Apollo Economist Warns AI Agents Could Drain Banks’ Low-Cost Deposits

A better interest rate is a tempting reason to move cash. Apollo chief economist Torsten Sløk warns that if AI agents eventually do that job for households at scale, banks could lose the low-cost deposits they use to fund loans. His warning describes a possible chain reaction, not a bank run underway.

The gap that prompted the warning

In a note titled “Is an Agentic Bank Run Coming?”, Sløk pointed to the gap between what checking accounts typically pay and the yields available elsewhere. He cited a 0.1% national average for checking and a 4.5% annual percentage yield at SoFi. His broader example covered accounts paying 3.3% to 5%. Those figures show why a household might want help finding a better return; they do not show how many households would move their money.

The individual decision and the system-wide risk are different. Moving cash to an account with a higher yield could benefit a saver. Sløk’s concern is what happens if AI agents make that choice routine across many households: banks could lose a large share of the inexpensive deposits they rely on to make loans. His scenario depends on widespread adoption, not merely on one agent finding an attractive rate.

What Muse can see today

Meta’s Muse gives the warning a current reference point, but not a working example of automatic cash transfers. Muse launched on September 8 with financial-account connections powered by Plaid. With a user’s permission, those connections can share balances, transactions, investment holdings and mortgage information. Plaid says it supports connections to more than 12,000 U.S. financial institutions and apps.

That access can give an assistant context for financial guidance. Plaid’s description of the integration does not say Muse can transfer money between accounts. Sløk’s proposed sweep into higher-yield accounts is therefore a forecast about what agents could soon do, not a capability demonstrated by this integration. Seeing an idle balance and moving it are separate steps.

0.1%Checking accounts

Sløk cited 0.1% as the national average yield on checking accounts.

4.5%SoFi deposits

Sløk used SoFi’s 4.5% APY as one higher-yield example; it is not an average for online accounts.

The missing measure is movement

Sløk’s note puts no estimate on how much money might leave low-yield accounts or how quickly it could move. That matters to the scale of his warning. A wide interest-rate gap explains the incentive to switch, but it cannot establish the pace of deposit losses or their effect on lending. CNBC reported no signs that an AI-driven bank run is happening or likely anytime soon.

For now, the practical boundary is clear: Plaid describes a way for people to choose which financial information to share with Muse and manage those connections. It does not describe an automatic transfer feature. The next meaningful development for Sløk’s scenario would be evidence that agents can move household cash and that people use them to do so at scale. Until then, the potential benefit to savers and the potential pressure on banks remain linked possibilities, not observed results.