Deletion of Wealth Tech

Comment: The article is so lightly paraphrased from the two references that it's arguably a copyvio ("Fintech companies that provide alternative solutions to incumbent wealth management companies" versus "fintech companies that offer an alternative to traditional wealth management firms", etc.). Even setting that aside, the first reference is mostly a long quote from somebody's LinkedIn post, and the preface to that quote says "Ah, a new word is born" &mdash; i.e., |a neologism. A news search finds a smattering of results for the past few months, but not enough, IMO, to indicate that the term itself deserves an article. Plenty of news and general hits are false positives, too; e.g., "as they have grown in wealth, tech firms have..." (By way of comparison, the financial technology article is pretty dreadful, but its presence is more justifiable. A redirect to financial technology ''might'' be warranted, but there isn't any content in the Wealth Tech page worth merging
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NEOLOGISM)

Comment: There are some uses of this evident in a BEFORE - e.g. - https://www.hubbis.com/article/how-bento-is-democratising-wealth-management or https://news.efinancialcareers.com/sg-en/281112/launched-fintech-start-ups-singapore - however usage seems to be quite limited. I'm not sure this would make a dictionary or glossary - and I don't think it should make an ecyclopedia - YET - . Article is in additional in a poor state
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)