In a letter to shareholders last year, JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon delivered an uncomfortable truth: AI “may reduce certain job categories or roles,” predicting labor ramifications similar to the printing press, steam engine, electricity, and internet. The tech became the primary suspect as JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanely issued several rounds of layoffs in 2025. But experts tell Fortune that an AI-fueled finance job takeover is largely “smoke and mirrors.” At least, for now.
People have rightfully raised eyebrows as banks trim their workforces and funnel billions into AI capabilities. Businesses have already deployed the software in their operations, using monikers for AI tools like “Socrates,” performing hours worth of junior-level analyst tasks in just seconds. Simultaneously, a report from Citigroup has found that 54% of financial jobs “have a high potential for automation”—more than any other sector. But experts agree that AI-related layoffs have been insignificant, so far. This year’s flow of banking headcount reductions are a result of pandemic-era overhiring and economic uncertainty.
“If there’s a large company that might say, ‘Well, we’re not planning to hire as much because of AI,’ or maybe ‘We’re letting people go because of AI,’ I think there’s a little bit of smoke and mirrors there,” Robert Seamans, director of New York University Stern’s Center for the Future of Management, tells Fortune.
“AI is often a scapegoat for things, because it’s easier to blame AI than it is to blame softening consumer demand, or uncertainty because of tariffs, or maybe poor HR strategy the past few years in terms of over hiring coming out of COVID,” he continues, adding that “there’s a lot less political risk than blaming the President’s tariffs.”
While AI isn’t capable of replacing bankers and consultants just yet, there could be trouble on the horizon for marketers and accountants, experts tell Fortune. And elite business degrees are still worth their while; the vast majority of top MBA students are still locking in job offers soon after graduation. But prospects are dwindling, and banking headcounts could stagnate for years as AI drives a massive productivity boom.
AI is stifling hiring in the banking industry—and it could last for years
Despite Wall Street making headlines for its relentless string of layoffs this year, headcounts across banking and finance have actually been relatively steady.
“I think the general [headcount] trend in the banking industry over the last decade is stable to slightly declining. I don’t see that changing anytime soon,” Pim Hilbers, a managing director working with banking and talent at BCG, tells Fortune. “That doesn’t mean that everybody just stays in their job for life. I think we see a lot more mobility than we saw in the past.”
So far, America’s largest financial institutions haven’t been making deep workforce cuts. Bank of America employed just four fewer workers at the end of the third quarter this year, compared to 2024. In that same time period, JPMorgan saw its headcount climb by 2,000 employees, and more than a third of the new staffers were brought onto corporate operations. Even Goldman Sachs, which implemented multiple rounds of layoffs this year, employed 48,300 this September—around 1,800 staffers higher than the year before.
Banks aren’t ready to shed staffers just yet; experts tell Fortune they’re pulling back on headcount growth for as long as possible, leaning on AI efficiency gains until they’re forced to add more humans to payroll. They predict this sluggish period of hiring could last for years.
“Many of the banks I talked to will say, ‘Look, I want to get the productivity so that I don’t have to hire the next 100 people to put on another billion dollars of loans.’ That’s probably [what] the majority of thinking is: I just won’t have to hire for 24 months, because I can get the productivity,” Mike Abbott, industry group lead for Accenture’s banking and capital markets, tells Fortune.
“As attrition flows through, you don’t have to hire as many, but then eventually you hit a point where you’re going to have to hire again.”
Top MBA students are still succeeding—but job offers are declining
MBA graduates are already feeling the hiring tremors in lieu of strong employment rates. Around 92% of the class of 2025 students from Columbia Business School received job offers, as did 86% of this year’s NYU Stern MBA graduates. Last year, 93% of Wharton students reported receiving work opportunities, and at Duke, 85% nailed down an offer letter.
However, professors at these top business schools caution that the statistics aren’t a reflection of all MBA programs. Columbia and NYU Stern, for example, are nestled in the epicenter of U.S. finance: New York City. Additionally, these elite universities have more resources to skill students and boost their market value. Columbia Business School associate professor of business Daniel Keum tells Fortune that Python is an “almost required” class for all MBA pupils at the university.
And while MBA job offer rates remain high, take a peek under the hood, and the prospects aren’t as plentiful. Job placement outcomes at every single one of America’s “magnificent seven” elite MBA programs—including Northwestern, MIT, Stanford, and Harvard—have declined since 2021, according to a Bloomberg analysis. In 2021, only 4% of Harvard’s MBA students received no job offer within three months of graduation; by 2024, that figure swelled to 15%. MIT saw a similar change, with its share of offer-less graduates climbing from 4.1% to 14.9% in a matter of three years.
The finance roles that are still safe—and the ones most at risk
As AI has evolved to take on the grunt work—preparing slideshow presentations, synthesizing client data, and balancing checkbooks—it’s been feared that all junior-level analysts would soon get the boot. But not all jobs in the financial industry rely on the same core skills, and experts tell Fortune there are a few endangered roles in the era of AI disruption.
Surprisingly, the entry-level financial workers paying their dues and tediously crafting bespoke powerpoint presentations won’t be the first ones out the door. Keum tells Fortune that consulting and banking jobs “resist automation quite robustly.” He explains that their job tasks have little margin for error, as clients will not tolerate even the smallest mistake. Plus, every business deal is different; no two acquisitions are exactly alike, making it difficult to automate human critical thinking needed for the job.
“Banking consulting [is] actually not doing too bad. Think about compliance issues where that 1% mistake is not tolerated. It cannot be accepted,” Keum says. “That’s why a lot of analyst jobs at McKinsey and Bain are automated, but it’s still extremely human intensive.”
Simultaneously, Abbott predicts an industry-wide surge in tech hiring. Around 76% of banks expect to increase their tech headcount because of agentic AI, according to Accenture data shared with Fortune. But human staffers in a few vulnerable roles might see the adverse effect of AI’s gains. It’s estimated that 73% of working time spent by U.S. banking employees has high potential to be impacted by generative AI, according to a 2024 Accenture report, improving the productivity of early AI-adopters by 22% to 30% over the next three years. Keum sees accounting and marketing roles being hit the hardest.
“Accountants are not doing well,” Keum told Fortune. “For accounting, it was, ‘Let’s make sure that your numbers are correct based on physical receipts inputted. Now, AI can do that very well…They’re hiring a lot less. So only the extremely senior people survive.”
The post Is AI really killing finance and banking jobs? Experts say Wall Street’s layoffs may be more hype than takeover—for now appeared first on Fortune.
