CyberFT was initially released in 2014 and right away combined almost the entire range of SWIFT Fin, InterAct and FileAct functionality and an array of extra options, developed using the cutting edge technology which SWIFT lacks. So CyberFT competes with the system with a years-long history and a huge customers database but less flexible and outdated from the technology viewpoint.
Let us introduce a table comparing SWIFT and CyberFT by primary criteria required for the modern and functional system of information transfer.
|Clients||About 10k banks and a limited number of companies.||
About 400 users (mostly banks). Russian and foreign banks and legal entities. Potential coverage of all banks and all legal entities without restrictions..
|About 400 users (mostly legal entities). Russian and foreign banks and legal entities. Potential coverage of all banks and all legal entities without restrictions.|
|Conformity with legislation||
Doesn’t conform to article 16, part 11, 112-FZ (Federal Law) dated May 5, 2014 “On amendments in the Federal Law ‘On the National Payment System’”
|In full conformity with all statutory and regulatory enactments of the Russian Federation.||
In full conformity with all statutory and regulatory enactments of the Russian Federation.
|Encryption||Encryption information protection facilities offered by SWIFT.||Encryption information protection facilities used in e-messaging of the payment system of the Bank of Russia (SKAD Signature).||Any removable encryption information protection facility, including CryptoPro, OpenSSL, Message-PRO, Agava, etc|
|Message protection||Transmitted data is accessible to the network provider.||Transmitted data is accessible to the network provider.||
Transmitted data is not accessible to the network provider.
|Server Location||US, Switzerland and Netherlands.||Russia.||
Russia and any other country at discretion of the Platform owner.
|Reliability||Special procedure for receiving and sending messages due to the ‘hot’ reservation of each network element. A total of 4 data centers.||
Messages go through the Message Processing Center of the Bank of Russia via the Environment for interaction with the Bank of Russia customers. All information systems of the Bank of Russia are reserved. But given that along with ED503 there was developed a whole range of technical messages for testing purposes it is clear that ED503’s reliability is fairly low.
|Effective state-of-the-art software and hardware as well as organizational and administrative measures geared towards reliability of the system. Number of providers is limitless.|
Star (all members are connected to the single center).
Star (all members are connected to the single center).
Interconnected (there may be a limitless number of data centers which various members connect to, that said, the centers are also interconnected).
$53,000 or more with mandatory cabling from a specific communication operator; up to $200,000 for each new customer.
|Service fee||At least €10 000.||
|Setup time||At least 8 weeks for shared connection and at least 16 weeks for direct connection.||At least 4 weeks since ABS involvement is required.||
CyberFT processing setup takes from 1 to 3 weeks, including ABS integration. Less than 2 weeks in case you use your own platform.
|Data transfer speed||A few seconds.||A few seconds.||
Under 1.5 seconds.
|Supported formats||Envelope for SWIFT Fin messages (MTXXX messages). Correctness of the input data is not checked, i.e. basically the envelope may be filled with any message.||Envelope for SWIFT Fin messages (MTXXX messages). Correctness of the input data is not checked, i.e. basically the envelope may be filled with any message. ISO 20022 standard and customer support upon request||SWIFT Fin (MTXXX messages), InterAct (MX messages in line with ISO 20022 standard), FileAct (unstructured messages with attachments), as well as Electronic Document Flow System messages (certificates, invoices, contracts), acceptance of payments and a lot more. Currency control documents in ISO20022 format (certificate of supporting documents, certificate of currency transactions, order to transfer funds from a transit currency account, transaction passport, application to the bank under the contract).|
|Message size limit||Less than 10 MB.||20 KB by default and 5 MB after being granted a special permission.||
100 MB by default. Message size limit can be increased without limitations.
|Information storage||Customer can store information indefinitely, SWIFT stores information for 124 days, whereafter the information is archived. Sometimes the archived information can be partially restored for a fee, not always.||Short-term and long-term archives store e-messages for 3 days and 5 years, respectively.||Indefinite storage of data on every stage of the transaction from sender to receiver.|
|Type of interaction||Processing only.||Processing only.||Processing and clearing.|
|User interface||A variety of SWIFT Alliance user applications for a full-fledged work.||
SWIFT financial messages are transmitted via ARM KBR (KBR-S) using the file systems catalogues or MQ queue manager; servers of the Bank of Russia accept transport envelopes containing messages. Real business application would require a follow-up tweaking of the visual user interface for customers and operators.
|Intuitive web-interface for a full-fledged work with the system.|
|Additional services for legal entities||Favorable terms of work for corporate clients as compared to banks, SWIFT Alliance Lite, etc.||None.||Favorable terms of work for corporate clients, dedicated 1C module, electronic document flow service of legally valid documents.|
|Speed of developing new modifications||Very low. SWIFT doesn’t offer individual modifications or integration modules.||Moderate. Individual modifications and integration modules are offered only to major member companies.||High. CyberFT offers standard integration modules, individual modifications and integration solutions, as well as individual modifications based on the standard CyberFT platform|