BOSTON–Text messages are rapidly gaining on email as the initial point of contact for financial scams, while new research shows 43% of victims make or authorize a payment within an hour of being contacted, leaving financial institutions with a narrow window to identify fraud before money moves.
According to a new report from PYMNTS Intelligence, the percentage of scam victims first contacted by text message has increased 35% since September 2025, reaching 12% in July 2026. During the same period, email’s share declined 30% to 13%.
The findings, detailed in the report, “Fraud’s Loyalty Tax: How Scams Cost Banks Their Customers,” highlight a growing challenge for banks, credit unions and fintech companies: Many scams originate through communications channels financial institutions cannot monitor, leaving them to identify suspicious activity only when a customer attempts to transfer money.
Less than a year ago, email led text messaging by 10 percentage points as the initial point of contact for scams. That gap has now narrowed to less than 1.5 percentage points, according to PYMNTS Intelligence.
Scammers Moving Quickly
The research found scammers frequently succeed in convincing victims to send money shortly after making contact.
Among the findings:
- 43% of victims made or authorized a payment within one hour of initial contact.
- 63% made or authorized a payment within one day.
- 35% realized their money was gone within 30 minutes of making their first transaction.
- 12% of victims were initially contacted by text message, up 35% from September 2025.
- 13% were initially contacted by email, a 30% decline over the same period.
PYMNTS Intelligence said the speed of these transactions creates significant challenges for financial institutions attempting to intervene before funds are transferred.
While banks and credit unions can monitor account logins, evaluate transactions and flag unusual account activity, they generally cannot see the text messages or social media conversations that persuade customers to authorize fraudulent payments.
That distinction is important because the transactions themselves may appear legitimate, having been initiated and approved by the account holders.
Younger Consumers Face Different Risks
The report also found significant differences in how scammers initially contact younger consumers.
Among Generation Z victims, 15% said their scam began with a text message, a rate 32% higher than the overall average.
Social media was an even more prominent starting point for scams involving Gen Z consumers, with 23% identifying it as the initial contact channel, 31% above the overall average.
According to PYMNTS Intelligence, the findings suggest financial institutions serving younger, digitally active consumers must account for fraud schemes that originate across multiple communications platforms before resulting in a financial transaction.
A scam might begin through a social media message, continue through text messaging and ultimately result in a transfer from a bank or credit union account.
Not All Scams Move at the Same Speed
The report also identified substantial differences in how quickly victims make payments depending on the type of scam.
Fake e-commerce and online marketplace scams were among the fastest-moving schemes, with 79% of victims making a payment within one day of initial contact.
The median time to payment for those scams was less than one hour.
Romance scams, by comparison, generally developed over much longer periods.
Only 16% of romance-scam victims made a payment within one day, while the median time to payment was at least two weeks.
Those differences present another challenge for fraud prevention systems, according to PYMNTS Intelligence.
A system designed to identify an unusually large or rapid transfer may be better positioned to detect certain marketplace scams than schemes in which criminals spend weeks developing relationships and establishing trust before requesting money.
Implications for Financial Institutions
According to the report, financial institutions increasingly must rely on transaction behavior rather than the communications that precede a payment to identify potential scams.
Potential warning signs include:
- Payments to newly added recipients.
- Unusual transaction amounts.
- Transfers to unfamiliar destinations.
- Changes in established transaction patterns.
- Other account activity that deviates from a customer’s normal financial behavior.
PYMNTS Intelligence noted that the challenge is particularly significant when customers willingly authorize payments after being deceived by scammers operating outside the financial institution’s systems.
In those cases, a transaction may pass traditional authentication controls even though the customer is acting on fraudulent instructions.
