CFOs See Payments Modernization as Key to Cash Flow, but Few Have the Infrastructure in Place, New Research Finds

A Fortis survey of 100 senior finance leaders at U.S. and Canadian SMEs found 72% believe payment modernization would significantly help cash flow, but only 21% report having modernized, effective payment infrastructure. High DSO was a top working-capital concern for 61%, and 59% cited limited real-time cash visibility; integration difficulty and resistance to change were barriers for 75% and 64%, respectively. The report presents automation and connected financial systems as potential ways to improve invoicing, collections and cash visibility.

Analysis

This is a weak demand signal, not evidence of near-term revenue acceleration: the research is vendor-sponsored, covers only 100 SMEs, and measures perceived need rather than budgets, implementation rates or realized DSO reductions. The investable mechanism is distribution, not simply payment volume. Embedded-payment providers and ERP/accounting platforms that can connect invoicing, reconciliation and payment workflows may gain software attach and retention; vendors selling standalone processing face pressure if integration becomes the deciding feature. But the reported integration friction and organizational inertia are also evidence against a rapid adoption curve.

Second-order, the cash released by faster collections could reduce SMEs’ use of overdrafts, factoring and other working-capital finance, while greater payment-data visibility could improve underwriting for lenders that retain access to those data. Any benefit to software vendors is likely offset initially by implementation costs and long sales cycles. Faster cash realization is a customer liquidity benefit, not automatically higher vendor revenue.

Near term (days), expect little durable repricing from a press release. Over 1–3 months, look for earnings commentary on embedded-payment penetration, AR automation bookings, implementation cycles and customer ROI. Over 6–18 months, the structural winner should be the provider with low-friction integrations and demonstrable collection-time improvement—not necessarily the largest processor. The contrarian point: finance leaders’ stated urgency may coexist with deferred SME software spending if costs remain elevated. No company-specific trade is justified without independently verified adoption or financial impact.

Key Decisions for Investors

• No immediate position: treat the survey as a watch item, not a standalone catalyst. Fortis and its research partners’ claims require validation against customer adoption and reported economics.
• Monitor earnings from ERP/accounting software and embedded-payment providers for payment attach rates, AR-automation bookings, implementation duration, retention and quantified customer outcomes; favor evidence of workflow integration over broad AI claims.
• Watch for a relative opportunity in integrated finance software versus undifferentiated payment processing only if integration-led wins or improving attach rates become visible. Avoid initiating the pair on this survey alone.
• Falsify the adoption thesis if vendors report lengthening implementation cycles, weak SME software spending, flat payment attach rates, or no measurable improvement in invoice disputes/DSO; revisit if customer-level data show repeatable working-capital release.