The legacy SWIFT statement and its ISO 20022 successor — side by side. Format, structure, data richness, migration timeline, and which one to request from each bank.
| Dimension | MT940 | CAMT.053 |
|---|---|---|
| Standard body | SWIFT MT (FIN) | ISO 20022 (CAMT) |
| Format | Flat text, :tag: blocks | XML schema |
| First released | 1980s | 2004, mandatory migration 2022–2025 |
| Primary region | Europe + global SWIFT | Global, Europe-first adoption |
| Statement scope | End-of-day (MT940), intraday (MT942) | End-of-day (CAMT.053), intraday (CAMT.052) |
| Remittance info | Free-text :86: field | Structured RmtInf with Strd/Ustrd |
| Character set | SWIFT X-set (limited) | Full UTF-8 |
| Counterparty detail | Often missing or truncated | Full BIC, IBAN, name, address, ID |
| File size | Small (KB) | Larger (XML overhead) |
| ERP support | Universal legacy | Modern ERPs + TMS |
| Future-proof | Sunset path | Strategic standard |
Yes — SWIFT's ISO 20022 migration runs through November 2025 for cross-border payments (CBPR+), and most European banks already offer CAMT.053 as the primary corporate statement. MT940 will keep working for years on legacy ERP feeds, but new integrations should request CAMT.053.
CAMT.053. It's XML with structured fields for every counterparty detail, regulatory reporting, charges breakdown, and remittance information. MT940's :86: narrative is a free-text field that banks fill inconsistently. If you need structured remittance for invoice matching, CAMT.053 is materially better.
Often no. SAP FF.5, older Oracle Cash Management releases, DATEV legacy modules, and many bespoke reconciliation tools still expect MT940. The practical move is to ask the bank for both during migration and reconcile balances in parallel for one or two cycles.
BAI2 is the US equivalent of MT940. The ISO 20022 migration affects BAI2 the same way it affects MT940: same destination format (CAMT.053), same multi-year transition. US treasury teams typically request BAI2 + CAMT.053 in parallel during 2024–2026.