Trusted independent reportCross-border relevantPublication date verified
PYMNTS
Real-Time Payments Put Bank Infrastructure on the Clock
WHAT HAPPENED
A PYMNTS Intelligence report produced with The Clearing House says 76% of surveyed U.S. financial institutions already provide access to the RTP network and 92% of those not yet enabled expect to do so within two years. Respondents cited manual processes (53%), legacy technology (52%) and siloed systems (47%) as modernisation obstacles; 35% said they were adding centralised payment hubs and 32% rail-specific processing tools.
PUBLISHED September 8, 2026SOURCE PYMNTSLANE Payment infrastructure
KEY FIGURES
76%
Institutions providing RTP access
92%
Non-enabled institutions expecting access within two years
manual processes 53%; legacy technology 52%; siloed systems 47%
Top modernisation obstacles
centralised hubs 35%; rail-specific tools 32%
Infrastructure investments
WHAT TO WATCH NEXT
Watch whether follow-up sources disclose confirmed customers, supported markets, pricing, transaction activity, and a primary-source update.
PYMNTS Intelligence research produced in collaboration with The Clearing House. The cited survey results are attributable to the report; they are not independent evidence of implementation success, transaction performance or cross-border interoperability.
The page already presents the summary and analysis. This section keeps only the copy, download, and technical source record without repeating the same reading view.
View technical text
# Real-Time Payments Put Bank Infrastructure on the Clock
> Evidence tier: B1
> Evidence type: PYMNTS Intelligence research produced with The Clearing House
> Source: [PYMNTS](https://www.pymnts.com/real-time-payments/2026/real-time-payments-put-legacy-bank-infrastructure-under-pressure)
> Published: 2026-09-08
> Captured: 2026-09-08T12:47:17.022Z
## Source summary
A PYMNTS Intelligence report produced with The Clearing House says 76% of surveyed U.S. financial institutions already provide access to the RTP network and 92% of those not yet enabled expect to do so within two years. Respondents cited manual processes (53%), legacy technology (52%) and siloed systems (47%) as modernisation obstacles; 35% said they were adding centralised payment hubs and 32% rail-specific processing tools.
## Why it matters
The survey identifies operating bottlenecks that can limit 24/7 domestic settlement even when network access expands, and it shows where institutions say they are investing. This is partner-produced research about the U.S. domestic RTP network, not a new cross-border corridor, product launch or independently measured deployment result. The article does not disclose an independently audited population frame, transaction outcomes, implementation success, pricing or cross-border interoperability.
## Key numbers
- **Institutions providing RTP access:** 76%
- **Non-enabled institutions expecting access within two years:** 92%
- **Top modernisation obstacles:** manual processes 53%; legacy technology 52%; siloed systems 47%
- **Infrastructure investments:** centralised hubs 35%; rail-specific tools 32%
## Topics and entities
- Industry lane: Payment infrastructure
- Entities: U.S. financial institutions / The Clearing House RTP
- Payment infrastructure
## Evidence and credibility note
PYMNTS Intelligence research produced in collaboration with The Clearing House. The cited survey results are attributable to the report; they are not independent evidence of implementation success, transaction performance or cross-border interoperability.
Date evidence: Automatically verified from article:published_time: 2026-09-08T08:01:39+00:00
## First-party corroboration
No directly corresponding A1 company announcement is currently linked.
## Original-source traceback
[Open the original PYMNTS report](https://www.pymnts.com/real-time-payments/2026/real-time-payments-put-legacy-bank-infrastructure-under-pressure)
---
This is a structured Payments Hot Markdown source summary derived from external reporting. Use the original link above to read the publisher's article; copyright remains with the original publisher.