Executive Insights: Escode’s Key Takeaways from CeFPro 2025 Whitepaper

Operational resilience is evolving across financial services. Organisations are broadening their focus beyond individual processes to consider supplier stability, service continuity, and concentration risk.

Our 2025 whitepaper, supplier stability in operational resilience: follow-up insights and analysis, builds on last year’s research to provide a deeper view of how institutions are progressing. The results are telling, not because they reveal dramatic shifts, but because they highlight a steady evolution. Organisations are increasingly aware of the risks posed by third-party service providers, yet gaps remain between confidence in exit planning and the actual capability to execute it under stress.

It’s a reflection of where the sector stands: moving from awareness to action, from broad policies to tested, verifiable resilience strategies.

A Continuation of the Trend

One of the most striking findings is the continued trend first identified in our 2024 survey: while organisations are paying attention to resilience, the non-cyber risks of supplier failure, service deterioration, and concentration risk remain less developed in planning.

Supplier failure, whether through financial distress, technical collapse, or sudden withdrawal of service, can cause significant operational disruption.

The positive news is that more organisations are recognising these risks and starting to address them. But the survey results show confidence doesn’t always equal capability.

Confidence vs. Capability 

When asked about the completeness of their stressed exit plans, 59% of respondents described themselves as highly or somewhat confident. Yet when compared to last year’s results, confidence levels have shifted rather than strengthened. Many organisations remain neutral: not openly unconfident, but not ready to declare readiness either.

This suggests an industry at an inflection point. Many firms have plans in place, but the test of those plans, the ability to execute under pressure, remains uncertain.

The key takeaway: confidence built on assumption can be fragile, while confidence built on verification becomes a true measure of resilience.

Lessons Learned - or Still Being Learned?

Regulated entities are expected to be well into the “lessons learned” phase of stressed exit planning. Yet our findings show the process is still very much in motion. That’s understandable: building resilience isn’t a single project, it’s an evolving discipline.

The opportunity lies in moving from documenting exit plans to testing, validating, and verifying them. This is where concepts like verified escrow come into play, not as a tick-box contingency, but as a structured way to shorten the impact window of supplier failure. When escrow is tested and verified, organisations gain control that if a supplier falters, operations can continue with minimal disruption.

A Shift in Uncertainty

Compared to last year, there’s been a positive shift: fewer respondents reported outright unconfidence or uncertainty. In practice, that means more firms are developing frameworks, drafting exit strategies, and engaging with supplier risk beyond the basics.

The sector is moving in the right direction. The challenge now is ensuring those frameworks aren’t just theoretical but operational.

From Assumptions to Evidence

Real resilience depends on visibility, accountability, and verification. It’s about ensuring the processes on paper translate into executable actions in practice.

This is where the gap between “confidence” and “capability” must be closed. Escode’s perspective is that bridging this gap requires three things:

• Visibility – understanding where dependencies and risks sit within supplier relationships.
• Accountability – clarifying responsibilities internally and externally, so exit plans don’t break down under stress.
• Verification – testing the mechanisms (such as software escrow) that underpin continuity, rather than assuming they’ll work when needed.

When these elements come together, resilience stops being a static plan and becomes a living capability.

Why This Matters Now

The regulatory environment continues to tighten, with growing emphasis on operational resilience and third-party risk.

We can’t control the frequency of supplier failure. What organisations can do is reduce its duration, severity, velocity, and settlement. That’s where capability comes in, and where tools like verified escrow demonstrate their value.