Corporates to Increase FX Automation: Survey
Posted by Colin Lambert. Last updated: August 27, 2026
A new survey published by Integral reports growing interest and moves in the direction of further automations for corporations’ FX workflows, with API trading and embedded pricing expected to lead the drive. At the same time, however, the survey also finds a degree of discord between corporate treasuries and their bank providers over how quickly this can be achieved.
The survey finds that 34% of those corporate treasuries to respond (the survey was of 143 corporate treasuries and financial institutions) traded FX either by voice or via a multi-dealer platform. Over the next five years, however, these treasurers expect to move further away from manual trading workflows to more automated solutions.
These methods of programmatic execution are expected to grow from 18% today to 42% by 2031- from user-triggered API execution (6% to 16% share of trading volume) and fully embedded, automated execution within ERP and TMS solutions (12% to 26%), the report notes.
Meanwhile, the survey report says that more than half of banks surveyed said corporate API trading will be the most important FX execution channel in five years’ time. Over 80% also said prices embedded directly into their clients’ systems – for example, OMS and TMS solutions – will play a significantly greater role in their FX distribution strategies.
Both sides of the equation see the potential of embedded FX management, the report says, but it also notes that adoption is not without its challenges. It reveals that 83% of corporates identified at least one barrier that could slow adoption, with internal system integration cited as the top hurdle for large corporates (56%), and bank API maturity (43%) the biggest challenge for mid-sized corporates and growth companies.
Unsurprisingly, agentic AI is also set to play a role in automating treasury FX workflows, however here there is a divide between expectation and reality. Currently, the report finds, only 8% of corporates are piloting AI projects, but half said they expect AI-driven agents to manage 25% of their FX workflow within the next five years.
The potential impact goes beyond execution efficiency. Nearly two-thirds of corporates said if FX execution were largely automated and embedded, it would enable them to better prioritize risk management strategy -suggesting that embedded, API-driven services and automated trading workflows from banks have implications for how treasury teams allocate their time, not just how they trade.
“Corporates are looking for more streamlined and automated solutions to manage their FX risk at a time when market volatility, disrupted trade flows and pressure on balance sheets are making treasury operations more complex,” observes Harpal Sandhu, CEO of Integral. “Banks have a crucial role to play and will need to work with their clients to address the operational and technology challenges around embedded FX management. This depends on strong technology foundations, including API first platforms that seamlessly connect banks and corporates and support the adoption of agentic AI.”
The Full FX View
That corporate treasuries are seeking to increase their levels of automation should come as no surprise – FX remains for most an administrative detail of the type that should be automated as much as possible. What stands out most from this report, however, is what appears to be a difference of opinion between clients and providers as to how easily it can be achieved.
For all the good work done by banks and technology vendors, embedding new processes in many buy side firms remains a tortuous process, hampered, as the report notes, by limited technical resources on the part of many clients and the lack of standardisation on the sell-side. There is also the question of whether the buy side firms are actually willing to spend the financial resources to achieve greater efficiency – at face value this looks like a no-brainer as far as decisions go, but so many firms are not trading often enough, and when they do, a manually-triggered execution process is sufficient.
What is interesting when looking at the corporate world is how e-ratios have been steady for some time, before climbing in the last couple of years. Using the UK and US semi-annual FX turnover data, Non-Financial Institutions (which can include flow from other sectors apart from corporate treasuries, but is largely corporate) there has been a divergence in how much volume is being done electronically.
In the UK, the latest survey indicated a 57.3% e-ratio for NFIs in April 2026, up from 56.5% the year before that, and notable higher than the 51.8/52.8% recorded in 2022 and 2023 respectively. It should be noted, however, that in April 2021 (when the pandemic was still a factor), this ratio stood at 56.2%.
Overall then, not a great deal of change but still a respectable e-ratio. In the US, however, it has been a story of steadily increasing automation, from 65.6% of volume in 2021, through 72/73% in 2023/24, to 84.6% in the latest survey.
Of course, there is a difference between electronic execution and a fully-embedded workflow, but it is fair to assume that those treasuries executing electronically either have, or will soon have, this as part of a broader automated workflow. It is also notable that just 4% of respondents to the survey were from North America, which could suggest this region is already fully-onboard the automation train (the highest proportion was Asia at 37%, which probably lags a little).
A key takeaway from the report is how corporates, if they did automate FX services, would reallocate the resources elsewhere for better risk management, and that seems sensible, but there is still that lingering question they have to answer. To achieve these efficiency gains and to be able to reallocate resources they first need to spend some resources – are that many corporations willing to do so for an administrative task?
They should do, the big question is, will they?
