The banking disaster has a silver lining. Companies may truly begin defending their money

The present American banking system presents depositors few sensible choices for securing their cash past the $250,000 FDIC restrict. Because of this, many companies didn’t take enough precautions.

There needs to be a greater approach for individuals to guard their money in financial institution accounts. Encouragingly, the define of such a brand new system is coming into focus. The FDIC might start to supply deposit insurance coverage past its present restrict–and there’s an opportunity for fintech and insurers to leap into the house with revolutionary safety merchandise as nicely.

Lastly, companies may be capable of take management of securing their money. However earlier than discussing that future, it’s essential to grasp how we obtained up to now.

Hypothetically, any firm or particular person might open an limitless variety of accounts to make sure all of their deposits are below the FDIC restrict. However virtually, this makes little sense.

This speaks to one of many basic rules of insurance coverage: It must be straightforward to acquire–in any other case it’s ineffective.

I’m an ideal instance of this. I run a fintech agency that helps firms supply embedded, point-of-sale insurance coverage merchandise to their clients. But regardless of constructing a profession round serving to individuals navigate danger, up till solely six months in the past we had 100% of our money at Silicon Valley Financial institution.

“Have you ever thought-about spreading your funds to a number of banks?” my spouse, a fellow entrepreneur, requested me at some point. “Solely $250,000 is protected by the FDIC.”

I informed her it might be effective. I didn’t see any cause why a financial institution like SVB would fail.

My firm, Tint, did take most of our cash out of SVB earlier than its failure, however solely as a result of we needed to maneuver it to a higher-yield account. Had we not completed that, virtually all of our property would have been weak.

The large query is: Why did I and so a lot of my fellow tech leaders not inoculate ourselves from this danger?

The reality is that purchasing insurance coverage shouldn’t be enjoyable. It doesn’t make you any cash–it solely saves you from dropping it. Most individuals don’t need to take into consideration insurance coverage in the event that they don’t must. When most executives are contemplating the place to put their cash, they often find yourself utilizing a financial institution that their friends are utilizing and that enjoys a strong fame. For many people, SVB match that description.

People are naturally fairly dangerous at projecting and analyzing danger. We hardly ever take into consideration what may occur if there’s a sudden run on a financial institution and our deposits are in peril. Doing so would imply arising with a plan for securing our funds. It might be difficult and time-consuming for us to unfold tens of millions of {dollars} between a number of accounts at a number of banks.

It seems that I’m describing a hopeless scenario wherein firms are doomed to put their money in unsafe locations. Nevertheless it doesn’t must be.

In truth, I’m optimistic that we’re about to see actual, enduring change within the deposit insurance coverage house. Tint doesn’t promote deposit insurance coverage merchandise.

Earlier this week, the New York Instances reported that members of Congress are discussing the concept of lifting the $250,000 cap on FDIC deposit insurance coverage. That is an intriguing concept. However even when the FDIC doesn’t increase its cap, organizations that want to safe their funds past the FDIC restrict ought to have the option to take action in a sensible and financially sustainable approach.

Which may imply paying premiums to the FDIC for added insurance coverage past the present restrict. This FDIC-plus service could possibly be provided through banks when clients open accounts.

However there’s cause to doubt whether or not the FDIC, as a government-run entity, is finest positioned and incentivized to resolve this drawback. Ideally in a capitalistic financial system, non-public entities are extra able to offering a passable answer.

Fintechs, for example, might supply accounts with enhanced safety at extra prices. Depositors must settle for strings hooked up to such plans to stop future financial institution runs. For instance, which may seem like limiting clients from withdrawing greater than a sure share of their deposits suddenly. And so as to add one other layer of safety, the FDIC might act as a type of reinsurer to backstop a run on deposits.

One other risk is that insurance coverage firms themselves might supply third-party safety plans on prime of financial institution accounts. Restrictions may apply there, when it comes to not providing protection to banks that aren’t adequately capitalized.

As we’ve seen with innovation in different sectors, if startups are profitable in providing such revolutionary deposit safety plans, conventional banks would probably comply with. It’s not arduous to think about JPMorgan Chase and Citi providing add-on insurance coverage for brand spanking new buyer accounts in a number of years.

Nearly all disasters are accompanied by a silver lining. With this one, it could be the creation of a extra strong, secure system for shielding our cash.

Matheus Riolfi is the co-founder and CEO of Tint.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary items are solely the views of their authors and don’t essentially mirror the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

Extra must-read commentary printed by Fortune: