Overview

In 2012, regulators began to censure financial institutions and credit card issuers for certain practices related to identity protection offerings. After more than $2 billion in fines and settlements, the expectations of consumers and the institutions that seek to offer identity protection services (IDPS) have changed. In the interim, free credit scores have become a pervasive offering among major institutions. 

Unfortunately, this has muddied the waters at a critical juncture when consumers are increasingly looking to their financial institutions to help protect their identities. A return to identity protection in banking would benefit consumers and FIs alike, but the road to adoption is complicated by mixed messages and bad memories. 

This original report, sponsored by EZShield, examines the opportunity for financial institutions to offer identity protection services to their accountholders, in light of the fraud threats faced by digital-first consumers. With consumers facing a growing array of fraud threats, they are desperately in need of stewards that will help safeguard their identity and look to their financial institutions for help.

This research report was independently produced by Javelin Strategy & Research. Javelin Strategy & Research maintains complete independence in its data collection, findings, and analysis. 


Download Whitepaper


Please fill out the form below with a valid email address and ​we will email you a link to the whitepaper.




This research report was sponsored by:

EZShield



It was independently produced by:

javelin-strategy-research-logo


Methodology

Consumer data in this report is based on information gathered in several Javelin surveys administered in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017. Data was gathered and weighted to reflect a representative sample of the adult U.S. population:

  • A random-sample panel of 2,129 respondents in a December 2017 online survey. The margin of sampling error is ±2.12 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. The margin of sampling error is higher for questions answered by subsegments.
  • A random-sample panel of 5,000 respondents in an October/November 2017 online survey. The margin of sampling error is ±1.39 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. The margin of sampling error is higher for questions answered by subsegments.
  • A random-sample panel of 5,028 respondents in a November 2016 online survey. The margin of sampling error is ±1.40 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. The margin of sampling error is higher for questions answered by subsegments.
  • A random-sample panel of 3,100 respondents in a August/September 2015 online survey. The margin of sampling error is ±1.76 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. The margin of sampling error is higher for questions answered by subsegments.
  • A random sample panel of 3,100 respondents in an August/September 2014 online survey, the margin of sampling error is ±1.76 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. The margin of sampling error is higher for questions answered by subsegments.