Agentic AI Could Accelerate Deposit Outflows: How Banks Can Protect Core Funding

By Neil Stanley, CEO and Founder of The CorePoint, and James White, Vice President of Growth and Market Strategy at Engage fi

Agentic artificial intelligence could reshape the competition for bank deposits by helping consumers identify higher-yielding accounts and move funds with minimal effort. As AI tools become connected to financial platforms, banks and credit unions may face a new challenge: depositors who can actively optimize their cash rather than leaving money in low-rate accounts out of convenience.

The arrival of agentic AI tools such as Meta’s Muse has intensified the conversation. These applications are designed to complete tasks on behalf of users, including finding promotions, comparing financial products and potentially transferring funds between accounts. If such capabilities become widely adopted, the traditional friction that has protected low-cost deposits could disappear.

Bank boards and executives should be asking a direct question: What would agentic AI mean for our core deposits?

Why Low-Cost Deposits Are in the Spotlight

Deposits remain one of the most valuable sources of funding for financial institutions. In 2006, banks held approximately $95 in loans for every $100 in deposits. Today, that figure is closer to $65 for every $100 in deposits, yet industry profitability has remained strong.

One major reason is the continued value of low-cost deposits. Checking, savings and money market accounts often pay customers relatively modest rates while providing banks with a stable source of funding. That spread has supported bank earnings for years.

However, the same deposits may become more vulnerable as technology makes it easier for customers to discover better rates and move their money. Agentic AI could expose the difference between what banks earn from deposits and what they pay depositors, creating an opportunity for technology companies and financial competitors to capture part of that value.

Key Takeaways for Banks and Credit Unions

• Low-cost deposits are the primary target. AI agents may help consumers find better returns on balances that currently earn very little.
• Certificates of deposit may also be vulnerable. Low renewal rates and limited early withdrawal penalties could make some CDs attractive targets.
• Blocking AI agents is not a complete strategy. Restrictions may slow adoption, but they do not eliminate the economic incentive to improve deposit returns.
• Deposit product design is within management’s control. Institutions can revise withdrawal terms, liquidity features and incentives for longer-term funding commitments.
• Proactive outreach will become more important. Banks should identify at-risk balances and upcoming maturities before customers receive competing offers through an AI agent.

Liquid Accounts Could See Faster Fund Movement

Most deposits are already operationally liquid. Customers can access their checking, savings and money market balances almost immediately, while digital banking allows funds to be transferred in seconds.

Approximately 85% of bank deposits are non-maturing, meaning customers can withdraw them at any time. Credit unions face a similar situation, with roughly 72% of deposits in non-maturing accounts. These balances have traditionally remained in place because moving money required research, comparisons, account applications and manual transfers.

Agentic AI could remove much of that friction. Rather than searching for rates, reviewing account terms and completing each step independently, a customer may be able to instruct an AI agent to identify a better option and handle much of the process.

The result could be a shift from passive liquidity to actively managed liquidity. Depositors would not simply have the ability to move money; they would have software continuously looking for opportunities to do so.

The potential savings for consumers are significant. Bankrate has reported an average U.S. savings account annual percentage yield of approximately 0.64%, compared with a national deposit rate cap of 1.13% published by the FDIC and a substantially higher comparable U.S. Treasury yield of 3.88%.

This gap represents billions of dollars in forgone interest. Estimates suggest that consumers may leave more than $150 billion in annual interest on the table by keeping funds in low-yield accounts. A technology provider that helps customers capture part of that missed return could create a substantial new revenue opportunity.

Maturing CDs Could Become a Competitive Battleground

Liquid accounts are not the only deposits at risk. Certificates of deposit may also become targets, particularly when they approach maturity or carry rates that are well below current market yields.

S&P data has estimated that approximately $570 billion in bank CDs pay 3.25% or less. When these accounts mature, competitors may have an opportunity to attract the balances with higher rates. Even if a new institution pays 3.25%, it could retain a meaningful spread against a risk-free Treasury yield near 3.88%.

Some long-term CDs may also contain weaknesses before maturity. Early withdrawal penalties are often tied to the account’s interest rate. If the penalty is relatively modest, a customer may still benefit financially by leaving the account and moving funds to a higher-yielding product.

An AI agent could identify those opportunities by reviewing account disclosures, maturity dates, interest rates and penalty structures. If an account pays less than half the yield available on a comparable Treasury security, a new provider might be able to increase the depositor’s return while still earning a profit.

Will Customers Trust AI With Their Financial Accounts?

Some financial institutions may assume customers will not connect an AI tool to their bank accounts. That assumption could be risky.

Consumers already use financial technology platforms to connect accounts, track spending, compare products and manage investments. Plaid, which supports financial account connectivity for many applications, processes millions of daily connections across a network that includes more than 150 million consumer accounts and over 12,000 U.S. financial institutions.

The relevant question may not be whether customers will ever connect their accounts to an AI agent. Consumers have already demonstrated a willingness to connect financial accounts to third-party applications when they believe the benefit is meaningful.

Technology companies may also make the opportunity easy to understand. A challenge promising to help users find an additional $1,000 gives consumers a clear financial goal. If the AI tool is already part of an application they use regularly, the decision to try it may feel less significant.

Several major banks have indicated that they will not allow external AI agents to transact inside customer accounts without human involvement. These concerns are understandable, especially when security, fraud prevention and regulatory compliance are involved.

However, restricting access may only delay the broader trend. Customers who want to move money between accounts they own may continue seeking tools that help them improve their returns. If technology providers can demonstrate that these transactions can be conducted safely and compliantly, pressure on financial institutions is likely to increase.

Agentic AI Could Act Like a Personal Banker

Consumers have spent years looking for alternatives to low-yield deposits. During the long period when safe bank accounts paid little interest, many people moved money into stocks, mutual funds, cryptocurrencies and Treasury securities.

Those alternatives often carry investment risk. By comparison, transferring a portion of a checking or savings balance to a higher-yield deposit account may seem relatively simple and low risk.

A customer may be willing to test an AI agent with a $10,000 savings account earning 0.64% or a $20,000 checking account earning almost nothing. If the process works well for shopping, travel or other everyday activities, customers may become more comfortable using the same technology for personal finance.

That adoption could spread quickly through social networks. A successful banking use case requires little effort from the depositor once the agent has access to account information and transaction permissions. Tasks that once discouraged rate shopping, such as comparing offers, tracking maturities, meeting account requirements and initiating transfers, could be automated.

Even a required confirmation click may not restore the old level of customer inertia. The customer would still receive a recommendation, a clear financial benefit and a nearly completed transaction.

What Banks Can Do to Defend Their Deposits

Agentic AI is still an emerging technology, and its adoption may develop differently than expected. Nevertheless, the weaknesses in many deposit products are already visible. Banks and credit unions should begin responding before automated rate shopping becomes common.

1. Reevaluate Deposit Product Design

Technology companies may build the agents, but financial institutions control the terms of their deposit products. Executives should review those products with the expectation that customers may soon behave like constant rate shoppers.

• Are early withdrawal penalties strong enough to support the intended funding term?
• Could customers benefit from leaving a CD before maturity despite the penalty?
• Can bundled products encourage longer commitments while preserving reasonable liquidity?
• Could flexible withdrawal features help retain balances that might otherwise leave?
• Do product terms reward loyalty and relationship depth rather than relying only on customer inaction?

Financial institutions should not depend entirely on future technology projects to address the issue. Product changes, pricing revisions and improved account structures can often be implemented faster than a large-scale core system replacement.

2. Use Data to Identify Vulnerable Balances

Raising rates across an entire deposit portfolio could increase funding costs without protecting the relationships most likely to leave. A more targeted approach may be more effective.

Institutions should identify balances that an AI agent would likely move first. These may include large idle balances, accounts with unusually low rates, deposits approaching maturity and customers with multiple external financial relationships.

Proactive outreach could allow a bank to offer a competitive rate before a customer receives a better recommendation elsewhere. Paying a loyal customer 3.5% may be less expensive than replacing a deposit after it moves to an account paying 4.5%.

3. Prepare Employees to Have Better Deposit Conversations

Technology should support employees rather than leave them reacting after funds have already departed. Relationship managers and branch teams need timely information about upcoming maturities, rate-sensitive balances and customer liquidity needs.

Employees should also be equipped to explain the value of competing products clearly. If customers have an AI-powered financial assistant in their pocket, bank employees must be able to provide insight, transparency and personalized guidance that generic rate comparisons cannot match.

4. Develop an AI Strategy of Your Own

Financial institutions should study the use cases that technology companies are likely to pursue. Potential examples include moving idle balances above a customer-defined threshold, reviewing maturing CDs, identifying recurring bills that have increased and recommending more efficient cash management strategies.

Banks and credit unions can begin with focused pilots instead of attempting to build a complete digital universal banker immediately. AI may be most valuable when it helps customers understand interest rate risk, liquidity needs, deposit alternatives and account pricing.

Every automated alert should also connect customers with a named human representative. Combining AI convenience with personal service could help institutions preserve trust while improving responsiveness.

Reach Customers Before Their Money Moves

Fraud and security concerns surrounding external AI agents are legitimate, but they should not obscure the underlying economic threat. Agentic AI is likely to target the value trapped in low-yield deposits, particularly at institutions with large portfolios of inexpensive funding.

The most effective response is not to search for reasons the trend will fail. Banks and credit unions should identify vulnerable products, review deposit pricing, monitor customer behavior and give employees the tools to engage customers before funds leave.

The bottom line: Agentic AI could make deposit rate shopping faster, easier and more widespread. Institutions that act now can strengthen product terms, offer more relevant pricing and develop their own AI capabilities. Those that rely on customer inertia may find that the old barriers to deposit movement no longer exist.

Neil Stanley is the founder and CEO of The CorePoint, a company based in Omaha, Nebraska, that helps financial institutions improve retail deposit growth and time deposit pricing. James White is a banking strategist with more than 25 years of experience helping banks and credit unions grow and serves as Head of Strategy at Engage fi.

Source: Thefinancialbrand.com