UBS denies false claims about AI integration after KPMG report relies on hallucinated facts

A KPMG report about the benefits of AI in financial services contained fabricated claims about UBS’s use of AI agents, and the Swiss bank wasn’t going to let that slide. UBS identified the inaccuracies and demanded corrections, prompting KPMG to pull the entire report.

The false claims stated that UBS had deployed AI agents across investment advisory, risk management, and compliance functions.

What KPMG got wrong, and what actually happened

As of mid-2025, UBS was managing over 280 active AI use cases, representing a 10% increase from the previous quarter. The bank has rolled out its proprietary “Red” AI assistant to tens of thousands of employees, generating millions of prompts in usage volume. CEO Sergio Ermotti has publicly emphasized the bank’s commitment to accelerating transformational AI programs designed to boost efficiency and improve client experience.

UBS operates under a dedicated AI governance structure that includes specific AI risk management policies, a comprehensive Group AI policy, and dedicated governance bodies overseeing responsible deployment with human oversight baked in. This framework has been in development for roughly a decade.

The AI hallucination problem hits professional services

KPMG isn’t some obscure research shop. It’s one of the Big Four accounting and consulting firms, the kind of institution whose reports move markets and shape boardroom strategies.

The very safeguards that UBS itself has built into its own AI deployment, human oversight and governance protocols, appear to have been missing from the process that produced this report. KPMG withdrew the report after UBS intervened.

What this means for investors

Investors evaluating companies based on their AI capabilities should demand primary sources. If a report claims a bank is using AI agents for compliance decisions, that claim should be traceable to the bank’s own disclosures, earnings calls, or regulatory filings. In this case, UBS’s actual public statements about its AI strategy tell a very different story than what KPMG published.

For UBS specifically, the incident actually reinforces the bank’s narrative rather than undermining it. The bank’s structured approach to AI governance, its insistence on human oversight, and its willingness to publicly correct the record all suggest an institution that takes AI risk seriously. With over 280 active use cases and a rapidly scaling internal AI assistant, UBS is clearly investing aggressively in the technology.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.