---
source_url: "https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2026/05/01/testing-for-compliance-how-qa-reduces-regulatory-risk-in-fintech-and-ehealth/"
title: How QA Reduces Regulatory Risk In FinTech And eHealth
mirrored_at: 2026-08-04T01:03:43.910Z
host: www.forbes.com
cited_in_42a: true
mirror_canonical: "https://index.42a.ai/www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2026/05/01/testing-for-compliance-how-qa-reduces-regulatory-risk-in-fintech-and-ehealth/index"
---

> **Original source:** https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2026/05/01/testing-for-compliance-how-qa-reduces-regulatory-risk-in-fintech-and-ehealth/

_Dzmitry Lubneuski is the CIO at_ [_a1qa_](https://www.a1qa.com/)_, a leading pure-play software testing company. He’s a tech expert with a solid 20-year background in QA_

![ ](https://imageio.forbes.com/specials-images/imageserve/677c044ce78f592aae242fb9//0x0.jpg?width=960)

getty

​A release is launched and everything seems fine. But weeks later, a regulator, auditor, partner, insurer or customer asks questions. What controls were in place? Did they work? Where’s the proof? Then the issue becomes commercial, legal and reputational.

And when the answer is fuzzy, the cost climbs fast. Fines are one part of it. Delayed launches matter, too. So do forced fixes, tighter contract terms and lost trust.

In fintech and eHealth, compliance is built into the product itself. It’s embedded in payment processes, patient records and onboarding. Payment systems must follow PCI DSS. Health data is protected under HIPAA. Customer data is governed by GDPR, along with local laws and industry standards.​

## How Fast The Cost Shows Up

​Recent examples demonstrate the speed at which these costs show up.

In Finland, [a major bank was fined](https://www.dataguidance.com/news/finland-ombudsman-fines-s-bank-eu18m-insufficient) 1.8 million euros after a data security issue, and the authority said the bank had not properly tested new software before release.

In Lithuania, [the central bank fined a leading neobank](https://www.amlintelligence.com/2025/04/latest-revolut-fined-record-e3-5m-by-lithuania-for-aml-breaches/#:~:text=LITHUANIA'S%20central%20bank%20has%20fined,European%20and%20Lithuanian%20central%20banks.) $3.83 million over anti-money laundering weaknesses.

In the U.S., [HHS OCR imposed a $1.5 million civil money penalty](https://www.hhs.gov/press-room/penalty-against-warby-parker.html) after a HIPAA cybersecurity investigation and announced a [$600,000 settlement](https://www.hhs.gov/press-room/ocr-hipaa-racap-pih.html) after a phishing incident.

IBM’s 2025 research puts [the global average cost of a data breach](https://newsroom.ibm.com/2025-07-30-ibm-report-13-of-organizations-reported-breaches-of-ai-models-or-applications,-97-of-which-reported-lacking-proper-ai-access-controls) at about $4.4 million.

The business question comes down to this: How can organizations deliver digital services quickly while keeping every release compliant, minimizing risk to the business?

This comes down to teams proving that controls still work as the product changes.

## Where The Pressure Builds

Fintech and eHealth systems are rarely simple. A payment journey can move through a mobile app, API, fraud tool, bank and third-party services before a transaction is approved. A digital health journey can pass through patient apps, booking systems, electronic health records, pharmacy links, billing platforms and cloud services.

That is where testing and assurance start to matter. They lower regulatory risk by demonstrating that key controls are functioning and leaving behind evidence.

In fintech, proof may cover onboarding, payments and identity checks. In eHealth, it may address consent, access, data sharing or integration with external providers.

When testing processes are weak, teams cannot easily show what was covered, what changed or whether a sensitive control was touched. Evidence gets pieced together late from screenshots, tickets, spreadsheets and one-off notes.

That creates real exposure. Audits get harder to support. Launches slow down. Fixes cost more because problems are found later. Trust takes a hit because the organization cannot prove control effectiveness with confidence.

The pressure is rising, too. In the EU, [DORA came into effect](https://www.eiopa.europa.eu/digital-operational-resilience-act-dora_en) on January 17, 2025, placing greater emphasis on resilience testing, incident response and third-party oversight in financial services. [Verizon’s 2025 DBIR](https://www.verizon.com/about/news/2025-data-breach-investigations-report) also found that third parties were involved in 30% of breaches, which is particularly relevant in fintech and eHealth, where core services often depend on external platforms, vendors and integrations. In this environment, stronger testing, oversight and assurance help reduce risk.

Most organizations don’t need extra testing just for the sake of it. They need better proof that key controls keep working as the product changes.

Testing helps reduce regulatory risk by showing whether key controls are working, what has changed and what evidence exists to support compliance. A unified quality pipeline strengthens that effort by bringing together functional testing for critical user journeys with security, performance, resilience and accessibility checks where relevant.

In fintech, this can include account opening, payment approval, fraud screening, identity verification and payment page integrity. In eHealth, it can cover patient registration, consent capture, clinician access, appointment booking, prescribing, billing and data exchange across systems.

Automation only helps if it produces usable, auditable evidence like time-stamped results linked to releases and controls.

AI can be very practical. It supports repetitive checks, spots unusual patterns and helps teams focus on changes that might cause risk. It also cuts down on maintenance when user interfaces or APIs change.

But if the results can’t be explained, the audit problem stays. Teams need to trace results back to a release and a control.

Continuous monitoring fills another gap. Scheduled tests show what passed at a specific time. Monitoring reveals what’s happening in production right now. When both views are in one place, teams can easily track coverage, failures, fixes and evidence history.

Payment page protection is a good example. PCI DSS is urging companies to do more to stop e-skimming and tampering. This means managing scripts on payment pages, monitoring changes and checking integrity. Manual checks don’t work well here, especially when pages change often or use outside code.

The same idea applies in eHealth. Even a small release that changes user permissions, API behavior or a connection to a pharmacy or insurer can cause real compliance risks, even if the visible feature seems minor.

## In Conclusion

For fintech and eHealth companies, regulatory risk reaches into launches, deals, trust and growth.

That is why testing and assurance matter. When they properly support compliance, teams catch control drift earlier, keep evidence current and make audits easier to support. They also spend less time pulling proof together by hand and fixing avoidable problems late in the process.

Over time, delivery runs more smoothly, with less rework, less confusion and less panic around release decisions.

Compliance-focused QA helps turn compliance from a last-minute scramble into something that is checked, visible and provable throughout delivery. That makes it much less likely that a routine release leads to regulatory trouble, delayed deals or damaged trust.

* * *

[Forbes Technology Council](https://councils.forbes.com/forbestechcouncil?utm_source=forbes.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=forbes-links&utm_content=in-article-ad-links) is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. [_Do I qualify?_](https://councils.forbes.com/qualify?utm_source=forbes.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=forbes-links&utm_term=ftc&utm_content=in-article-ad-links)

* * *