As real-time payments gain traction across industries, CFOs are weighing the benefits against the potential risks. A significant majority of more than one thousand CFO respondents (68%), have expressed their intention to adopt real-time transaction solutions, also known as instant payments.

The promise of faster transactions, improved cash flow visibility, and streamlined operations is clear, but so are the challenges tied to fraud prevention, integration costs, and internal process changes. In this environment, finance leaders are taking a measured approach—exploring new opportunities while keeping a close eye on security and compliance.

Key Takeaways:

• About half of U.S. companies now use instant-payment rails (FedNow or TCH’s RTP), up from 40% in 2023, with roughly 80% expecting to use them by 2026. The FedNow Service (launched July 2023) and the RTP network together now reach most regions – over 1,300 banks and credit unions are live on FedNow, and the RTP network serves 285,000+ businesses monthly.
• Both rails have raised transaction limits. FedNow will soon allow $1 million transfers (up from $500K); The Clearing House increased RTP’s cap to $10 million. All real-time systems support ISO 20022, so payments carry rich remittance data (invoices, payer/payee details) for easy reconciliation.
• New risk features help manage fraud. FedNow now offers account-velocity controls and “receive-only” modes to limit misuse, and both networks provide 24/7 monitoring. In fact, 42% of RTP transactions occur outside normal banking hours, underscoring round‑the‑clock use.
• Today’s CFOs cite cost-cutting and risk management as top goals. Nearly 60% of finance leaders rank reducing payment risk as a priority. Instant payments can boost cash flow by speeding receivables (92% of firms say faster rails improve cash flow) and enable “just-in-time” payables. Many cite lower processing costs (versus wires) and richer data as benefits.
• Despite the upside, many CFOs remain careful. Surveys show the cost of upgrading legacy systems is the biggest barrier (over half of businesses see real-time rails as “costly”). Treasury teams still rely on ACH for payroll and wires for large payments, so instant rails are often phased in selectively. A compelling business case is needed to rework established processes.
• Other markets continue to make rapid gains. The UK’s Faster Payments (24/7 since 2008) now handles transactions up to £1 million, with volumes 15% higher in 2024. The EU is implementing an “Instant Credit Transfer” rule under PSD3 (effective late 2025) to make euro payments instant.

Rising U.S. Adoption of FedNow and Real-Time Payments

Adoption of real-time rails has accelerated. In late 2024, a major U.S. survey found 51% of firms were already using FedNow or RTP for business payments – a jump from 42% a year earlier. Crucially, 80% of companies plan to be on these instant systems within two years. In practical terms, 285,000+ businesses now send instant payments each month via TCH’s RTP network, which recently surpassed $500 billion in cumulative transaction value.

FedNow, though newer, has also scaled quickly; by April 2025, it counted 1,300+ participating banks and credit unions nationwide (95% of them small/mid-sized). In Q1 2025, FedNow settled about 1.3 million transactions (up 43% year-over-year) – roughly $540 million in value daily. Which simply means, instant payments have gone from niche to mainstream in U.S. corporate finance over just the past two years. This momentum is driven by expanding network reach. When FedNow launched in July 2023, it extended real-time rails to hundreds of banks and credit unions that were not on the RTP network.

The two systems now complement each other, One large U.S. bank reported that clients can send an “instant payment” without worrying which rail will be used – the bank routes it via FedNow or RTP as needed to hit the recipient. In practice, this means more payees (suppliers, payroll providers, etc.) can be reached instantly. As The Clearing House notes, nearly half of RTP activity happens overnight, on weekends or holidays, aligning with how a 24/7 business operates. All told, broader connectivity and availability have pulled more corporate treasury teams into experimenting with these rails.

Since 2023, both FedNow and RTP have rolled out significant enhancements. The Clearing House raised RTP’s single-payment limit from $1 million to $10 million (effective Feb 2025) to accommodate high-value B2B use cases like real estate closings or daily merchant settlements. The Federal Reserve likewise plans to double FedNow’s cap from $500K to $1 million in mid-2024, recognizing that larger supplier payments or urgent payroll top‑ups are needed for big corporations. (Notably, FedNow’s baseline $500K limit was already five times higher than the $100K it launched with in 2023.)

Both rails use the ISO 20022 messaging standard. This means each payment can include detailed invoice and remittance information – far beyond the minimal ACH fields. For example, a real-time corporate payment can carry the supplier’s name plus an itemized invoice breakdown, all instantly visible to the recipient. That data-rich transparency makes reconciliation easier and can reduce exceptions. In short, instant payments now rival wires in amount and exceed them in data, often at a fraction of the cost.

Additionally, instant transactions are irreversible “push” payments, so controlling fraud is critical. FedNow has introduced new built-in safeguards – banks can set velocity limits or account-level thresholds by customer segment (e.g., tiering limits for retail vs. corporate clients), and institutions may choose to be receive-only (able to accept but not send payments) while security is fine-tuned.

The Fed also offers payment inquiry support and optional monitoring; a fintech assessment notes that FedNow was launched with dedicated fraud-prevention tools and inquiry-of-sending features. On the RTP side, participant banks similarly use analytics and screening on their rails. Thus, while no system is impervious, both instant networks are adding controls to address the very bank and treasurer concerns around push-payment fraud. In practice, these upgrades are making real-time payments more versatile.

For example, FedNow now supports low-cost request-for-payment messages (invoices) for free (effective 2025), mirroring TCH’s Request-for-Payment, which streamlines billing and approval. Liquidity management features (instant transfers between Fed accounts) have also been enhanced. Combined with 24/7 availability, these evolving capabilities are closing the feature gap between instant rails and traditional methods, inching them toward ubiquity.

CFO Sentiment and Strategy

Today’s finance chiefs acknowledge the potential of real-time payments but remain deliberate in their approach. A 2024 U.S. Bank survey found that cutting costs and managing risk are top-of-mind priorities for CFOs. In payments specifically, 59% of finance leaders said “decreasing operational risk” is an important initiative, up sharply from past years.

This caution translates into the way treasurers handle new rails. Many firms continue to use the ACH network (batch-based, low-cost) for routine disbursements like payroll or vendor checks, and rely on wires for one-off large payments. Instant payments are often reserved for scenarios that justify the effort, late-stage payables, supply-chain finance, earned-wage access programs, or customer refunds, where speed directly improves business outcomes. Most treasurers agree that instant rails can improve cash management, but they ask if the benefits outweigh the work.

Altering long-established payment processes can be challenging, and a compelling business case is necessary to justify the transition.

For many companies, simply holding onto cash until the last moment using ACH already effectively stretches the float. To change that habit, CFOs need to see a clear ROI, for example, earning early-payment discounts or avoiding short‑term borrowing by using last-minute electronic payments. This balanced stance is echoed on the banking side. A January 2025 report notes 90% of banks agree customers would benefit from instant rails, yet many institutions remain hesitant. Roughly one-third of banks cite legacy core-system limitations and fraud concerns as barriers.

Indeed, a majority of banks and credit unions surveyed called the upfront cost of upgrading the biggest obstacle to offering faster payments. In other words, the ecosystem (both buyers and their banks) is still adapting. For now, many financial institutions have joined FedNow in a “receive only” mode to mitigate risk. CFOs, who must work through these banks, feel that caution, if the company’s bank has not fully embraced sending, can limit immediate use.

However, despite these hesitations, most CFOs recognize that instant payments offer clear financial benefits. The Federal Reserve’s 2024 Business Payments Study found that 92% of firms say faster payments improve cash flow by accelerating receipts and unlocking discounts. Over half of businesses reported instant rails lower transaction costs (versus checks or wires). Real-time confirmation of payment delivery also reduces errors and enables same-day reconciliation, which appeals to the treasury’s efficiency goals.

Many CFOs are therefore building real-time capabilities for key use cases rather than wholesale replacement – for example, sending large vendor payments or making ad-hoc “just-in-time” payables that previously could not clear. In parallel, they continue using instant rails for incoming payments (customers paying by same-day transfer, payroll feeds, or merchant payouts) to gain confidence in the system.

Benefits vs. Challenges for Businesses

Benefits

The chief appeal of instant payments for a company is liquidity management. When a payment clears in seconds, the recipient’s accounts receivable drops immediately, and the payer’s cash outflow is finalized (good funds), allowing finance to optimize cash on hand. Businesses can push out disbursements to the very end of the day, and likewise receive payments without delay, greatly improving working capital.

For example, some employers now use FedNow for off-cycle payroll runs, letting employees tap earned wages instantly while delaying the company’s funding by hours or days. Suppliers receive money faster and with detailed invoice data, which has been shown to improve relations and potentially negotiate better terms. Real-time rails also enhance transparency and accuracy. Unlike ACH entries or checks (where often little more than an ID or invoice number travels with the money), instant transfers can include the supplier’s name and a full breakdown of charges up front.

This two-way messaging (especially under ISO 20022) makes matching payments to invoices almost automatic. In practice, CFOs find that fewer staff hours are wasted chasing missing remittance info. Several studies highlight data as a top advantage, like in a FedPayments Council survey, 56% of businesses using instant payments said they experience lower payment-processing costs and fewer errors.

Finally, there is cost efficiency relative to wires. Typical domestic wire fees (often $15–$30 each) can be dozens of times higher than same-day credit transfer fees, which generally top out at a dollar or two per transaction. For midsize transactions, that difference adds up. As a result, treasurers view real-time credits somewhat like a hybrid of ACH and wires, immediate like a wire, but priced closer to an ACH or commercial card. Over time, large treasuries may even reroute some B2B payments (e.g. supplier draws, claims, rebates) from wires into instant rails to save fees while still meeting their payees’ timelines.

Challenges

These benefits come with caveats. The biggest practical hurdle is integration cost and complexity. Many companies’ ERP and treasury systems were built for batch processing and ACH/file-based uploads. Connecting them to FedNow or RTP’s APIs, or to a bank portal, requires IT investment. As one treasury survey put it, over half of businesses not using instant rails cite “cost and complexity” as the key barrier.

Similarly, smaller firms without a sophisticated treasury function may simply defer adoption until services are turnkey. Also, real-time rails are irreversible, so fraud protection is crucial. CFOs worry about authorized push-payment scams (where an employee is tricked into sending money) or about insufficient time to detect errors. Instant payments networks mitigate this by requiring payers to pre-validate recipients and by including fraud screening at the network level.

For instance, FedNow includes optional filters and the ability to quickly reverse unauthorized transactions under tight timeframes. Banks are also bolstering customer education around confirming payment requests. Nonetheless, many companies ramp up usage gradually while internal controls catch up, or use dedicated fraud-monitoring services as a supplement.

Another issue is that not every counterparty is reachable instantly yet. As of early 2025, roughly 1,300 institutions (out of 9,000 U.S. banks and credit unions) had joined FedNow, and about 400 institutions support RTP. This means a mid-market business may have some suppliers on instant rails, but others are still reliant on ACH. CFOs must therefore maintain dual processes during transition.

Over time, as more banks join and paytechs integrate (many payroll providers, bill-pay vendors, and AR platforms are enabling FedNow/RTP), this “network effect” will ease. But in the near term, CFOs often use instant payments primarily for suppliers and channels that explicitly accept them, while continuing legacy channels elsewhere.

Regulatory and Competitive Side

In the payments industry, competition and regulation are spurring improvements. In the U.S., regulators encourage instant-pay adoption. The Federal Reserve has waived FedNow participation fees for small banks through 2025 and has consulted on beneficial-rule enhancements. The Fed also carefully set FedNow’s initial pricing (e.g., just $0.045 per transfer in 2023) to build volume. On the wire-transfer side, the Federal Reserve’s wire system (Fedwire) and ACH continue alongside, but corporate governance increasingly demands that firms evaluate faster options.

Additionally, fintech providers and payment networks offer alternatives that target similar goals – payment-card networks (Visa Direct, Mastercard Send) and fintech services (Zelle, and business-centric push-to-card) allow faster payouts to vendors and consumers without needing bank details.

Many CFOs consider these alongside FedNow/RTP as part of a suite of “just-in-time” payment tools, especially for disbursements to individuals or international partners. On the legislative front, U.S. authorities are focused on fraud prevention (e.g., encouraging protections for push-pay scams) but have not mandated instant rails for businesses. In contrast, Europe’s regulators are moving more aggressively. A new “Instant Credit Transfer” requirement under PSD3 will mandate euro deposits be available within seconds across the EU (targeting Oct 2025).

Chinese and Indian real-time systems have already demonstrated that ubiquitous instant payments can become a de facto infrastructure. This global momentum puts pressure on the U.S. market to evolve, but U.S. innovation (with dual rails and open banking tools) offers flexibility. For CFOs, this means staying alert to changes. For example, interoperable cross-border schemes (like SWIFT’s GPI for instant transfers) and token-based payment rails may eventually link with domestic real-time networks, expanding reach.

Real-time payments are now common worldwide, and the U.S. trail is closing. The UK’s Faster Payments Service, long a success story, saw transaction volumes jump about 15% in 2024. Faster Payments now allows up to £1,000,000 per transfer, enabling large B2B and real-estate transactions instantly. In continental Europe, the Eurosystem’s TIPS platform (TARGET Instant Payment Settlement) already handles instant euro credit transfers 24/7, and most SEPA member banks support it. The upcoming EU Directive will push all euro-area banks to make instant credit transfers available as a default by late 2025.

In Asia, markets are even further along. For example, India’s UPI system processed 93.2 billion transactions in just H2 2024, demonstrating consumer and merchant comfort with instant pay. China and other countries also have prolific mobile-driven payment rails. While U.S. businesses deal mostly in domestic USD transfers, these global examples show the full potential; once nearly every party is “on network,” instant payments become the norm for nearly all disbursements and receipts. For American CFOs with overseas operations, these developments also signal that cross-border payment delays may become more unusual. Banks and fintechs are working on instant rails for global B2B settlements, and some service providers now link FedNow/RTP flows to foreign instant networks (for example, a U.S. supplier paid in USD could have the funds immediately released to a UK partner via Faster Payments). This “real-time globalization” is still emerging, but it underscores how interconnected payment infrastructures are.

Final Thoughts: The Road Ahead

By 2025, real-time payments will have shifted from a future concept to a core tool for corporate finance teams. Adoption is now essential for timely supply-chain and treasury operations. Still, CFOs and treasurers weigh the benefits of speed and visibility against implementation costs and the need for strong controls.

The next step is deeper integration with financial systems. ERPs and Treasury Management Systems are adding direct connections to FedNow and RTP APIs, making it easier to support new use cases. Banks are also upgrading, moving beyond ACH to offer real-time push payments as client demand grows.

Many companies are starting with targeted use cases, such as automating end-of-month supplier payments or offering instant refunds. ACH and wires will still be used where they make sense, but finance teams are learning to assess real-time payments like any other method.

Real-time payments in the U.S. are at a turning point. CFOs who stay proactive can gain a competitive edge, while waiting too long may mean missed opportunities.