RBI makes financial information easier to access for you: Account Aggregators to work across platforms, w

What has the RBI changed about Account Aggregators and Consolidated Account Statements (CAS)?

The RBI has introduced two connected changes. Account Aggregators can work across platforms instead of remaining limited to separate, closed systems. The RBI is also moving toward including bank-deposit information in Consolidated Account Statements, or CAS. This matters because financial information is often scattered across institutions and products.

For example, a person may hold shares and mutual funds shown through an existing CAS, while savings accounts and fixed deposits remain elsewhere. With the new framework, consent-based data sharing can help bring these records into a broader financial view. An Account Aggregator acts as the secure channel for exchanging information between institutions.

The change does not mean data is shared automatically. The customer’s permission remains central. The articles describe the policy as a step toward one place for deposits and investments, although availability will depend on participating institutions and implementation. Over time, interoperability could make personal asset statements easier to access and manage.

What is an Account Aggregator, and what does it do with a person’s financial information?

An Account Aggregator is a regulated digital intermediary for sharing financial information. It connects institutions holding data with institutions or services that need authorised access. Its purpose is not to create a new investment account. It helps a person share existing records in a controlled, electronic way.

For example, someone could permit information about bank deposits to be shared with a service that already receives investment details. The Account Aggregator carries the information using the consent given by the customer. It can help connect records from banks and other financial institutions, rather than requiring the customer to collect every statement manually.

The articles present Account Aggregators as important to making financial information easier to access across platforms. The actual information available will depend on connected institutions and supported products. Permission is the key safeguard: sharing should happen for an approved purpose and should not be treated as unrestricted access to a person’s entire financial life.

What does “interoperability” mean here, and how can it allow different Account Aggregator platforms to work together?

Here, interoperability means one Account Aggregator platform can work with another within the financial-data-sharing network. A customer should not be blocked simply because the institution holding data and the service requesting it use different aggregator platforms. The RBI’s move is intended to reduce that fragmentation.

Suppose a customer’s bank uses one Account Aggregator and an investment service uses another. With interoperable connections, the customer can give permission for relevant bank information to reach the authorised service. The platforms coordinate the transfer, while the underlying bank or financial institution remains the data source. The process is meant to be consent-based rather than open-ended.

This could make consolidated statements and financial services more practical across providers. It does not guarantee that every product will appear immediately. Institutions must participate, systems must connect correctly, and permissions must be handled securely. The articles describe interoperability as the infrastructure needed to make information access work across platforms.

How many major types of financial assets could potentially appear together in one statement, such as bank deposits, fixed deposits, shares, and mutual funds?

The articles identify four major asset types that could potentially be viewed together: bank deposits, fixed deposits, shares, and mutual funds. Bank deposits and fixed deposits are deposit products, while shares and mutual funds are investments. Counting the named categories gives four types, although a real statement could eventually support more products.

For example, an investor might have savings money and a fixed deposit at a bank, shares in a demat account, and mutual funds held through a registrar. Earlier, these records could be presented through different channels. Interoperable Account Aggregators could help authorised services collect the relevant information, while CAS provides a consolidated statement format for financial holdings.

This is a potential capability, not a promise that every person will see all four immediately. Coverage depends on participating institutions, supported systems, and customer consent. Still, adding bank deposits to CAS alongside shares and mutual funds would give people a wider picture of their assets than an investment-only statement.

What practical difference will this make for someone trying to view or manage all their investments and deposits in one place?

The practical difference is convenience and a clearer view of total holdings. Instead of checking separate bank, deposit, share, and mutual-fund records, a person could potentially review more of that information through one consolidated statement. This can make tracking assets, preparing financial plans, and spotting gaps easier.

For example, someone saving for a goal might compare money in a savings account and fixed deposit with shares and mutual funds. If the relevant institutions participate, interoperable Account Aggregators can pass authorised information across platforms, while CAS presents the combined record. The customer would not need to manually gather every document each time.

The articles describe this as an upcoming or developing benefit, not an instant universal dashboard. Different products may be added at different times, and institutions must support the system. The change should improve access and reduce fragmentation, but customers still need to review whether balances, dates, and holdings are complete and current.

Who owns the financial data, who gives permission to share it, and what role do banks and Account Aggregators play?

In this framework, the person connected to the accounts is the data owner and consent giver. That person decides whether information may be shared and for the approved purpose. Banks, brokers, registrars, and similar institutions hold or generate the underlying records. They are the sources that can provide the information when properly authorised.

For example, a customer may permit bank-deposit details to be sent to a service seeking a fuller asset statement. The Account Aggregator does not decide ownership or independently use the data as an investment provider. It provides the secure, consent-based channel between the institution holding the information and the authorised recipient. Banks and other institutions still maintain the original records.

The articles emphasise easier access, not a transfer of ownership to platforms. In practice, strong consent controls, authentication, secure transmission, and clear records of permission are needed. The RBI’s interoperability move broadens how platforms can connect, while the customer’s permission remains the key control over sharing.

Why has financial information traditionally been split among separate banks, brokers, mutual-fund registrars, and other institutions, and what systems are needed to combine it securely?

Financial information has traditionally been divided because each institution records a different relationship and product. A bank maintains deposit accounts, a broker or depository supports shares, and mutual-fund registrars maintain fund records. These organisations use separate databases, identifiers, formats, and access arrangements. A single statement therefore cannot automatically collect everything.

To combine the information, systems must be able to identify the customer, connect the relevant institutions, and exchange data in a standard way. The customer must authenticate and give permission. Secure encryption, access controls, consent records, and reliable interfaces help protect the transfer. Account Aggregators provide the coordinating layer, while banks and other institutions remain the information sources.

The RBI’s interoperability initiative addresses the problem of separate aggregator networks. It could help CAS include bank deposits alongside shares and mutual funds, as described by the articles. The result will depend on technical integration and participation. A secure combined view is therefore an infrastructure project, not simply a new document format.

Key Facts:

📌 RBI is allowing interoperability among Account Aggregators.

📌 Bank deposits and fixed deposits may join CAS information.

📌 Customer permission remains central to financial-data sharing.

📌 Account Aggregators enable consent-based financial-data sharing.

📌 They connect institutions holding data with authorised information users.

📌 They do not replace a person’s bank or investment accounts.

📌 Interoperability connects separate Account Aggregator platforms.