The banking startups are collecting account holder information so they can turn around and upsell you on credit cards and other products.
But it gets better ...
There is no such thing as a startup bank in the US because the government doesn't grant bank charters anymore. All those new companies aren't banks at all. They piggyback on top of an existing bank or the ACH network.
That's why none of them say FDIC-approved, since they can't be part of FDIC.
Perhaps you meant something else?
[0]: https://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/bankdecisions/depins/i...
Is this true? Why is this the case? How long has it been like this?
Zelle: effectively instant, requires both banks to be on the network, free. Relatively new and many people who could use it don’t.
ACH: a few days, effectively ubiquitous, very small underlying charge infrequently marked up to ~$3 by the bank.
Wire transfers: not quite instant but close during banking hours, effectively ubiquitous by institution but often a pain for retail users to access due to risk profile, underlying cost is about $5 and often marked up to $15~$20.
The UX of the P2P payment apps is much, much better than any of the above, and would be what I’d reach for for a transfer in the $X0 range contingent on my counterparty being likely to use apps.
Banks in Europe: There might be a fee in some cases but I don't remember paying one (or it's <$5). Rent or similars are just recurring SEPA payments (it's a push - not a direct debt)
But can people (not business) initiate ACH transactions?
Yes. I used to do it to move money between checking accounts at different institutions. I don't think I've ever had an account that charged for ACH transfers. Meanwhile Zelle isn't supported by exactly one financial institution I use (but not one I use for banking).
https://www.mybanktracker.com/checking/faq/ach-transfer-fees...