The Central Bank’s requirement that financial institutions that are not officially banks stop using the terms “Bank”, “Banco” or “Banking” in their names and advertisements should force many companies to change their brands. and it led many people to wonder what will happen to the largest of these institutions, Nubank ().
The BC estimates that between 15 and 20 companies will have to make the change, a process that includes submitting a project to the regulator in 120 days and completing the changes in one year. The measure should have more impact, however, on smaller or newer fintechs, and could benefit large banks, assesses Eduardo Tomiya, founding partner of TM20 Branding and pioneer in the methodology for financial evaluation of brands in the country.
According to him, large companies like Nubank are already in another category of evaluation by consumers. “In the beginning, when fintechs emerged, there was always the issue of the customer being put off because it wasn’t a bank, but today, given the size and knowledge of the company, the end of the use of the term won’t have much of an effect,” he says.
Continues after advertising
Read more:
Valuable brand
Tomiya observes that, among the attributes that differentiate institutions and influence consumer choice, the issue of solidity ended up taking a backseat. Today, according to him, customers’ main concerns are with less bureaucracy, agility and technology.
“The fact of stopping using ‘Bank’ will not affect that much and Nubank should continue as the country’s most valuable brand in the sector”, he explains, citing the Most Valuable Brands in Brazil 2025 Award, made by TM20 in partnership with Brazil Panels and Elos Ayta and published by InfoMoney.
According to him, Nubank uses the term ‘Bank’ more as a qualifier, not a differentiator. “Nubank differentiated itself through other attributes”, he says. Therefore, people looking for the institution are not as concerned about its solidity.
According to Tomiya, the attribute of solidity in the category has lost relevance in recent years. “Solidity now enters another group, a lower level on the differentiation scale”, he explains. “Before, it was first.”
In the survey carried out by TM20 Branding and Brazil Panels with 500 consumers in five regions of the country for the ranking of the Most Valuable Brands, when asked which attributes most influence the preference of one brand over another, solidity, even stimulated by the survey, does not appear among the nine most important. The main attribute is trust in the brand, followed by close and welcoming service.
Continues after advertising
| Stimulated attributes | Importance in preference (%) |
| It’s a brand I trust | 17 |
| Close and welcoming service | 14 |
| Easy to use and complete application | 12 |
| Has low fees/no fees | 9 |
| That’s where I get my benefit | 5 |
| I receive profit sharing or cashback | 4 |
| It is technological and innovative | 4 |
| It’s easy to get credit loans | 3 |
| There is no bureaucracy | 3 |
Despite this, the BC’s measure should benefit the large banks, “since the issue of solidity has lost ground, but it is not negligible”, says Tomiya. “The evolution of fintechs has changed the Brazilian financial market, to the point where Itaú and Bradesco copied these companies seeking quick approval of credit, technology and facilities”, he adds.
Race to become a bank?
Tomiya considers that the BC measurement is important because it deals with an attribute that qualifies for the category. And, with the end of the use of the terms ‘Bank’ and ‘Banco’, new fintechs, which will enter now, or which are still in development, will lose out especially. “But the BC’s decision is legitimate, as these institutions are not banks”, he states.
He also expects there to be a rush of fintechs to ask the BC to become banks. “But, for a person who starts using a fintech today, with all the regulatory process, the issue of financial solidity loses a little importance for the category”, he adds.
Continues after advertising
End of confusion
For Luiz Trabuco Cappi, president of the Board of Directors of Bradesco (), the BC’s decision to limit the use of the term bank is correct. “If you incorporate the word bank into your logo, it can cause confusion that is not appropriate,” he said, during a bank event this Tuesday (2).
He also admits an asymmetry in the system in relation to banks and fintechs. “Not only in terms of minimum capital but also compliance and security, such as the issue of collective accounts” he stated.
Marcelo Noronha, executive president of Bradesco, thinks that the measure has a positive side because there is confusion among the population, but it should not change the market. “It just takes away a little of the confusion that people make, it doesn’t change much for the banks”, he says.
Continues after advertising
Affected companies are analyzing the measure
O InfoMoney looked for seven financial companies that use the term ‘Bank’ or ‘Bank’ in their names. Only two commented on the BC’s decision. The largest of all, Nubank, informed in a note that “it is analyzing the new determination of the Central Bank on the nomenclature of financial institutions”.
“We reinforce our historic and non-negotiable commitment to strictly follow all legislation and regulations in force in the country, respecting the deadlines and determinations of the monetary authority”, says Nubank, which is today one of the largest financial institutions in the country, but is not officially a bank.
The institution adds that it “further reinforces that the standard only concerns the name of the institutions and not the services provided” and that “it has all the necessary licenses to offer the products currently available on its platform”. “Our operations and the offer of our products and services continue normally, without any impact on customers.”
Continues after advertising
Stark Bank informed in a note that “it has already started evaluating the guidance recently published by the Central Bank on the terminology that should be used by institutions in the sector”, adding that “our operations have always been built on solid foundations of regulatory compliance and absolute respect for the rules of the financial system, and we continue to operate in this way, as we have done since the beginning”.
Pagbank, Bankly and Altbank Zro Bank did not respond or declined to comment on the measures. The report is still awaiting these returns and will include its responses as soon as they are sent.
Strict regulations for fintechs
There are, however, criticisms of the BC rule. Lawyer Felipe Franchi, president and founder of financial solutions fintech Franchi and guest professor at UNISINOS, questions the “normative excesses”, especially in the issue of prohibiting the use of the words ‘Bank’ and ‘Banco’ which, according to him, can cause more confusion than security for the consumer.
“Instead of protecting the consumer, it can open loopholes for underhanded practices or illegal operations disguised under other names,” he says. “In some cases, it could even be more coherent to require correspondents and BaaS (Bank as a Service) structures to make the term ‘Bank’ clear, precisely to avoid error or misinterpretation”.
For him, “perhaps the problem is the lack of stricter guidelines for the entry and operation of BaaS structures, which are essential to the modern financial ecosystem and play a legitimate role in expanding the supply of banking services in the country.”
