Sector Spotlight: Core Banking Systems — First Generation

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Sector Spotlight: Core Banking Systems — First Generation

August 19, 2025

This is the final installment in a four-part series that covers the four generations of core banking systems. For more information on how these generations are defined and their history, read our commentary here.

The first generation of core banking systems represent the first modern computerized core banking systems. The systems are built on legacy languages such as COBOL, RPG, or Progress OpenEdge but support modern integrations via application programming interfaces (APIs) (e.g., REST, SOAP, JSON/XML) and/or Service Oriented Architecture (SOA), allowing extensions in languages like Java, .NET, or JavaScript.

What’s going on in core banking systems — first generation

First generation core banking systems came to market beginning in the late 1960s. They’ve experienced many iterations in their long history, including updates to improve the frontend experience and streamlined integration through APIs. A defining feature of these systems is that they operate in batch-processing mode, not in real time, with few exceptions designed for savings institutions and credit unions. Today, first generation systems tend to be attractive to financial institutions that prioritize stability, reliability, and security.

First generation core banking systems vendor snapshot

The first generation core banking system space includes mostly established US vendors. A bank’s choice of system will depend on its business and functional requirements.

Here’s a snapshot of first generation core banking systems. The list is representative; today there are over 50 first generation cores supported in the US:

  • CSI NuPoint: CSI was incorporated in 1965, and the foundation of core banking solution NuPoint’s capabilities dates to that time. Throughout its history, CSI has evolved from a small data processing company to a major bank technology provider, serving hundreds of institutions. NuPoint, as its core platform, has been pivotal driving adoptions through features like open banking integrations and AI-enabled tools. The company’s customer-first culture and ongoing investments have fueled consistent growth and awards.

  • FIS HORIZON: Horizon was developed in 1987 and released as a core banking system in 1989, targeting community banks. It was first acquired by Systematics in 1990, then Alltel, and eventually FIS in 2006. Horizon is a core banking platform designed for community banks, offering intuitive navigation, customer-centric features, multi-tiered architecture, and integrations for digital banking, payments, and analytics. Horizon stands out for its browser-agnostic design enabling banks to enhance customer relationships and operational efficiency.

  • FIS IBS: IBS (Integrated Banking Services) has its roots with M&I Data Services, which was a subsidiary of Marshall & Ilsley Corporation (M&I Bank) to serve correspondent banks with mainframe-based core processing. It was originally released and deployed in 1980 by what became Metavante (rebranded from M&I Data Services in 2000), before FIS acquired Metavante in 2009. IBS is a scalable, outsourced processor for deposits, loans, customer management, and ancillary services, targeting mid-tier to large regional banks.

  • FIS Systematics: Systematics has a rich history. It originally came to market in 1968, was acquired by Alltel in 1990, and eventually became FIS in 2006. Systematics has evolved from a pioneering data processing company to a cornerstone of FIS’ portfolio, surviving industry shifts like digitization and consolidation. It is known as a robust, “tried and true” system for large-scale banking operations, powering transaction processing, account management, and compliance for major US banks.

  • Fiserv Cleartouch: Formerly Fiserv Vision and rebranded as Fiserv Cleartouch in 2012, the solution was marketed to savings institutions as an online real-time solution. It is deployed as an outsourced solution and is integrated with an array of enterprise solutions from Fiserv. Third-party solutions can be integrated with the platform using its middleware layer.

  • Fiserv Precision: Precision started in 1982 as PCS in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. As a provider of bank processing solutions for in-house banks, it offered a robust platform emphasizing end-to-end capabilities (new account opening, transaction handling, and ancillary services). In 2003, Fiserv acquired PCS and placed it under its Information Technology, Inc. (ITI) division (acquired by Fiserv in 1995). The acquisition enhanced Fiserv’s offerings in client/server solutions for banking. While it’s faced challenges like legacy system consolidation, Precision’s focus on stability and efficiency has sustained its use by hundreds of US financial institutions.

  • Fiserv Premier: Premier’s roots go back to ITI of Lincoln, Nebraska, by founders Dale Jensen and Don Dillon (former executives at National Bank of Commerce). The company began by developing data processing solutions for financial institutions, laying the groundwork for the Premier core banking system. Premier’s history reflects the evolution of core banking from legacy systems to integrated digital platforms. Originating from ITI’s innovative work in the 1970s, the 1995 Fiserv acquisition was transformative, enabling global scale and continuous enhancements. Today, it powers a significant portion of US banking operations, with future focus on hybridization and consolidation to meet modern demands.

  • Fiserv Signature: Comprehensive Banking System (CBS), the precursor to Signature, was developed through a Citicorp-IBM partnership in the 1980s, coinciding with IBM’s AS/400 launch, a database-mode platform for commercial banking. In 1991, Fiserv acquired Citicorp Information Resources, including CBS, entering commercial account processing and expanding it internationally with ICBS for multicurrency operations. In 2009, Fiserv rebranded CBS as Signature, primarily for larger institutions requiring customized solutions.

  • Jack Henry CIF 20/20: CIF 20/20’s history mirrors Jack Henry’s growth from a 1976 startup to a major bank technology provider. Originating as an evolution of early IBM-based systems for small banks, CIF 20/20 offers around 120 complementary products and services, emphasizing in-house processing. Today, it powers efficient operations with modern features like API connectivity, positioning it for ongoing relevance in a consolidating market.

  • Jack Henry SilverLake: In 1988, SilverLake was introduced as an AS/400-based system, designed for mid-sized banks to leverage relational database features. In the late 1980s, the solution was an advancement over earlier systems; it has adapted through hardware evolutions, acquisitions, and refreshes to meet mid-tier banking needs. Today, it emphasizes scalability and innovation, with cloud-native modernization while sustaining its role in community and regional banking.

What to look for in first generation core banking systems

First generation core banking systems represent traditional, established approaches to core development. Capabilities are foundational and proven.

  • Batch processing: Transactions are processed in groups rather than in real time.

  • Turnkey functionality: Out-of-the-box functionality; full suite approach/tightly integrated with ancillary applications.

  • Stability and security: Well-established technology, reliable/minimal risk.

  • Vendor support: Deep vendor support, from development to service needs.

Each generation of core banking system offers its own unique strengths and tradeoffs, as does each system within each generation. As a bank contemplates its options, a clear understanding of its requirements and how those requirements align with its overall strategy are key to mapping the right attributes to the bank’s needs.

Note: Fiserv in the past year announced plans to consolidate legacy cores — Premier with others (e.g., Precision, Cleartouch) into next-generation platforms, driven by cloud and digital trends. CCG Catalyst will withhold further commentary on long-term implications until tangible results from these implementations are observed.

Subscribe to our Insights