In conversation with... Erik Becker, Product Director at Regnology

As the European Union sharpens its focus on financial resilience and transparency, the long-running European Pillar 3 Data Hub (P3DH) project is entering its critical implementation phase. The P3DH is a centralized digital platform for banks to submit and publish standardized prudential disclosures directly to the European Banking Authority (EBA). The corresponding Implementing Technical Standards (ITS) from the EBA are nearly final for the P3DH, bringing a new level of transparency and standardization to the financial sector. 

While rooted in regulation—specifically the EU’s Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR III) and Directive (CRD VI)—P3DH is far more than an exercise in compliance. For banks, it brings strategic implications—from modernized processes and IT infrastructure to updated policies and stronger data governance.

Moreover, by requiring disclosures to be public, standardized, and machine-readable, it pushes institutions to elevate data quality, ensure internal consistency, and leverage more automation. It also lays the groundwork for broader EU initiatives like the European Single Access Point (ESAP), aiming to make financial data more accessible and comparable across the Union. 

In this interview, Regnology Product Director, Erik Becker, delves into the P3DH impact and offers a practical lens on what it means for the industry—from operational and technical challenges to the long-term impact on competitiveness, transparency, and trust.

The reference date for the first submission under the Pillar 3 Data Hub is expected for 30 June 2025 for large and other institutions and 31 December 2025 for small and non-complex credit institutions (SNCIs), subject to final EBA clarification by mid-2025. 

Institutions are required to submit their Pillar 3 disclosures directly to the EBA no later than the date on which they publish their financial statements or financial reports for the corresponding period, or as soon as technically feasible during the transition period. 

The applicable reporting frequency will vary by topic and institution
type—typically annual, semi-annual, or quarterly for large institutions, while other institutions have less frequent obligations.  

A key element still pending is the EBA’s upcoming guideline under Article 106 CRD, which is expected to define harmonized publication rules across the EU. Until then, national practices may continue to differ, and banks should remain closely aligned with both EBA and local supervisory expectations.

Regardless of the submission model, institutions must ensure consistency between supervisory data and public disclosures. For larger and other institutions, the responsibility for data quality remains entirely with the bank, even though supervisors, especially the ECB, are expected to cross-check disclosures against regulatory submissions. At the same time, with public disclosures becoming fully accessible to analysts, investors, and other stakeholders, ensuring alignment is also key to mitigating reputational risk. Many banks are therefore investing in automated reconciliation and quality controls to safeguard both compliance and credibility. 

To support this, banks should aim to use a unified reporting solution that covers both Pillar 1 and Pillar 3 requirements. Unlike the modular submission logic in supervisory reporting, several disclosure requirements must now be submitted together via a single-entry point—for example, Own funds, Leverage Ratio, and liquidity disclosures are grouped under CONDISPILLAR3 (referring to DPM Version 4.1). This bundling requires institutions to manage all relevant templates in a single, consistent system, ensuring alignment across data sources and avoiding system breaks or duplication. 

In this context, automation and integrated architecture are critical—enabling accuracy, scalability, and a shift from manual preparation toward strategic oversight.