new technologies to serve our customers, and the cost of being the first through the regulatory door with new stuff, a process which naturally sucks up limited time and money resources. We can’t talk about this in too much detail yet as conversations are still ongoing, but I will say that APRA seem to be doing a great job in walking the line between protecting the security of the Australian Financial system and considering our new innovation. Remember we are seeking to bring some of the best innovation from around the world to Australia. Quite rightly that’s going to take a bit of time to review, assess and assure.


Hi James - thanks for the question. Hang on a few weeks and we will be announcing it! It’s not quite the right time for us commercially to let everyone know as we are still dotting i’s and crossing t’s with our partner.

Perhaps however, if it’s helpful I can paint the picture of how we made the decision.

When making a decision like this we have to decide what sort of a bank we want to be (NB Xinja is not a bank yet).

At one end of the scale there are the super innovative, completely new to Australia banking platforms like Mambu and Thought Machine out of Germany and London respectively. Personally I love these systems and believe they offer fantastic outcomes for bankers and customers, however they have never been approved for use in Australia.

At the other end of the scale you have the platforms that are already commonly in use in Australia. On the plus side they are well known by the regulators so don’t take long to get approved. They are solid, well resourced locally and easy to implement. Going with them is a valid decision, its the big bank, safe for shareholders option.
The problem for us, and this is only our opinion, is that if you build a neo bank using older technology that is exactly the same as every other legacy bank in Australia, what you end up with is a legacy bank squeezed into a digital platform.

We want Xinja to deliver brilliant customer experiences, be nimble, agile and low cost. We want to do things for our customers that will blow their minds with how cool and helpful they are. In our opinion you can’t do that with a core banking platform that’s from a previous generation. We have promises to keep to customers/investors and we can’t do that with legacy technology. We want to be the Monzo or Tesla of Australian banking. Not a mini Big 4 Bank.

Our chosen partner we hope strikes a really strong middle ground. Well established globally and well enough established in Oz to be acceptable to the regulator…but omg innovative, designed specifically for our business model and with the full weight of a global cutting edge software company behind it.

Are we right to go down this path? We hope so, but only time will tell.


It would!! (we’d love to know too :wink:)

1 Like

Those pesky sensible heads!

On a serious note though it’s good to see they are consulting.

Whilst it’s irritating to see Volt Bank get a licence, I have to be honest, I read it, saw the conditions and the amounts they’re allowed to accept… pretty uninspiring really, even with the ‘2 year lift’.

So personally, I don’t feel like it gained them much ground against Xinja. From a brand perspective I hadn’t really heard much of them.


I’m with @weeksy_j, I’ve heard more people over this side of the world mention Xinja than Volt.


Volt is using Temenos for their digital platform. This article has been released on the 23rd:


Well here’s the nice big pie on the face of APRA for suggesting that cloud-based product is a bad idea.

A power outage on a service in Melbourne taking down trading at an entire bank for 6 hours. If this isn’t a great talking point for APRA then what is…


@ranciliomike. It is interesting that they went with Temenos. This is certainly something we considered early on, but we were concerned that it was too confined by traditional banking frameworks and thinking. Obviously that’s just our opinion, and I am sure the good folks at Termenos would have a very different, well argued, point of view. At Xinja we started by working out what sort of approach we needed to take that would allow us to make a bank that put our customer’s needs at the core of everything. A bank that can break free of the way we have been taught to think about banking. It’s been a journey but we believe we are striking a great balance between adopting newer, more modern ways to deliver Xinja, while satisfying the needs of our regulators. Watch this space… :slight_smile:


Quite frankly, regardless of how long it takes, it’s been an asset to Xinja that neither ASIC nor APRA have covered themselves in glory being active regulators from what has transpired in the Royal Commission.

It lends far more weight to the argument that I’m sure Xinja is making - “If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got”…

Bring on the next generation of tech.


Never heard of them…

1 Like

And probably still won’t. Not for a while.

1 Like

It’s been more than a few weeks - when the announcement on the core banking provider ?


Hey T, not much longer now! Sorry I can’t be more specific. After we announce it we’ll be doing a blog piece on just why it’s so important to choose the right one :wink: Do you have any thoughts on core banking in general?