Going by normal convention, the maturity of any software can be measured by the number of years the product has been in existence. However for core banking, it is really worthwhile to think beyond chronology to determine maturity.
For instance, it is useful to “age” the solution by number of clients, geographies of operation and history of product versions. At the same time, it is also necessary to see how its stacks up against the competition. Last but not least, the solution’s inherent
attributes must also be seen as indicators of maturity, which means that ease and duration of implementation, technical infrastructure, usability and functionality are as, if not more important than longevity.
Unlike software products from Google or Microsoft, which don’t need much analysis to confirm their maturity or market standing, core banking solutions, which are comparatively low profile, need to be evaluated closely before their credentials can be established.
Also, the complexity of core banking software, the changing dynamics of banking, and the regulations imposed by Central Banks of different countries, necessitate more than superficial assessment.The evaluation also depends on the type of bank; Tier I, II,
III banks, credit unions, co-operative banks, and co-operative societies all have different needs.
While experts have analyzed core banking solutions based on multiple factors and given their recommendations, they are yet to take cognizance of maturity. It is fair to say that despite being implemented across the globe, core banking software is yet to
attain maturity. The challenges posed by the varying demands of different countries as well as by the changing regulatory requirements, make it hard for core banking to achieve a level of stability, which is the hallmark of a mature application.