Digital payments have become the basic infrastructure of the economy, which means that the load on the bank’s back office is growing faster than its technological contour has time to adapt.

According to the Bank of Russia, the share of non-cash transactions in retail turnover reached 83.4% at the beginning of 2024, and 70% of Russians used SBP only in the first quarter of 2025. Half of them paid for goods and services through it.
The law on commission-free transfers between individuals has given an additional impetus to the growth of digital channels.

For banks, this means one thing: digitalization is irreversible, and this increases the burden on processing, payment platforms, and the entire technological circuit. This is where the key vulnerability of the industry is revealed – a significant part of back-office systems are not designed for modern volumes of operations.

Monolith as a structural problem

From the outside, banking IT systems look reliable, but inside, many still represent a monolith architecture where calculations, billing, reporting, and tariff rules are linked into one array. Any change in the monolith jeopardizes the stability of the entire back office in the bank.

For a long time, this was not considered critical. Monoliths supported operational work and allowed to close regulatory requirements.
But the situation has changed:

• Transaction volumes are growing exponentially;
• Customers expect “real-time” service;
• The Central Bank is strengthening the requirements for sustainability, accountability and import independence.

Monolith stopped coping.
The increased workload is now directly affecting the quality of service, costs, and the bank’s ability to launch new products.

Import substitution as a risk factor

Under the sanctions pressure, technological dependence has become a systemic risk.
A scenario that was considered likely two years ago has become a reality today.:

• Foreign vendors are leaving or reducing support,
• Updates are becoming unavailable,
• Critical components cannot be replaced point-by-point.

The Bank of Russia, realizing the scale of the threat, is consistently strengthening its policy towards the transition to domestic technologies, from the infrastructure of the digital ruble to integration with the SBP and reporting requirements.

For banks, this means the need for choice:

• build up your own IT team (expensive and time-consuming),
• or switch to domestic back-office solutions with the support of external technology partners.

When the old architecture hits the ceiling

One of the industry’s cases is illustrative.
A large bank has reached the maximum capabilities of its own settlement platform – 30 million transactions per day.
The system was working, but at the limit: the slightest load surge threatened transaction delays and a violation of the SLA.

The bank had three options:

• expensive modification of existing software,
• purchase of additional servers (comparable in cost to the system),
• transition to a modular architecture with the possibility of flexible scaling.

The choice turned out to be obvious: modernization was not a whim – it became a matter of operational sustainability.

The risks for banks are obvious:

Why cosmetic improvements do not save

An attempt to “patch up” the old system – write scripts, add automation, expand capacity – only delays the problem.

1. Loss of efficiency

Many settlement and commission processes are still tied to manual operations. This slows down the work and increases the likelihood of errors.

2.  Lack of flexibility

Any tariff change requires the intervention of IT teams and multi-day testing.
The release of a new product may take months.

3. Zoom limits

The growth of the customer base increases the processing time of operations and the risk of errors.
Businesses have to limit their own growth in order not to “break” the system.

4. Risks of non-compliance with SLA

Failures in calculations are a direct blow to the trust of customers and partners, especially corporate ones.

5. Regulatory risks

Working on an unsupported stack threatens with fines and even license restrictions.

What should be a modern back-office system?

Settlements, commissions and mutual settlements are a critical infrastructure of the bank.
A modern solution must meet several key requirements:

• High-load architecture: the ability to process tens of millions of operations without degradation.
• Modularity: the ability to scale without stopping the system.
• Integration with all key systems: ABS, processing, reporting, SBP channels.
• Flexible pricing model: setting up commissions without the participation of developers.
• Automation of the setting: closing of the day, reconciliation, obligations between participants – without manual labor.
• Import independence: compliance with the requirements of the Central Bank and sustainability in the face of sanctions.

Whoever adapts faster wins.

It’s not about completely rebuilding the banking IT infrastructure.
In conditions of shortage of personnel and market pressure, those who are able to quickly switch to new technological solutions, especially pre-configured box systems, benefit.

This is a way for banks to:

• reduce costs,
• minimize risks,
• comply with regulatory requirements,
• and, most importantly, ensure the stability of operations.

Russian fintech is confidently moving towards microservice architectures, rapid testing, scalability and sustainability. This is not a trend, but a new operational norm.