Finance
HSBC exec says there’s a lot of AI ‘success theater’ in finance
Big technology companies are betting that a new wave of smaller, more precise AI models will be more effective when it comes to the needs of businesses in sectors like law, finance, and health care.
Jaap Arriens | NurPhoto via Getty Images
LONDON — Increasingly many financial services firms are touting the benefits of artificial intelligence when it comes to boosting productivity and overall operational efficiency.
Despite bold statements, a lot of companies are failing to produce tangible results, according to Edward J Achtner, the head of generative AI for U.K. banking giant HSBC.
“Candidly, there’s a lot of success theater out there,” Achtner said on a panel at the CogX Global Leadership Summit alongside Ranil Boteju — a fellow AI leader at rival British bank Lloyds Banking Group — and Nathalie Oestmann, head of NV Ltd, an advisory firm for venture capital funds.
“We have to be very clinical in terms of what we choose to do, and where we choose to do it,” Achtner told attendees of the event, held at the Royal Albert Hall in London earlier this week.
Achtner outlined how the 150-year-old lending institution has embraced artificial intelligence since ChatGPT — the popular AI chatbot from Microsoft-backed startup OpenAI — burst onto the scene in November 2022.
The HSBC AI leader said that the bank has more than 550 use cases across its business lines and functions linked to AI — ranging from fighting money laundering and fraud using machine learning tools to supporting knowledge workers with newer generative AI systems.
One example he gave was a partnership that HSBC has in place with internet search titan Google on the use of AI technology anti-money laundering and fraud mitigation. That tie-up has been in place for several years, he said. The bank has also dipped its toes deeper into genAI tech much more recently.
“When it comes to generative artificial intelligence, we do need to clearly separate that” from other types of AI, Achtner said. “We do approach the underlying risk with respect to generative very differently because, while it represents incredible potential opportunity and productivity gains, it also represents a different type of risk.”
Achtner’s comments come as other figures in the financial services sector — particularly leaders at startup firms — have made bold statements about the level of overall efficiency gains and cost reductions they are seeing as a result of investments in AI.
Buy now, pay later firm Klarna says it has been taking advantage of AI to make up for loss of productivity resulting from declines in its workforce as employees move on from the company.
It is implementing a company-wide hiring freeze and has slashed overall employee headcount down to 3,800 from 5,000 — a roughly 24% workforce reduction — with the help of AI, CEO Sebastian Siemiatkowski said in August. He is looking to further reduce Klarna’s headcount to 2,000 staff members — without specifying a time for this target.
Klarna’s boss said the firm was lowering its overall headcount against the backdrop of AI’s potential to have “a dramatic impact” on jobs and society.
“I think politicians already today should consider whether there are other alternatives of how they could support people that may be effective,” he said at the time in an interview with the BBC. Siemiatkowski said it was “too simplistic” to say AI’s disruptive effects would be offset by the creation of new jobs thanks to AI.
Oestmann of NV Ltd, a London-based firm that offers advisory services for the C-suite of venture capital and private equity firms, directly touched on Klarna’s actions, saying headlines around such AI-driven workforce reductions are “not helpful.”
Klarna, she suggested, likely saw that AI “makes them a more valuable company” and was consequently incorporating the technology as part of plans to reduce its workforce anyway.
The result Klarna is seeing from AI “are very real,” a Klarna spokesperson told CNBC. “We publicize these results because we want to be honest and transparent about the impact genAI is having in the real world in companies today,” the spokesperson added.
“At the end of the day,” Oestmann added, as long as people are “trained appropriately” and banks and other financial services firm can “reinvent” themselves in the new AI era, “it will just help us to evolve.” She advised financial firms to pursue “continuous learning in everything that you do.”
“Make sure you are trying these tools out, make sure you are making this part of your everyday, make sure you are curious,” she added.
Boteju, chief data and analytics officer at Lloyds, pointed to three main use cases that the lender sees with respect to AI: automating back office functions like coding and engineering documentation, “human-in-the loop” uses like prompts for sales staff, and AI-generated responses to client queries.
Boteju stressed that Lloyds is “proceeding with caution” when it comes to exposing the bank’s customers to generative AI tools. “We want to get our guardrails in place before we actually start to scale those,” he added.
“Banks in particular have been using AI and machine learning for probably about 15 or 20 years,” Boteju said, signaling that machine learning, intelligent automation and chatbots are things traditional lenders have been “doing for a while.”
Generative AI, on the other hand, is a more nascent technology, according to the Lloyds exec. The bank is increasingly thinking about how to scale that technology — but by “using the current frameworks and infrastructure we’ve got,” rather than by moving the needle significantly.
Boteju and Achtner’s comments tally with what other AI leaders of financial services have said previously. Speaking with CNBC last week, Bahadir Yilmaz, chief analytics officer of ING, said that AI is unlikely to be as disruptive as firms like Klarna are suggesting with their public messaging.
“We see the same potential that they’re seeing,” Yilmaz said in an interview in London. “It’s just the tone of communication is a bit different.” He added that ING is primarily using AI in its global contact centers and internally for software engineering.
“We don’t need to be seen as an AI-driven bank,” Yilmaz said, adding that, with many processes lenders won’t even need AI to solve certain problems. “It’s a really powerful tool. It’s very disruptive. But we don’t necessarily have to say we are putting it as a sauce on all the food.”
Johan Tjarnberg, CEO of Swedish online payments firm Trustly, told CNBC earlier this week that AI “will actually be one of the biggest technology levers in payments.” But even so, he noted that the firm is focusing more of the “basics of AI” than on transformative changes like AI-led customer service.
One area where Trustly is looking to improve customer experience with AI is subscriptions. The startup is working on an “intelligent charging mechanism” that would aim to figure out the best time for a bank to take payment from a subscription platform user, based on their historical financial activity.
Tjarnberg added that Trustly is seeing closer to 5-10% improved efficiency as a result of implementing AI within its organization.
Cybersecurity and enterprise software stocks have been market dogs in 2026, with fears that AI will wipe out a wide range of companies in the enterprise space dominating the narrative. But they snapped a brutal losing streak this past week, joining in the broader market rally that saw all losses from the U.S.-Iran war regained by the Dow Jones Industrial Average and S&P 500.
Cybersecurity has been “a victim of some of the AI-related headlines,” Christian Magoon, Amplify ETFs CEO, said on this week’s “ETF Edge.”
It wasn’t just niche cybersecurity names. Take Microsoft, for example, which was recently down close to 20% for the year. Its shares surged last week by 13%.
A big driver of the pummeling in software stocks was a rotation within tech by investors to AI infrastructure and semiconductors and some other names in large-cap tech, Magoon said, and since cybersecurity stocks and ETFs are heavily weighted towards software companies, they were left behind even as those businesses continue to grow on a fundamental basis.
But Wall Street now has become more bullish with the stocks at lower levels. Brent Thill, Jefferies tech analyst, said last week that the worst may be over for software stocks. “I think that this concept that software is dead, and then Anthropic and OpenAI are going to kill the entire industry, is just over-exaggerated,” he said on CNBC’s “Money Movers” on Wednesday.
“Big Short” investor Michael Burry wrote in a Substack post on Wednesday that he is becoming bullish about software stocks after the recent selloff. “Software stocks remain interesting because of accelerated extreme declines last week arising from a reflexive positive feedback loop between falling software stocks and changes in the market for their bank debt,” he wrote.
The Global X Cybersecurity ETF (BUG), is down about 12% since the beginning of the year, with top holdings including Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, Akamai Technologies and CrowdStrike. But BUG was up 12% last week. The First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) is down 6% for the year, but up 9% in the past week.
Piper Sandler analyst Rob Owens reiterated an “overweight” rating on Palo Alto Networks which helped the stock pop 7% — it is now down roughly 6% on the year. Its peers saw similar moves, including CrowdStrike.
Performance of Global X cybersecurity ETF versus S&P 500 over past one-year period.
Magoon said expectations may have become too high in cybersecurity, and with a crowding effect among investors, solid results were not enough to to push stocks higher. But the down-and-then-back-up 2026 for the sector is also a reminder that when stocks fall sharply in a short period of time, opportunity may knock.
“Once you’re down over 10% in some of these subsectors, you start to see the contrarians start to say, ‘well, maybe I’ll take a look at this,'” Magoon said.
He said AI does add both opportunity and uncertainty to the cybersecurity equation, increasing demand but also introducing new competition. But he added, “I think the dip is good to buy in an AI-driven world,” specifically because the risks to companies may lead to more M&A in cyber names that benefits the stocks.
For now, investors may look for opportunity on the margins rather than rush back into beaten-up tech names. “I think investors are still going to remain underweight software,” Thill said.
But Magoon advises investors to at least take the reminder to keep an eye on niches in the market during pronounced downturns. “The best-performing are often the least bought and do the best over the next 12 months versus late-in-the-game piling on,” he said.
While that may have been a mindset that worked against the last investors into cybersecurity and enterprise software in mid-2025 when the negative sentiment started building, at least for now, it’s started working for the stocks in the sector again.
Meanwhile, this year’s biggest winner is also a good example of what can be an extended trade in either a bullish or bearish direction. Last year, institutional ownership of energy was at multi-year lows, Magoon said, referencing Bank of America data. “Reverse sentiment can be a great indicator,” he said.
But he cautioned that any selective buying of stocks that have dipped does have to contend with the risk that there is a potentially bigger drawdown in the market yet to come in 2026. That is because midterm election years historically have been marked by large drawdowns. “If you think it is bad right now, it could get a lot worse,” Magoon said. But he added that there’s a silver-lining in that data, too, for the patient investor. The market has posted very strong 12-month returns after midterm election drawdowns end. So, for investors with a longer-term time horizon and no need for short-term liquidity, Magoon said, “stick in there.”
Sign up for our weekly newsletter that goes beyond the livestream, offering a closer look at the trends and figures shaping the ETF market.
New innovation in the exchange-traded fund industry could come at a cost to investors during extreme conditions.
According to MFS Investment Management’s Jamie Harrison, ETFs involved in increasingly complex derivatives and less transparent markets may be in uncharted territory when it comes to violent downturns.
“Those would be something that you’d want to keep an eye on as volatility ramps up,” the firm’s head of ETF capital markets told CNBC’s “ETF Edge” this week. “As innovation continues to increase at a rapid pace within the ETF wrapper, [it’s] definitely something that we advise our clients to be really front-footed about… Lack of transparency could absolutely be an issue if we’re going to start seeing some deep sell-offs.”
His firm has been around since 1924 and is known for inventing the open-end mutual fund. Last year, ETF.com named MFS Investment Management as the best new ETF issuer.
“It’s important to do due diligence on the portfolio,” he said. “Having a firm that has deep partnerships, deep bench of subject matter experts that plays with the A-team in terms of the Street and liquidity providers available [are] super important.”
Liquidity as the real issue?
Harrison suggested the real issue is liquidity, particularly during a steep sell-off.
“We’ve all seen the news and the headlines around potential private credit ETFs. That picture becomes much more murky,” he added. “It’s up to advisors, to investors [and] to clients to really dig in and look under the hood and engage with their issuers.”
He noted investors will have to ask some tough questions.
“What does this look like in a 20% drawdown? How does this liquidity facility work? Am I going to be able to get in? Am I going to be able to get out? And if I’m able to get out, am I able to get out at a price that’s tight to NAV [net asset value], and what’s the infrastructure at your shop in terms of managing that consideration for me,” said Harrison.
Amplify ETFs’ Christian Magoon is also concerned about these newer ETF strategies could weather a monster drawdown. He listed private credit as a red flag.
“If your ETF owns private credit, I think it’s worth taking a look at, kind of what the standards are around liquidity and how that ETF is trading, because that should be a bit of a mismatch between the trading pace of ETFs and the underlying asset,” the firm’s CEO said in the same interview.
Magoon also highlighted potential issues surrounding equity-linked notes. The notes provide fixed income security while offering potentially higher returns linked to stocks or equity indexes.
“Those could potentially be in stress due to redemptions and the underlying credit risk. That’s another kind of unique derivative,” Magoon said. “I would very closely look at any ETF that has equity-linked notes should we get into a major drawdown or there be a contagion in private credit or something related to the banking system.”
What that means for consumer loans
Checks and Balance newsletter: Of God and MAGA
Why software stocks, 2026’s market dogs, have joined the rally
Armanino adds Strategic Accounting Outsourced Solutions
New 2023 K-1 instructions stir the CAMT pot for partnerships and corporations
