Introduction
What constitutes an effective fintech software development company’s case studies?
If you are exploring hiring a fintech software development provider, then you will no doubt see an abundance of “case studies” from fintech software development services providers claiming they have done the following solicitation based on some self-proclaimed hype:
- “We developed a mobile banking application.”
- “We created user-friendly features through UX improvements.”
- “We met the client’s expectations.”
These are all well and good, but they do not assist in helping the founder or C-level executive respond to the only questions that matter:
- Will this provider meet the criteria set forth under the strict scrutiny imposed by fintech?
- Nevertheless, will it be a reliable, safe, and compliant provider that will provide an opportunity to obtain objective information regarding the success of their applications?
- Finally, do they measure success by way of results, or just by ending the task associated with feature delivery?
Therefore, in the realm of fintech software development services, an effective case study serves as; Supporting evidence of the thought process employed by a development team, examples of the level of risk-taking that was employed in developing an application and if the development team can achieve a level of measurable success, while simultaneously meeting all of the constraints imposed by the ‘real-world’ (security controls/compliance/integrations/audits/service level agreements/time).
This article will provide an overview of what should be included in an effective fintech software development service case study, along with a general outline for what can be provided to prospective vendors for use as a reusable template (that will permit a founder – with limited technical knowledge to determine how successful a fintech software development service provider is, in a very brief amount of time).
Why are fintech case studies needed to be raised to a higher standard level?
Fintech goods do not exist in an environment where we “move fast and break things”. Fintech goods are conducted under the following set of requirements:
- Identity verification and onboarding difficulties (KYC/AML)
- Payment facilities and very strict integration contracts and agreements
- Operational hazards and incident management readiness
- High levels of secure access control (especially in regulated locations)
- High level of security confirmation which may be linked to standards [OWASP ASVS].
When a servicer/vendor presents you with a “case study” the analysis you perform is more than just reviewing the design of the product as you are looking at their ability to deliver secure, predictable, and measurable products in the reality of fintech.
An effective case study should answer the following three evaluation questions:
- Will they build the proper product? (product/Domain understanding)
- Will they build the product properly? (security/compliance/quality)
- Will they build the product with dependable results? (Value delivery method, Value purchase record, sales volume metrics).
What should be included in a meaningful fintech case study
Here are some things to check when evaluating a fintech app development company’s case study. If many of these items are missing, this is usually a red flag.
1. Clearly define the problem, not just the solution.
A good case study should start with a clear description of the business problem:
- What is the customer? (bank, payment service provider, fintech start-up, marketplace with payments, etc.)
- What was the broken or missing user journey?
- What KPI or operational pain caused this project?
Strong examples:
- “Customer had a drop-off of 62% during onboarding due to the manual KYC process requiring customers to re-enter the same data over and over.”
- “Customer had a 28% increase in chargebacks after they expanded into a new area.”
- “Customer was taking 2-3 days to reconcile settlements and using Excel spreadsheets to do so.”
Weak examples:
- “Customer needed an application.”
- “Customer needed a digital wallet.”
If the fintec case study does not clearly articulate the problem, the vendor likely did not own the problem, or did not measure the problem.
2. Context and limitations (the part most suppliers conceal)
This is the area in which the “real world” appears. A true case study contains information regarding the limitations of how the fintech operates; these limitations contain the following information:
- Regulatory/compliance: This encompasses regulatory requirements, including recommended amendments to PSD2 legislation (such as data retention and audit readiness).
- Security: The general security requirements (the threat model, the authentication approach, the encryption requirements, verification requirements, i.e, ASVS standards)
- Integration: The integration environment includes core banking systems, payment gateways, card processing, and KYB/KYC service providers, and fraud tools.
- Timing: Timing includes fixed launch dates, investor deadlineand s, and migration timings.
- Legacy/legacy issues: Legacy issues involve monolithic solutions, brittle APIs, and a lack of documentation.
- Operational: Operational requirements include 24/7 support, SLAs, on-call, and incident playbooks.
This is where you will see if they actually have shipped product in the fintech space, as fintech is predominantly about the limitations placed on them.
3. The strategy (how decisions were made)
Look for decisions based on history, not just work.
A strong case study describes:
- How they ran discovery (i.e., workshops, user flows, risk registers, backlogs)
- What they focused on and the reasoning behind it.
- When you see decision tradeoffs occurring (scope vs timing vs risk).
If you are looking for an example of what a good discovery process will look like, we have two posts in our hhistoryf which we often get shared internally from both founders and product leads regarding:
A vendor that is unable to demonstrate a trade-off is more likely just reacting.
4. Architecture (not elaborated on – but enough detail to not eliminate)
You don’t want a 30-page picture in the public case study, but it has to be done in a way to show there wasan understanding of fintech-grade architecture by the team.
For a solid case study, we need:
- high-level system diagram (even simple)
- data boundaries (PII, financial data, logs)
- Key services/modules (auth, ledger/wallet, payments, notifications, admin, reporting)
- Integration points and reliability strategy (retries, idempotency, queues)
Bonus points if it explains:
- How they approached audit trails and reporting
- How they handled areas with high risk (payments initiation, refunds, chargebacks)
- What they did for observability (logs, metrics, alerts)
If the case study mentions the word ‘microservices’ with no definition of boundaries or how it mattered, then consider it buzzword architecture.
5. The security and compliance posture of a fintech vendor is non-negotiable.
A case study detailing how a vendor implements baseline secure delivery practices should include:
- Threat modeling/risk review
- Code reviews & CI checks
- Dependency scanning/secrets management
- Testing strategy (unit, integration & regression)
- Penetration testing readiness/remediation loop
- Basic incident response procedures
To provide a benchmark of what secure enough means, a highly recognized web services and applications verification framework called OWASP ASVS is used widely throughout the industry.
Operating under PSD2 security expectations (that includes multi-factor authentication) for EU-based payment service transactions requires that organizations have delivered upon those expectations when making business decisions.
For more information about how we implement Secure SDLC in Fintech Delivery, please read: Secure By Design: How To Build Fintech Apps The Right Way.
6. Quantifiable results (numbers, not descriptive terms)
This is where the majority of the “Case Study” options fall short.
A great Case Study has a clear outcome stated in before-and-afterer format and connects the result back to the original problem. Example Of Case Studies Include:
Results from Products
- % Completion of Onboarding: 38% → 61%
- Time to First Transaction: 2 days → 20 Minutes
- % Monthly Active Users for all 3 months: +24%
Results from Operations
- Manual Reconciling Time: 2 Days → 2 hours
- Support Tickets Every 1,000 Users: -35% (less than 1/10th)
- Average MTTR for all Incidents: 90 Minutes → 25 Minutes
Results from Security/Risk
- High or Critical Vulnerable Findings After Pen Test: 17 → 3
- Fraud Rate as % of Transaction Volume: -18%
- Chargeback Ratio is Lower than Target Threshold
If you cannot measure your results, ask what you measured as you delivered your resource. If the only answer is that you measured the velocity, then you are not fintech mature.
7. Things to learn from (proof of maturity)
The best examples from studying find examples that weren’t perfect or would have been,n and make changes as a result of what went wrong.
- e.g., “We didn’t do enough testing for the vendor’s sandbox environment, so now we are doing contract testing and using a staging environment.”
- e.g, “the first version of KYC flow had too many steps and too much friction, so we improved the process and added progressive disclosure.”
- e.g,.We learned that the process for handling refunds had edge cases; therefore, we added idempotency keys and reconciliation checks to the process.”
A vendor who has only documented successful implementations (wins) is either being disingenuous in discussing the reality of their experiences as a vendor or simply has not had enough experience as a vendor to document any failures.
Red flags: “case studies” that should lower your level of trust
If you’re going through a vendor website and notice the following signs, you need to consider them as red flags:
- No constraints listed (no mention of regulatory compliance; no mention of security; no mention of any integration; no mention of audit).
- No numbers listed (only “they improved”; “they optimised”; “they streamlined”).
- No clarification on the differentiation of roles (did they do a full end-to-end build or just supply developers?).
- No timeline for any of the deliverables – what duration did each deliverable take, and why?
- Stock screenshots that tell you nothing regarding the depth of the actual product
- Vague tech stack boasting with no rationale re: how the architecture will be used
How we think about case studies at Appricotsoft
Appricotsoft regards case studies as important pieces used to display the software we have created, while being honest about how it was developed.
We have a very high level of scrutiny in what we consider to be a case study.
A case study is not a trophy; it is an artifact of learning and a means to build trust with potential customers. Recognizing this, we prefer our case studies to demonstrate these key areas:
- A visible delivery rhythm (weekly demos showing progress with actual work completed).
- A single source of truth for communication of all decisions, risks, scope changes, and release checklists.
- The use of AI in conjunction with human ownership to achieve execution of project tasks (we believe that DKB will assist and support work,k but that people remain responsible for the resulting work product).
This third point is also a key component of our Unison Framework (AI assists with project delivery, but the result of accountability rests with the individual), particularly in relation to scope, design, security, and contractual obligations.
This also relates to those values espoused by Appricotsoft:
- Keep It Real (no drama, no speculation, no inflating expectations).
- Make It Awesome (the quality is not deferred until afterthe project.)
- Own It (delivery of results should be predictable and transparent).
If you are a founder in the process of evaluating vendors, you should not expect perfection; rather, you should expect transparency in the results of their work as provided by the case study.
Vendor Selection FAQs
Are case studies necessary for vendor selection?
Definitely yes when it comes to fintech because they are the best way to determine whether or not the vendor understands the requirements placed on them with respect to security, compliance, and integrations, and how they measure their success (outcomes).
What if the vendor can’t provide me with a case study orthe details are under an NDA?
This is not uncommon. However, if they are not able to provide you with details, consider asking them to create an anonymized version that includes each of the following;
- The constraints they operated within (i.e., security, compliance);
- Their architectural platform;
- The measurable outcomes they achieved (ranges are okay);
- The lessons they learned during the successful delivery of service.
How many case studies would you recommend I request from a vendor?
Typically, a vendor should be able to provide you with AT LEAST TWO case studies. One should be another vendor who received a product similar to what you are evaluating, and the other should be one that was developed under similar conditions,s transcending those conditions into a different vendor typology (i.e., bank vs. wallet).
Quick Tip
A successful fintech case study isn’t just an attractive piece of paper; it’s evidence of your ability to successfully execute projects despite limited resources (time, budget, etc.).
If you want one rule to remember: No constraints + no metrics = no value.
And if you‘d like to make vendor comparisons easy, send out the template above with clarity, outcome, and maturity scoring included in your evaluation of their responses.
If you’re in the process of selecting a financial technology (fintech) development partner currently or looking for some information on how we securely execute discovery and delivery please check out these two links about our processes: