Published 10 October 2025, this report gives national authorities key considerations and candidate indicators for tracking AI adoption and the vulnerabilities identified in November 2024 — third-party dependencies, market correlations, cyber risk, and model-risk and governance gaps. It includes a case study on AI-related third-party dependencies and provider concentration, finding that generative AI depends on a small number of key suppliers of hardware, cloud and models. The FSB concludes monitoring is at an early stage and urges authorities to close data gaps.
| Document | FSB AI monitoring report (Oct 2025) — Monitoring Adoption of Artificial Intelligence and Related Vulnerabilities in the Financial Sector |
| Issued by | Financial Stability Board |
| Type | Report |
| Status | Final |
| Published | Oct 10, 2025 |
| Applies to | FSB member authorities; informs supervisory data requests to banks and other financial institutions |
| Official source | fsb.org ↗ |
| Use cases | Third-party & vendor AI · Model risk management · Cybersecurity · Trading & capital markets · AI governance (general) |
What are the key points of FSB AI monitoring report (Oct 2025)?
- Published 10 October 2025 with a companion press release on next steps for authorities.
- Proposes direct and proxy indicators for AI adoption and for each vulnerability identified in the 2024 report.
- Case study on the AI supply chain: dependence on a few providers of chips, cloud and foundation models creates concentration risk.
- Finds authorities' monitoring is at an early stage, hampered by limited data and lack of common taxonomies.
- Next steps: authorities to strengthen monitoring using the indicators; FSB to facilitate international coordination on taxonomies and data standards.
What did FSB AI monitoring report (Oct 2025) change for banks?
It is the bridge from principles to data: banks should expect supervisors to ask for AI inventories, vendor dependencies and usage metrics aligned with these indicators.
What does the FSB want authorities to monitor on AI?
AI adoption levels and the vulnerabilities from its 2024 report — third-party concentration, market correlation, cyber risk and model/governance risk — using the direct and proxy indicators in the October 2025 report.
Will banks have to report AI usage data to regulators?
The FSB report does not itself require it, but it encourages authorities to close data gaps, which in practice means more supervisory information requests on AI use and vendors.
| Date | Document | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 6, 2026 | Responses to FSB AI sound practices consultation (Aug 2026) — Public responses to consultation on Sound Practices for Responsible Adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI) | Final |
| Jul 7, 2026 | Bowman remarks at FSB AI outreach (July 2026) — Opening remarks on sound practices for artificial intelligence (FSB virtual outreach event) | Final |
| Jun 10, 2026 | FSB AI sound practices consultation (June 2026) — Sound Practices for Responsible Adoption of Artificial Intelligence (AI): Consultation report | Proposed |
| Oct 10, 2025 | FSB next steps on AI monitoring (Oct 2025) — FSB outlines next steps for authorities on AI monitoring | Final |
| Nov 14, 2024 | FSB AI financial stability report (Nov 2024) — The Financial Stability Implications of Artificial Intelligence | Final |
| Dec 4, 2023 | FSB third-party risk toolkit (2023) — Final Report on Enhancing Third-party Risk Management and Oversight: A toolkit for financial institutions and financial authorities | Final |
Follow every document these regulators publish
6 curated AI stories for banking executives · Every morning · Free
Subscribe to BankingNewsAI →