The balance of technology financing has increased for the first time in a year. Funding for technology-driven small and medium-sized enterprises has expanded, with KB Kookmin Bank and Kyongnam Bank securing the top spots in their respective technology financing evaluations.
On June 17, the Financial Services Commission held a written meeting of the Tech Evaluation Committee and announced the results of the "2025 Second Half Technology Financing Tech Evaluation and Quality Assessment" on June 19.
The tech evaluation is a system that assesses the performance and support capabilities of banks in technology financing on a semi-annual basis. It is designed to encourage funding for companies with technological potential but lacking collateral or credit. The evaluation results influence the adjustment rates of contributions to the Credit Guarantee Fund and the Technology Guarantee Fund.
In this evaluation, KB Kookmin Bank ranked first in the large bank category, followed by NongHyup Bank in second place. In the small bank category, Kyongnam Bank took first place, with Busan Bank coming in second.
The balance of technology financing was recorded at 318.7 trillion won at the end of last year. After declining from 326 trillion won in 2022 to 304.5 trillion won in 2023 and 302.8 trillion won in 2024, it has now returned to an upward trend.
The Financial Services Commission attributed the increase in new technology financing to large banks and the enhancement of technology financing infrastructure at individual banks. Technology financing loans received an average preferential interest rate of 0.34 percentage points lower than standard loans. The interest rate for technology financing was 4.04%, compared to 4.24% for general SME loans, marking a 0.20 percentage point difference.
In the quality assessment of technology credit evaluations, the evaluation agency eCredible received an "excellent" rating. Among banks capable of self-assessment, Shinhan Bank, Hana Bank, and IM Bank also received excellent ratings.
All 14 evaluation agencies received ratings of "good" or higher, continuing from the first half of last year. However, differences in the capabilities of evaluation personnel and the redundancy verification system led to a decrease in the number of agencies receiving excellent ratings by one compared to the previous half.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.