Data Action

Name: Data Action
Brand: Data Action

Powering Core and Digital banking for Challenger Banks

Est 1986|9 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 6K|Website|FTEs 233|HQ Adelaide, South Australia, AU

MarketsInfrastructure Monitoring Application Hosting Platforms API Management

Published Sep 30, 2026

01Common complaints

If the organization requires publicly accessible and standardized compliance artifacts
- If the procurement process depends on easily accessible public attestations (e.g., SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001) and detailed security architecture disclosures, DA’s public materials (as accessed) may be insufficient; request the evidence pack during vendor diligence.
If operational resilience risk is the primary constraint
- If the risk appetite is highly sensitive to third-party outages, the February 2024 DA infrastructure outage is a notable due diligence flag. Organizations may prefer architectures with multi-provider redundancy or a vendor with documented multi-region resilience metrics.
If transparent, self-serve pricing is required
- DA does not publish clear pricing tiers publicly; organizations that require published rate cards for rapid price discovery may consider vendors with public pricing or standardized SaaS offerings.
If a cloud-native multi-tenant SaaS core is required by default
- Organizations explicitly pursuing a multi-tenant, cloud-native core with rapid feature iteration and self-service provisioning may find cloud-native entrants more aligned to that model, depending on regulatory posture and implementation constraints.
Reliability incident
- February 2024: A DA network outage affected multiple client banks, causing internet and mobile banking disruptions and partial degradation before recovery was declared.
Transparency gaps in public documentation
- Publicly accessible security certifications and detailed compliance documentation were not found in the material accessed for this research.
- No public pricing tiers were identified.
Roadmap and future capabilities
- No publicly accessible, detailed product roadmap was located in the sources reviewed. Procurement discussions should request roadmap detail and upgrade/release cadence.

- If the organization requires publicly accessible and standardized compliance artifacts - If the procurement process depends on easily accessible public attestations (e.g., SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001) and detailed security architecture disclosures, DA’s public materials (as accessed) may be insufficient; request the evidence pack during vendor diligence. - If operational resilience risk is the primary constraint - If the risk appetite is highly sensitive to third-party outages, the February 2024 DA infrastructure outage is a notable due diligence flag. Organizations may prefer architectures with multi-provider redundancy or a vendor with documented multi-region resilience metrics. - If transparent, self-serve pricing is required - DA does not publish clear pricing tiers publicly; organizations that require published rate cards for rapid price discovery may consider vendors with public pricing or standardized SaaS offerings. - If a cloud-native multi-tenant SaaS core is required by default - Organizations explicitly pursuing a multi-tenant, cloud-native core with rapid feature iteration and self-service provisioning may find cloud-native entrants more aligned to that model, depending on regulatory posture and implementation constraints. - Reliability incident - February 2024: A DA network outage affected multiple client banks, causing internet and mobile banking disruptions and partial degradation before recovery was declared. - Transparency gaps in public documentation - Publicly accessible security certifications and detailed compliance documentation were not found in the material accessed for this research. - No public pricing tiers were identified. - Roadmap and future capabilities - No publicly accessible, detailed product roadmap was located in the sources reviewed. Procurement discussions should request roadmap detail and upgrade/release cadence.

Deal disqualifiers: what makes an inappropriate fit

The organization requires publicly available, standardized compliance attestations and security artifacts; Data Action did not publish these in the material reviewed.
The organization cannot tolerate vendor concentration risk without multi-region active-active disaster recovery and enforceable contractual penalties.
The organization requires a multi-tenant SaaS core by default and rapid self-service provisioning; cloud-native vendors may be a better fit for that model.

- The organization requires publicly available, standardized compliance attestations and security artifacts; Data Action did not publish these in the material reviewed. - The organization cannot tolerate vendor concentration risk without multi-region active-active disaster recovery and enforceable contractual penalties. - The organization requires a multi-tenant SaaS core by default and rapid self-service provisioning; cloud-native vendors may be a better fit for that model.

02Why they buy

Australia-focused positioning
- DA describes the product as developed for Australian retail banking and positions its offerings with domestic regulatory considerations in mind.
Combined core, digital and managed hosting offering
- DA’s public materials describe a product set that includes core banking, digital banking channels, payments integration, reporting, and managed private cloud hosting with 24/7 support services.
Migration experience (vendor-reported)
- DA reports completing a number of migrations; the vendor reports over 80 migrations, which is a vendor-stated metric and was not independently validated in this research.
Comparative context
- Ultradata has an established domestic presence in the mutual segment and a broad product set.
- Cloud-native entrants may provide different delivery and economic models (SaaS, multi-tenancy) that suit other buyer profiles.

- Australia-focused positioning - DA describes the product as developed for Australian retail banking and positions its offerings with domestic regulatory considerations in mind. - Combined core, digital and managed hosting offering - DA’s public materials describe a product set that includes core banking, digital banking channels, payments integration, reporting, and managed private cloud hosting with 24/7 support services. - Migration experience (vendor-reported) - DA reports completing a number of migrations; the vendor reports over 80 migrations, which is a vendor-stated metric and was not independently validated in this research. - Comparative context - Ultradata has an established domestic presence in the mutual segment and a broad product set. - Cloud-native entrants may provide different delivery and economic models (SaaS, multi-tenancy) that suit other buyer profiles.

03Field reports

Availability of traditional review-platform content

Gartner Peer Insights
- No accessible vendor/product listing for Data Action was found in searches of public review platforms during this research.
G2
- No listing for DA core banking was identified.
TrustRadius
- No listing for DA core banking was identified.

Community / social discussion (more accessible)

Reddit — outage-driven user sentiment (Feb 2024)
- Example negative and frustration signals (direct quotes)
  - From r/AusFinance during the outage:
    - "So…wondering why as customers we aren’t given updates and actually have to register after an incident to be provided updates on the outage ? That seems insane …surely?"
    - "I’m surprised ubank and all the other banks didn’t throw Data Action under the bus a lot earlier."
    - "First time I’ve heard of the outage, haven’t had any correspondence saying there is an ongoing issue."
    - An anecdotal comment claimed: "I’m glad we’re only 6 months or so away from transitioning away from DA…" (identity and timing cannot be verified).
- Interpretation
  - End customers frequently attribute service issues to their retail bank, but upstream provider incidents become visible during major outages. Communication and transparency (status updates, proactive alerts) were recurring pain points in public threads.

- Reddit — outage-driven user sentiment (Feb 2024) - Example negative and frustration signals (direct quotes) - From r/AusFinance during the outage: - "So…wondering why as customers we aren’t given updates and actually have to register after an incident to be provided updates on the outage ? That seems insane …surely?" - "I’m surprised ubank and all the other banks didn’t throw Data Action under the bus a lot earlier." - "First time I’ve heard of the outage, haven’t had any correspondence saying there is an ongoing issue." - An anecdotal comment claimed: "I’m glad we’re only 6 months or so away from transitioning away from DA…" (identity and timing cannot be verified). - Interpretation - End customers frequently attribute service issues to their retail bank, but upstream provider incidents become visible during major outages. Communication and transparency (status updates, proactive alerts) were recurring pain points in public threads.

Press / third-party accounts that function as proxy reviews

Computerworld interview about 86 400 (Aug 2019)
- Selection rationale (paraphrased)
  - 86 400 selected a cost-effective core with API support and a vendor willing to collaborate closely; Data Action was identified as the core vendor in the coverage.
- Caution
  - This is a single-customer narrative in a media interview and reflects one buyer’s priorities; it may not represent the median customer experience.
iTnews reporting about Open Banking/Consumer Data Right deadlines (Dec 2021)
- Constraint signals (paraphrased)
  - iTnews reported that Data Action and Ultradata were relatively small and faced capacity constraints that affected customers’ ability to meet open banking deadlines; some customers experienced implementation difficulties.

- Computerworld interview about 86 400 (Aug 2019) - Selection rationale (paraphrased) - 86 400 selected a cost-effective core with API support and a vendor willing to collaborate closely; Data Action was identified as the core vendor in the coverage. - Caution - This is a single-customer narrative in a media interview and reflects one buyer’s priorities; it may not represent the median customer experience. - iTnews reporting about Open Banking/Consumer Data Right deadlines (Dec 2021) - Constraint signals (paraphrased) - iTnews reported that Data Action and Ultradata were relatively small and faced capacity constraints that affected customers’ ability to meet open banking deadlines; some customers experienced implementation difficulties.

Why customers selected DA over alternatives (evidence-based)

Fit for Australian challenger/mutual segment
- DA describes its offering as aligned with Australian retail banking regulatory and functional requirements.
API and integration considerations (from 86 400 coverage)
- 86 400 highlighted API support and collaborative vendor engagement as factors in selection.

Why some customers may leave or consider alternatives (inferred from evidence)

Operational concentration risk and outages
- High-visibility outages can lead clients to reconsider vendor dependency, particularly for banks with strict reliability expectations.
Capacity constraints and regulatory deadlines
- Limited delivery bandwidth during peak regulatory programs (e.g., Open Banking) can prompt clients to evaluate alternatives that provide greater implementation resourcing or standardized SaaS capabilities.

- Operational concentration risk and outages - High-visibility outages can lead clients to reconsider vendor dependency, particularly for banks with strict reliability expectations. - Capacity constraints and regulatory deadlines - Limited delivery bandwidth during peak regulatory programs (e.g., Open Banking) can prompt clients to evaluate alternatives that provide greater implementation resourcing or standardized SaaS capabilities.

86 400 (Australian neobank) — Data Action core banking provider

Evidence points
- Multiple sources indicate that 86 400 used Data Action for core banking functions.
Reported outcomes
- Coverage indicates the core was operational prior to public launch and that the bank’s overall architecture included multiple providers.
Critical evaluation
- Public material is largely narrative; measurable outcomes attributable solely to Data Action (e.g., cost per account, time-to-launch improvements) are not publicly documented. The bank’s outcomes reflected integration across multiple vendors, limiting attribution to any single supplier.

- Evidence points - Multiple sources indicate that 86 400 used Data Action for core banking functions. - Reported outcomes - Coverage indicates the core was operational prior to public launch and that the bank’s overall architecture included multiple providers. - Critical evaluation - Public material is largely narrative; measurable outcomes attributable solely to Data Action (e.g., cost per account, time-to-launch improvements) are not publicly documented. The bank’s outcomes reflected integration across multiple vendors, limiting attribution to any single supplier.

IBM case study (QRadar SIEM hosted on IBM FlashSystem)

Evidence points
- IBM describes Data Action hosting a QRadar SIEM on IBM storage and frames benefits such as reduced multi-vendor integration complexity.
Critical evaluation
- This case study describes IBM infrastructure supporting Data Action’s tooling and is not an independent audit of Data Action’s banking platform performance. It provides insight into components of Data Action’s security tooling and infrastructure choices but is not a direct measure of the platform’s reliability for bank customers.

- Evidence points - IBM describes Data Action hosting a QRadar SIEM on IBM storage and frames benefits such as reduced multi-vendor integration complexity. - Critical evaluation - This case study describes IBM infrastructure supporting Data Action’s tooling and is not an independent audit of Data Action’s banking platform performance. It provides insight into components of Data Action’s security tooling and infrastructure choices but is not a direct measure of the platform’s reliability for bank customers.

04Best fit

Company sizes: employee counts and revenue ranges (inferred)

Typical fit (inferred)
- Regulated Australian ADIs and similar institutions outside the major national banks, with sufficient operational complexity to require a core plus digital and managed services stack. Examples include regional banks, mutual banks, credit unions and neobanks.

Industries and verticals where adoption is strongest (with customer examples)

Retail banking and customer-owned banking in Australia
- Example: 86 400 (neobank) used Data Action for core banking functions (multiple sources indicate Data Action provided the core).
- Clients referenced in outage reporting include ubank, Beyond Bank, Defence Bank, People’s Choice and others.

Roles and personas: decision makers and end users

Decision makers
- CIO/CTO, COO, Head of Technology, Head of Digital Channels, Head of Risk/Compliance, Procurement
End users
- Bank operations teams, call centre staff, branch staff, customer service teams, finance operations

Pain points and challenges the product addresses

Modernizing core and digital experiences without fully building and operating an in-house platform
Meeting Australian regulatory and industry requirements
Providing managed hosting and continuous operational support

Qualification criteria: what makes an appropriate fit

The organization prefers a domestically oriented provider offering an integrated set of core, digital and managed hosting services and values vendor experience with migrations and the Australian market.

05The pitch

What the product does (core value proposition in objective terms)

Data Action (DA) provides a banking technology platform and managed services primarily for Australian challenger and customer-owned banks.
The offering is presented as a suite of modules that can include:
- Core banking (ledger and operational banking functions)
- Digital banking channels (mobile/internet banking)
- Payments capabilities (including references to domestic real-time payment rails in digital solution materials)
- Data reporting and analytics services
- Integration and infrastructure / hosted private cloud services
- Cybersecurity services
DA describes the product as developed in Australia with an intended focus on Australian regulatory requirements and retail banking operations.

- Data Action (DA) provides a banking technology platform and managed services primarily for Australian challenger and customer-owned banks. - The offering is presented as a suite of modules that can include: - Core banking (ledger and operational banking functions) - Digital banking channels (mobile/internet banking) - Payments capabilities (including references to domestic real-time payment rails in digital solution materials) - Data reporting and analytics services - Integration and infrastructure / hosted private cloud services - Cybersecurity services - DA describes the product as developed in Australia with an intended focus on Australian regulatory requirements and retail banking operations.

Target market and market positioning

Target buyers
- Australian challenger banks, neobanks, customer-owned banks, credit unions, and adjacent financial services organizations.
Market position
- A specialist domestic provider focused on the Australian mutual/challenger bank segment rather than global mega-vendors.
- Competes against other local core banking vendors (notably Ultradata) and faces competitive pressure from cloud-native and SaaS core and digital platforms entering Australia.

- Target buyers - Australian challenger banks, neobanks, customer-owned banks, credit unions, and adjacent financial services organizations. - Market position - A specialist domestic provider focused on the Australian mutual/challenger bank segment rather than global mega-vendors. - Competes against other local core banking vendors (notably Ultradata) and faces competitive pressure from cloud-native and SaaS core and digital platforms entering Australia.

Get a comprehensive analysis of Data Action including market position, competitive landscape, adoption trends, and peer benchmarks.

Download full report →