Large financial services firms are right to fight data-aggregation access, but they'll lose this fight to arguments based on innovation and "inclusion" if they do not quickly enhance their own value proposition.

The Trump administration will not approach economic policy like the Federal Reserve does, but the central bank can still address its own problems before the new administration intervenes.

Pretty much every merger of insurers and banks since the Citi-Travelers deal has come undone, but today's conditions support new-style marriages that make sense for shareholders and customers.

Requiring the bank regulators to disclose the numerical grades they give for capital, assets and other factors would subject them to the same market discipline they demand for banks.

Other countries have already lowered interest rates below zero, and the financial stability concerns of such a policy taking shape in the U.S. should not be dismissed.

The Federal Reserve Board now demands that big banks proactively manage reputational, strategic and compliance risks – qualitative things they traditionally viewed as outside their control. The new discipline will serve banks well.

Until a mechanism to shut the biggest and baddest is well in place, the prospect of taxpayer bailout will distort financial markets and handicap competitors.

No, the standards weren't "watered down," media hype notwithstanding. But the Basel Committee is considering a complete pass for banks with government lifelines. This would enshrine "too big to fail."

The facts in the JPMorgan Chase (JPM) "London Whale" case are still being sorted out, but that hasn't stopped analysts — myself included — from pondering its policy impact. Much of what the bank's CEO, Jamie Dimon, calls punditry has focused on whether the $2 billion-plus loss proves points on the Volcker Rule, TBTF, CEO compensation and, perhaps, nicknames.