People

Neobanks 'will prove to be quite counter-cyclical': Varo CEO Colin Walsh on the future of banking

The neobank is about to become the first to get a U.S. banking license, and Walsh is optimistic about its prospects.

Varo CEO Colin Walsh

Varo CEO Colin Walsh says that while there are thousands of banks, "you have a huge segment of the population that's not being served well by them."

Photo: Courtesy of Varo

Five years after launch, Varo Money is set to become the first digital banking startup to receive a fully fledged banking license. Varo currently offers a zero-fee bank account and high-yield savings account, but has to do so through its sponsor bank, Bancorp. With a license, it'll be able to offer those products without anyone else's involvement — alongside new, previously off-limit offerings like credit products.

If all goes to plan, Varo will be the first digital-only bank able to offer a full suite of banking products, differentiating it from peers such as Chime and MoneyLion in the increasingly competitive neobank market.

Last month, Varo received FDIC approval, satisfying "the most onerous conditions" on the path to becoming a full bank, its CEO Colin Walsh told Protocol. Ahead of its license being granted (which it expects this quarter), Protocol spoke to Walsh to discuss the hurdles neobanks like his face in the U.S., as well as the company's competitors and what coronavirus might mean for its business.

This interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.

How much of a role do you think regulation has played in the success of U.S. neobanks?

I think it plays a huge role. Working with a sponsor bank, there's only so much you can do in terms of the breadth of product. The regulator doesn't want to permission the full range of consumer banking products, because that just entails lots of risk — operational risk, compliance risk — that could be very challenging for a sponsor bank to manage if they were trying to offer a full suite of consumer banking products.

In order to get a charter, you have to go through a very rigorous process to demonstrate that you actually have the risk, and controls, and the expertise to be able to manage across that whole suite of products. And so I think part of the lack of really big challengers yet in the U.S. — and I say yet, because it'll be game on once we have our full national bank charter — is that the regulatory process is really complex. You have to invest a ton of money; it's not an easy undertaking, it's taken us over three years. And so I think that's a real barrier to entry.

In the U.S., they're like: "Look, we've got thousands of banks, why would we need new challengers?" Now my argument is: You might have thousands of banks, but you have a huge segment of the population that's not being served well by them. And so therefore you do need to bring in innovators that can actually cost-effectively and profitably serve these customers. And they're listening, that argument has resonated with the regulators now. But that being said, they haven't made the process any easier.

What will you be able to do once you are licensed as a bank?

When we open up the bank, we'll be able to have a full suite of credit products. So everything from credit cards and installment loans, and home equity lines, and new savings products such as CDs and robo-investing. We'll be able to offer joint and household accounts; we'll be able to accept wire transfers. There's a whole series of things that we'll be able to do as a bank, that are really challenging to do as a fintech that's working with a bank sponsor.

How will no longer having a sponsor bank affect your margins?

In a very positive way. Because if you imagine, to have a partner that's taking a huge part of your revenue — the economics of being a standalone bank, particularly with a fully digital platform, is a significant step change.

How has the presence of digital offerings from big banks — that can compete with your products — affected traction?

I think that a lot of customers, in particular customers that are more financially well-off, they're very well served by the banks today. So they have neat product offerings, they've invested a lot of money in good mobile apps. They have rich reward programs. Consumers who are fairly financially well-off are very well served by the incumbents. I think that there's a large group of consumers that have not been terribly well-served, but they want to bank with a bank — going back to this point that actually being a bank matters, they need credit cards and they need mortgages, and they need to send wire transfers, and they are married and need joint accounts, and all these things. And so there really hasn't been an option for that group of consumers.

And then there's a group of consumers that are pretty financially vulnerable. They're working with payday lenders and check-cashers and prepaid cards. And those are the customers that players like Chime are able to attract, because their product offering solves a problem for these customers, but they're not as sensitive to wanting that full scope of products that a bank will bring, and they're probably more willing to to move their business to someone like a Chime.

How do you feel about Goldman Sachs's Marcus, the company's high-yield digital savings account?

Marcus is going after a different segment. It's going after that more financially healthy customer; they're more of a product business than a relationship business. They have high-yield savings accounts, they have installment loans, now they're talking about a checking account. But we started right from the beginning, trying to focus on a specific customer segment, and being able to build a relationship — starting with checking and savings and getting into credit and so on and so forth — and focusing on a group of consumers that the banks are not serving well, but they want to have a bank, and they want to have a bank that's going to meet the wide range of their needs. I see us playing in different spaces as Marcus. We're really going after the everyday middle-class consumer. Marcus is going after a higher-income customer and slightly different segments for its different product lines.

For us right now it's a really interesting, open field because no one has the technology capabilities that we have, in terms of being truly digital and the modern, sophisticated tech stack that we've built, alongside of having a really wide breadth of products to offer consumers. We will be sort of a new breed player, so to speak, in the U.S.

So you feel as if you don't have much competition?

Lighter competition. I think everybody — like the J.P. Morgan Chases, the Citibanks, the Goldman Sachses and the Bank of Americas … and then you've got SoFi, and Robinhood, and Wealthfront — they're all going after that higher-income millennial group, and kind of middle- and upper-middle class, wealthier consumers. I think that kind of core middle-class consumer who's seen their budgets stretched over the last two decades, they haven't seen much wage growth, they've seen their housing expenses go up, their medical expenses, huge amounts of student debt — these people that are just feeling more financially squeezed and really trying hard to stay in the middle class. That's the customer that Varo is going after. They're not wealthy, but they're ambitious and they've got goals, and they want to get ahead, and they don't feel the banks are supporting them.


Get in touch with us: Share information securely with Protocol via encrypted Signal or WhatsApp message, at 415-214-4715 or through our anonymous SecureDrop.


The economy isn't looking great, to say the least, from the fallout of the coronavirus pandemic. Is there anything you're particularly worried about on the horizon?

There's just a lot of uncertainty still that has to play out. But I think that in a down cycle, a proposition like what we offer — eliminating hundreds of dollars of fees, helping people structure their budget by giving them their paycheck early, and giving them free overdraft services, giving them tools to save money and incentivising them to save money, giving them access to credit products — these are all things that become even more valuable to consumers in an economic cycle. And so I actually think that companies like Varo will prove to be quite counter-cyclical, and the demand for these products will continue to grow.

Climate

This carbon capture startup wants to clean up the worst polluters

The founder and CEO of point-source carbon capture company Carbon Clean discusses what the startup has learned, the future of carbon capture technology, as well as the role of companies like his in battling the climate crisis.

Carbon Clean CEO Aniruddha Sharma told Protocol that fossil fuels are necessary, at least in the near term, to lift the living standards of those who don’t have access to cars and electricity.

Photo: Carbon Clean

Carbon capture and storage has taken on increasing importance as companies with stubborn emissions look for new ways to meet their net zero goals. For hard-to-abate industries like cement and steel production, it’s one of the few options that exist to help them get there.

Yet it’s proven incredibly challenging to scale the technology, which captures carbon pollution at the source. U.K.-based company Carbon Clean is leading the charge to bring down costs. This year, it raised a $150 million series C round, which the startup said is the largest-ever funding round for a point-source carbon capture company.

Keep Reading Show less
Michelle Ma

Michelle Ma (@himichellema) is a reporter at Protocol covering climate. Previously, she was a news editor of live journalism and special coverage for The Wall Street Journal. Prior to that, she worked as a staff writer at Wirecutter. She can be reached at mma@protocol.com.

Sponsored Content

Great products are built on strong patents

Experts say robust intellectual property protection is essential to ensure the long-term R&D required to innovate and maintain America's technology leadership.

Every great tech product that you rely on each day, from the smartphone in your pocket to your music streaming service and navigational system in the car, shares one important thing: part of its innovative design is protected by intellectual property (IP) laws.

From 5G to artificial intelligence, IP protection offers a powerful incentive for researchers to create ground-breaking products, and governmental leaders say its protection is an essential part of maintaining US technology leadership. To quote Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo: "intellectual property protection is vital for American innovation and entrepreneurship.”

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.
Workplace

Why companies cut staff after raising millions

Are tech firms blowing millions in funding just weeks after getting it? Experts say it's more complicated than that.

Bolt, Trade Republic, HomeLight, and Stord all drew attention from funding announcements that happened just weeks or days before layoffs.

Photo: Pulp Photography/Getty Images

Fintech startup Bolt was one of the first tech companies to slash jobs, cutting 250 employees, or a third of its staff, in May. For some workers, the pain of layoffs was a shock not only because they were the first, but also because the cuts came just four months after Bolt had announced a $355 million series E funding round and achieved a peak valuation of $11 billion.

“Bolt employees were blind sided because the CEO was saying just weeks ago how everything is fine,” an anonymous user wrote on the message board Blind. “It has been an extremely rough day for 1/3 of Bolt employees,” another user posted. “Sadly, I was one of them who was let go after getting a pay-raise just a couple of weeks ago.”

Keep Reading Show less
Nat Rubio-Licht

Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter.

Climate

The fight to define the carbon offset market's future

The world’s largest carbon offset issuer is fighting a voluntary effort to standardize the industry. And the fate of the climate could hang in the balance.

It has become increasingly clear that scaling the credit market will first require clear standards and transparency.

Kevin Frayer/Getty Images

There’s a major fight brewing over what kind of standards will govern the carbon offset market.

A group of independent experts looking to clean up the market’s checkered record and the biggest carbon credit issuer on the voluntary market is trying to influence efforts to define what counts as a quality credit. The outcome could make or break an industry increasingly central to tech companies meeting their net zero goals.

Keep Reading Show less
Lisa Martine Jenkins

Lisa Martine Jenkins is a senior reporter at Protocol covering climate. Lisa previously wrote for Morning Consult, Chemical Watch and the Associated Press. Lisa is currently based in Brooklyn, and is originally from the Bay Area. Find her on Twitter ( @l_m_j_) or reach out via email (ljenkins@protocol.com).

Policy

White House AI Bill of Rights lacks specific guidance for AI rules

The document unveiled today by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is long on tech guidance, but short on restrictions for AI.

While the document provides extensive suggestions for how to incorporate AI rights in technical design, it does not include any recommendations for restrictions on the use of controversial forms of AI.

Photo: Ana Lanza/Unsplash

It was a year in the making, but people eagerly anticipating the White House Bill of Rights for AI will have to continue waiting for concrete recommendations for future AI policy or restrictions.

Instead, the document unveiled today by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is legally non-binding and intended to be used as a handbook and a “guide for society” that could someday inform government AI legislation or regulations.

Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights features a list of five guidelines for protecting people in relation to AI use:

Keep Reading Show less
Kate Kaye

Kate Kaye is an award-winning multimedia reporter digging deep and telling print, digital and audio stories. She covers AI and data for Protocol. Her reporting on AI and tech ethics issues has been published in OneZero, Fast Company, MIT Technology Review, CityLab, Ad Age and Digiday and heard on NPR. Kate is the creator of RedTailMedia.org and is the author of "Campaign '08: A Turning Point for Digital Media," a book about how the 2008 presidential campaigns used digital media and data.

Latest Stories
Bulletins