COMPETITION LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR THE FINTECH SECTOR IN TURKIYE COMPARED TO GERMANY

Meliksah Akturk
{"title":"COMPETITION LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR THE FINTECH SECTOR IN TURKIYE COMPARED TO GERMANY","authors":"Meliksah Akturk","doi":"10.17261/pressacademia.2024.1895","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose- This study's objective is to observe Türkiye’s fintech market structure by their competitiveness results. To get a better observation Türkiye compared with a fintech-developed country as Germany. The inconvenient definition of fintech caused this study to examine 4 massive fin-tech sectors. Especially current situation of the financial-technology market there are several branches. The study refrains from the engineering-intensive branches to serve its purpose. The study includes; Payments, Lending, Personal Finance, and Insuretech branches. We expect to observe the competitive dynamics for several branches.\nMethodology- The study selected the “entropy index” as a method. The entropy index shows the market depth for related sectors. It can be defined as a density analysis. We can make the index with at least 5 observations. However, the increase in the observation level causes the low-variance level index results.\nFindings- The study made its index by the top ten firms by their sales revenue level. The study observes the market in 5 branches. The conclusion part supplied 5 different density results. In that situation, observations can be seen more specifically for the market. The study used the entropy density index to observe the competitiveness level of the market. Results were multiple because the branches were divided from the sector. Every branch has its dynamics. On the Türkiye side, we expect fewer companies than in Germany. However, in the personal finance sector, we can observe the competitiveness levels are close. However, in this study, we can also observe high gaps between the sectors of insurance tech and lending. This study did not have the purpose of determining the factors behind them but the study tried to give political suggestions.\nConclusion- The density level for lending and personal finance sectors can be compatible with a high-fintech level company. For the insure-tech side, companies value and numbers are lower. The payment sector has more technology than the other sectors but the number of firms are lower than in Germany. We were expecting the competitive structure are not improve in Turkey because of the low-quantity firms. At some branches, we obtained the results that support this expectation. However, the view of the study observed that some branches has low competitive market structure when compared the Germany. But at some points, there are massive cliffs between the two countries. We can attribute the situation to the habits. The habits of technology meant. Especially on the insurance side, Turkey should improve itself. Türkiye should be getting more investment, subsidies, etc. in the sector of insure-tech and payment sector. Because their competition level is a risk to the country’s market structure. This study includes no detailed politics but suggests to subsidies and incentives from the government side. Government should support and encourage the new-entry firms or entrepreneurs for the sector of fintech.\n","PeriodicalId":517141,"journal":{"name":"Pressacademia","volume":"17 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pressacademia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17261/pressacademia.2024.1895","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose- This study's objective is to observe Türkiye’s fintech market structure by their competitiveness results. To get a better observation Türkiye compared with a fintech-developed country as Germany. The inconvenient definition of fintech caused this study to examine 4 massive fin-tech sectors. Especially current situation of the financial-technology market there are several branches. The study refrains from the engineering-intensive branches to serve its purpose. The study includes; Payments, Lending, Personal Finance, and Insuretech branches. We expect to observe the competitive dynamics for several branches. Methodology- The study selected the “entropy index” as a method. The entropy index shows the market depth for related sectors. It can be defined as a density analysis. We can make the index with at least 5 observations. However, the increase in the observation level causes the low-variance level index results. Findings- The study made its index by the top ten firms by their sales revenue level. The study observes the market in 5 branches. The conclusion part supplied 5 different density results. In that situation, observations can be seen more specifically for the market. The study used the entropy density index to observe the competitiveness level of the market. Results were multiple because the branches were divided from the sector. Every branch has its dynamics. On the Türkiye side, we expect fewer companies than in Germany. However, in the personal finance sector, we can observe the competitiveness levels are close. However, in this study, we can also observe high gaps between the sectors of insurance tech and lending. This study did not have the purpose of determining the factors behind them but the study tried to give political suggestions. Conclusion- The density level for lending and personal finance sectors can be compatible with a high-fintech level company. For the insure-tech side, companies value and numbers are lower. The payment sector has more technology than the other sectors but the number of firms are lower than in Germany. We were expecting the competitive structure are not improve in Turkey because of the low-quantity firms. At some branches, we obtained the results that support this expectation. However, the view of the study observed that some branches has low competitive market structure when compared the Germany. But at some points, there are massive cliffs between the two countries. We can attribute the situation to the habits. The habits of technology meant. Especially on the insurance side, Turkey should improve itself. Türkiye should be getting more investment, subsidies, etc. in the sector of insure-tech and payment sector. Because their competition level is a risk to the country’s market structure. This study includes no detailed politics but suggests to subsidies and incentives from the government side. Government should support and encourage the new-entry firms or entrepreneurs for the sector of fintech.
土耳其金融科技行业与德国竞争水平的比较分析
目的--本研究的目的是通过竞争力结果观察土耳其的金融科技市场结构。为了更好地观察土耳其与德国等金融科技发达国家的比较。由于金融科技的定义不便,本研究只考察了 4 个大型金融科技领域。特别是金融科技市场的现状有多个分支。为了达到研究目的,本研究不涉及工程密集型分支。本研究包括支付、借贷、个人金融和保险科技分支。我们希望观察几个分支的竞争态势。熵指数显示了相关行业的市场深度。它可以定义为一种密度分析。我们至少可以用 5 个观测值来编制指数。研究结果--本研究以销售收入水平排名前十的公司为样本,编制了指数。研究观察了 5 个分支市场。结论部分提供了 5 个不同的密度结果。在这种情况下,可以更具体地观察市场。研究使用熵密度指数来观察市场的竞争力水平。由于分支机构是从行业中划分出来的,因此结果是多重的。每个分支机构都有其动态变化。在土耳其方面,我们预计公司数量少于德国。不过,在个人金融领域,我们可以看到竞争力水平很接近。不过,在本研究中,我们也可以观察到保险科技和贷款行业之间的巨大差距。结论--贷款和个人金融行业的密度水平可以与高金融科技水平的公司相媲美。在保险技术方面,公司的价值和数量都较低。支付行业的技术含量高于其他行业,但公司数量却低于德国。由于企业数量较少,我们预计土耳其的竞争结构不会得到改善。在一些分支机构,我们得到的结果支持了这一预期。然而,研究结果表明,与德国相比,一些分行的市场竞争结构较低。但在某些方面,两国之间存在着巨大的差距。我们可以把这种情况归咎于习惯。这意味着技术习惯。特别是在保险方面,土耳其应该自我完善。土耳其应在保险科技和支付领域获得更多投资和补贴。因为它们的竞争水平对土耳其的市场结构构成风险。本研究不包括详细的政治内容,但建议政府方面提供补贴和激励措施。政府应支持和鼓励新进入金融科技领域的公司或企业家。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信