As of March 11, three commercial container vessels were struck by missiles or drones in Gulf waters within days of each other. These incidents included a Thai-flagged vessel that was hit 11 nautical miles north of Oman, a Japanese vessel that struck off the coast of the UAE, and a third vessel targeted northwest of Dubai. And they weren’t near misses or accidents; most were hit directly. This has changed how logistics works in the region.

The industry has responded quickly, though cargo owners have been disoriented. Major container ship operators terminated their contracts, offloaded their legal obligations, and dropped containers at the nearest safe port. However, “the nearest available port” is a loosely applied concept. Because operators make unilateral decisions about where goods land, there is little transparency or logic behind their choices. Cargo owners are now finding their shipments stranded in ports they never contracted for.

Ports in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE have suspended operations entirely, while others are working with significant delays. Although the global port network remains open, it is currently absorbing a surge of redirected traffic that has led to congestion and vessel bunching at major hubs like Singapore and Rotterdam. This phenomenon, where ships must queue because ports cannot process arrivals fast enough, has created a prominent side effect characterised by rising labour costs, lower unloading speeds, and significant strains on storage capacity.

Cargo owners will bear the brunt of this catastrophe in the coming days. Goods are sitting exposed at ports without adequate storage infrastructure and are vulnerable to loss and damage.

Recovering these losses depends on the contracts that were signed between shippers and vessel owners, though they vary from company to company and contract to contract. Delay-related losses are usually excluded under the standard Institute Cargo Clauses (A), meaning the cargo policy simply will not pay out.

In addition to cargo owners, ports and terminals face significant hardships as congestion-related incidents become increasingly common and insurance coverage remains dependent on regional policies.

Consequently, businesses moving goods through Gulf waters must review their contracts, stress test their insurance coverage, and prepare for persistent delays and rerouting for the duration of the conflict.

The post Gulf shipping crisis: What cargo owners and port operators need to know appeared first on International Finance.

The transition is expected to change the investment landscape. Women are more risk-aware, and they demand holistic financial wellness rather than pure alpha generation. Women are also more socially aware and likely to be actively invested in trust-based philanthropy through gender-lens investing.

However, the wealth management industry might not be prepared for a systemic change. Widow retention rates are below 30%, and currently, women comprise 24% of certified financial planners.

The macroeconomic architecture

The upward social mobility of women, especially in an economic sense, isn’t just a narrative that big corporations put out for diversity and inclusion or just core diversity and inclusion points. It’s slowly becoming the primary driver of global GDP and asset accumulation.

There’s increased labour market participation, business ownership, and favourable inheritance patterns among women. It is a distinct economic block that’s going to reshape how global markets work.

People have been discussing the Great Wealth Transfer for some time now as a major generational shift, but the gendered aspect of such a massive transfer has not been explored enough.

The transfer occurs in distinct waves and creates a double-inheritance phenomenon that uniquely favours women. The first wave comes from spouses. Since women generally outlive men, they are the primary beneficiaries when their partners die. It represents the second transfer of Boomer wealth. The first wave occurs when they also inherit wealth from their parents.

According to statistics, by 2030, American women will hold the majority of the $30 trillion in financial assets currently held by Baby Boomers. Globally, the figure is expected to reach $100 trillion over the next two decades.

The shift from male to female control often triggers dramatic changes in the velocity of money. Unlike the passive accumulation strategies often favoured by previous generations of male patriarchs, female inheritors are active allocators, statistically more likely to deploy capital into the real economy through impact investing, real estate, and philanthropy.

While inheritance provides a substantial baseline of female wealth in mature Western markets, the most dynamic growth engine is entrepreneurship. The story of the self-made billionaire has replaced that of the passive heiress.

Data from 2025 indicates women’s average wealth is growing faster than men’s. The average wealth of women billionaires increased 8.4% to $5.2 billion, more than double the 3.2% growth rate for men. The surge is driven by female founders bypassing traditional corporate ladders to build immense value across sectors from technology to biotech. Estimates suggest that achieving gender parity in entrepreneurship and employment could add between $5 trillion and $12 trillion to global GDP by 2025.

Despite a clear trajectory, a critical “management gap” persists. Current analysis reveals that approximately 53% of assets controlled by women are unmanaged, compared to 45% for men. The eight-percentage-point gap represents a massive pool of capital sitting in cash or low-yield savings accounts due to a lack of trust in the advisory sector. Closing this gap represents a revenue opportunity of approximately $10 trillion by 2030 for the wealth management industry. The unmanaged asset gap is not merely female risk aversion, but rather a rational response to an industry that has failed to demonstrate value.

Regional geographies of wealth

The North American market is the most mature, characterised by high wealth concentration but significant “money in motion” risks. The primary driver of asset movement is not just death, but divorce. “Grey divorce” among couples separating after age 50 is rising, creating a unique demographic of wealthy, single women requiring specialised financial planning. Research shows a woman’s household income drops an average of 41% following divorce, compared to just 20%-22% for men. Furthermore, the statistic that 70% of widows fire their financial advisors within a year of their spouse’s death is a damning indictment of the “silent spouse” syndrome, where advisors cultivated relationships primarily with husbands while treating wives as secondary participants.

Europe presents a stable but conservative landscape where women remain significantly underserved. European women control roughly one-third of retail financial assets, a figure projected to reach 45% by 2030. These women are extremely skeptical of the financial industry. They are statistically more risk-averse than men (though another way of putting it is that they have more risk awareness), as they demand significantly more education and transparency before committing capital.

Over 30% of European women are extremely dissatisfied with how wealth services currently work, stating that they lack personalised advice and often feel patronised.

Asia, on the other hand, is a very dynamic region for female wealth creation. The primary driver is rapid economic development and cultural shifts that favour female business ownership. Unlike the West, where wealth is mostly inherited, Asian women are overwhelmingly entrepreneurial. By 2030, $6 trillion will transfer to the next generation in Asia-Pacific, with recipients increasingly being daughters who are active participants in family businesses. These Asian female heirs are younger, more digitally native, and more likely to demand digital-first wealth solutions, driving the growth of Singapore and Hong Kong as global Family Office hubs.

Female investor psyche

Understanding the psychology of the female investor is critical to bridging the $10 trillion unmanaged asset gap. Research consistently debunks the myth that women are “worse” investors. They often outperform men due to distinct behavioural traits aligning with long-term value creation. Studies indicate women investors outperform men by approximately 1.8 percentage points annually, attributed to more disciplined approaches, trading less frequently, adhering to long-term plans rather than reacting to market noise, and demonstrating less overconfidence bias.

However, performance advantages are masked by a “confidence gap.” Only 23% of women act as primary decision-makers for long-term financial planning, compared to 80% who manage short-term household budgets. The lack of confidence is a major barrier to entering equity markets, leading to higher cash allocations suffering from inflationary erosion.

The industry often mislabels women as “risk-averse” when “risk-aware” is more accurate. Women require more data points and a clearer understanding of worst-case scenarios before investing. Once they understand the risk and probability of loss, they are willing to accept it. It necessitates changes in how investment products are presented. Instead of focusing on “beating the benchmark,” advisors must frame investments in the context of “goal achievement,” since women construct portfolios around life goals like funding education, ensuring healthcare in old age, and legacy protection.

Wealth acquisition, especially when sudden, brings distinct psychological challenges. High-achieving women and inheritors often suffer from “financial imposter syndrome,” feeling undeserving of their wealth or lacking the intellect to manage it. For widows and divorcees, wealth often accompanies grief or trauma, requiring advisors who function partly as financial therapists. Even Ultra-High-Net-Worth women harbour irrational fears of becoming destitute, driving over-allocation to liquidity despite rational analysis suggesting otherwise.

Structural failures

The financial services industry has historically failed to serve women effectively. The traditional approach of “shrink it and pink it” involved superficial changes like hosting “ladies’ luncheons” without addressing underlying structural differences in female financial lives. Modern female investors widely reject this approach, demanding institutional-grade rigour and products that solve the specific liquidity and longevity risks women face.

The lack of female advisors is a self-perpetuating problem. Women comprise only 24% of Certified Financial Planner professionals and occupy only 18% of C-suite roles in finance globally. The absence of female leadership signals a lack of understanding of the female client’s lived experience. A looming advisor shortage exacerbates the service gap, with McKinsey predicting a deficit of 100,000 advisors in the US by 2034.

Recognising the $10 trillion opportunity, major global banks have launched dedicated initiatives. UBS has established itself as a thought leader through consistent research and educational platforms, including the Women’s Wealth Academy, addressing the confidence gap and programmes preparing heirs for wealth responsibilities. Citi Private Bank emphasises “Financial Wellness” as a core pillar of health and organises curated communities, recognising that women prefer learning from shared experiences of other successful women. Morgan Stanley’s “Family Office Resources” treats female-led households as institutions, prioritising governance structures and lifestyle advisory, acknowledging that for UHNW women, time is the most scarce resource.

The rise of female family office

As wealth scales, women are increasingly bypassing traditional private banks in favour of Single-Family Offices (SFO), allowing greater control, privacy, and alignment with personal values. The SFO model appeals to women because it enables a “total balance sheet” approach integrating investment management with philanthropy, tax planning, and next-generation education. Asia is witnessing an SFO boom, with Singapore and Hong Kong battling for dominance as preferred jurisdictions for Asian matriarchs through tax incentives and governance structures.

For wealthy women, investing is rarely value-neutral. There is a profound shift toward aligning capital with conscience through ESG and Gender Lens Investing. Women are revolutionising philanthropy through “Giving Circles” and collaborative funding models, mobilising over $3.1 billion, with participation growing 140%. The new model appeals to women’s preference for community and shared decision-making. Trust-based philanthropy led by figures like MacKenzie Scott and Melinda French Gates moves capital faster to social change frontlines compared to bureaucratic foundation models.

Gender Lens Investing is moving from niche to mainstream strategy. Assets in gender bonds reached $62.4 billion in 2025, driven by demand from female allocators wanting fixed-income portfolios supporting female empowerment. Women are twice as likely as men to incorporate ESG factors into investing, suggesting that as women control more wealth, the cost of capital for non-ESG compliant companies will rise, forcing market-wide shifts toward sustainability.

Technology is the final piece. New platforms allow for “Inheritance Simulation” and digital stress tests, visualising what happens to family wealth under various scenarios, providing the transparency and worst-case scenario visualisation that risk-aware female investors crave. The winning model for 2030 is “bionic”, AI-driven analytics delivered by empathetic human advisors who can anticipate life transitions and enable proactive intervention.

The 2030 outlook

The feminisation of wealth is the single most disruptive trend in global finance. By 2030, women will control nearly half of global private wealth, and their capital will be greener, more collaborative, and managed by a more diverse workforce. For the wealth management industry, the message is existential: adapt or die. Churn rates following widowhood and divorce prove that the old model of treating women as secondary clients is obsolete.

Success will belong to firms solving the trust gap through radical transparency and education, institutionalising the household through governance and lifestyle services, aligning with values by offering robust ESG products, and digitising with empathy using technology to clarify risk. The women taking the lead in wealth will be the ones designing the future.

The post The feminine future of wealth appeared first on International Finance.

Among them are the six grandchildren of the late business tycoon Goh Cheng Liang, founder of Wuthelam Holdings, which manufactures paint and coatings. Liang died in Singapore in August, aged 98. Each grandchild inherited stakes in a public company worth more than USD 1 billion. On the other hand, 196 “self-made” business leaders became billionaires this year, with a collective wealth of USD 386.5 billion, UBS said.

“These heirs are proof of a multi-year wealth transfer that’s intensifying,” UBS executive Benjamin Cavalli told Reuters.

The study was conducted on the basis of UBS’ tally of super-rich clients and a database that tracks the wealth of billionaires across 47 markets across the world.

As per the bank’s calculations, at least USD 5.9 trillion will be inherited by billionaire children over the next 15 years. Most of this inheritance growth will take place in the United States, with India, France, Germany, and Switzerland next on the list.

“However, billionaires are highly mobile, especially younger ones, which could change that picture. The search for a better quality of life, geopolitical concerns, and tax considerations are driving decisions to relocate,” the UBS study added.

In Switzerland, where USD 206 billion will be inherited over the next 15 years according to the bank, voters recently overwhelmingly rejected a proposed 50% tax on inherited fortunes of USD 62 million or more, with critics predicting that the move could trigger an exodus of wealthy people. Not only Switzerland, but Europe in general is facing calls to introduce a wealth tax on the international elite. However, voices against such policy moves are making their points loud and clear as well.

“Switzerland, the UAE, the United States, and Singapore are among the billionaires’ preferred destinations,” UBS’s Cavalli noted.

In October 2025, the French parliament voted against a proposed 2% tax on fortunes over 100 million euros. Italy, which has attracted many wealthy residents thanks to its flat-tax regime for foreign income, has set out plans to increase the levy by 50% to 300,000 euros a year from 2026.

The United Kingdom, which distanced itself from reports of implementing a formal wealth tax, officially ended non-domicile status in 2025. Under the previous arrangement, British residents who declared their permanent home as overseas could avoid paying tax on foreign income and gains. The Keir Starmer government has also announced plans for a council tax surcharge, labelled a “mansion tax,” on homes worth more than 2 million, as Chancellor Rachel Reeves introduced her second budget in November.

In 2024, Spain, Brazil, Germany, and South Africa signed a motion at the G20 for a minimum 2% tax on the super-rich to reduce inequality and raise public funds. As per a study by the leading French economist Gabriel Zucman, the move could net up to USD 250 billion in extra revenue.

The post Billionaires inheriting record levels of wealth: UBS report appeared first on International Finance.

These include the total cryptocurrency market capitalisation surpassing the $4 trillion threshold, the enactment of the GENIUS Act, which established the first comprehensive federal regulatory framework for stablecoins in the United States, and a parabolic price trajectory for Bitcoin that saw it breach new all-time highs before succumbing to a macro-induced correction in November.

While the breach of the $4 trillion mark signalled a structural re-rating of the asset class and placed it on par with major global equity exchanges, market dynamics revealed a bifurcation between asset performance and infrastructure growth.

Bitcoin’s ascent to a peak of approximately $126,000 was fuelled by the “Trump trade” and massive ETF inflows, yet its subsequent 30% correction underscored the market’s continued sensitivity to macroeconomic shocks, specifically stagflationary signals from the US labour market. Conversely, the stablecoin sector, now buttressed by federal law, decoupled from speculative volatility to process transaction volumes rivalling global payment networks like Visa, which confirms its utility as a settlement layer for the digital economy.

We dissect these trends through six core sections, including a detailed analysis of legislative reform. By synthesising data on regulatory shifts and on-chain metrics, we offer a nuanced perspective on how the industry has transitioned from a speculative fringe to a regulated, albeit volatile component of the global financial architecture.

Welcome to the big leagues

In July 2025, the digital asset sector achieved a historic valuation milestone as the total market capitalisation surpassed $4 trillion for the first time. The event was not merely a psychological victory for early adopters but a quantitative signal of the asset class’s integration into the broader financial system. To contextualise this growth, the market cap effectively doubled from its previous cycle highs, driven by a confluence of retail resurgence and institutional capital deployment.

The ascent to $4 trillion was underpinned by distinct structural factors that differentiate this cycle from the speculative manias of 2017 and 2021. Foremost among these was the deepening of liquidity pools facilitated by the approval of spot ETFs across multiple jurisdictions.

The “ETF wrapper” served as a critical conduit for wealth management platforms and pension funds to allocate capital without the operational burden of custody, effectively unlocking trillions in previously sidelined capital.

Data from the third quarter of 2025 indicates that the rally was supported by extensive institutional demand, which was further catalysed by legislative advancements in the United States. The market did not rise in a vacuum; rather, it was buoyed by a “pro-crypto” administration and a tangible shift in regulatory posture. The correlation between legislative clarity and capital inflows became undeniable, as evidenced by the sharp uptick in valuations following the passage of the GENIUS Act.

However, the composition of this market capitalisation reveals a significant evolution in capital allocation. While Bitcoin retained its dominance as the primary store of value and accounted for over $2.4 trillion of the total market cap at its peak, the 2025 cycle witnessed a broadening of the value spectrum. Capital rotated aggressively into programmable blockchains and stablecoins, reflecting a market that increasingly values utility and yield over pure speculation.

The psychological impact of crossing the $4 trillion mark forced a reassessment of risk models among global macro strategists. At this scale, the asset class becomes too large to ignore for sovereign wealth funds and endowment managers who must now consider digital assets as a necessary component of a diversified portfolio to hedge against debasement and capture technological alpha. Industry analysts noted that crossing this mark signals a “structural re-rating” of crypto, moving it from an asymmetric bet to a staple allocation.

The market demonstrated resilience by holding above the $3.88 trillion level during periods of consolidation, dipping only approximately 2% from peak levels during initial profit-taking phases. Such consolidations are characteristic of maturing markets where rapid appreciation is digested through time rather than deep price corrections. The ability of the market to sustain valuations above the $4 trillion line for extended periods in mid-2025 suggested that the capital base had shifted from highly leveraged retail traders to “sticky” institutional holders with longer time horizons.

As liquidity deepened, it also fragmented across a growing number of venues and chains. Layer 1 has seen good growth, but introducing Layer 2 solutions on top of it means that execution and infrastructure have become as critical as asset selection. And experts reiterate that sustaining this growth would require resilient systems that are adept at handling high-frequency institutional flows and smart risk frameworks to manage the disparate liquidity pockets.
Uncle Sam legalises digital dollar

If the $4 trillion market cap was the quantitative highlight of 2025, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins Act of 2025 (GENIUS Act) was its qualitative cornerstone. Signed into law by President Donald Trump on July 18, 2025, this bipartisan legislation ended years of regulatory purgatory for the digital asset industry. It established a comprehensive federal framework for payment stablecoins, effectively legitimising the sector’s most practical application, which is dollar-denominated digital settlement.

The GENIUS Act is transformative primarily because of its definitional clarity and establishment of a dual-track regulatory system. It amends US federal securities laws and the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) to explicitly state that a payment stablecoin is not a “security” or a “commodity”. This jurisdictional carve-out is the “holy grail” for issuers who have spent years navigating the aggressive enforcement actions of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

Instead of shoehorning stablecoins into 1930s securities laws, the Act places them under the supervision of banking regulators through two distinct pathways. One through the Federal Track for Non-Banks. Federally licensed non-bank stablecoin issuers are now subject to oversight by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). This allows fintech companies to operate with a national charter without becoming full-fledged banks. Secondly, there are subsidiaries of insured depository institutions that fall under the supervision of their primary federal regulator, such as the Federal Reserve or the FDIC.

Crucially, the Act also preserves the state regulatory system. Issuers with less than $10 billion in outstanding stablecoins can opt for regulation under a state-level regime provided that the state’s standards are deemed “substantially similar” to the federal framework. That provision was a major victory for state regulators like the NYDFS, ensuring that local innovation hubs are not crushed by federal preemption while still maintaining a high national standard.

A central pillar of the GENIUS Act is the imposition of strict prudential standards designed to prevent the “bank runs” that plagued the sector in previous cycles. As per the legislation, all stablecoin issuers must maintain 1:1 reserves backed by high-quality liquid assets (HQLA).

The prohibition on rehypothecation is particularly significant as it prevents the specific type of leverage-driven contagion that caused the collapse of algorithmic stablecoins and unregulated lending desks in 2022. By mandating that reserves be held in bankruptcy-remote accounts with priority claims for holders, the Act effectively creates a digital equivalent of cash that is safer than uninsured bank deposits.

One of the most debated aspects of the GENIUS Act was the prohibition on interest payments. Issuers are explicitly forbidden from passing the yield generated by their reserve assets (such as Treasury bills) on to the holders of the stablecoins. That provision was the subject of intense advocacy from the traditional banking lobby, including the American Bankers Association.

They argued that if stablecoins offered a risk-free yield comparable to Treasuries, they would suck liquidity out of the traditional banking system and destabilise community banks that rely on low-cost deposits.

For the crypto industry, this creates a clear business model trade-off. While issuers cannot compete on yield, they are forced to compete on utility, speed, and integration. This has pushed issuers to focus on building payment rails and merchant networks rather than simply marketing their tokens as savings vehicles.

The GENIUS Act also integrates stablecoins into the national security apparatus. Issuers are explicitly subject to the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), obligating them to implement rigorous Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know Your Customer (KYC) programmes.

The Act grants the Treasury Department enhanced powers to combat illicit finance, including requirements for issuers to possess the technical capability to “seize, freeze, or burn” tokens when legally ordered. That provision addresses the “sanctions evasion” narrative often used by critics, ensuring that compliant stablecoins cannot be used as a tool for rogue states or criminal enterprises.

Issuers are also forbidden from using “deceptive names” or marketing materials that imply their product is backed by the “full faith and credit of the United States” or covered by federal deposit insurance. Such rules prevent the dangerous misconception that a private stablecoin is a government-guaranteed instrument.

Wall Street’s effect on Bitcoin

The year 2025 reinforced a fundamental truth about Bitcoin. It remains a highly sensitive liquidity gauge capable of delivering parabolic returns and devastating corrections in equal measure.

The narrative of “institutional maturation” did not dampen volatility; rather, it introduced new transmission mechanisms for macro shocks to cascade through the market.

Bitcoin’s performance in the first three quarters of 2025 was nothing short of spectacular. Fuelled by the “Trump trade” following the election, favourable regulatory signals and the relentless bid from spot ETFs, Bitcoin embarked on a parabolic run. By October, the asset had breached the six-figure mark, setting a new all-time high of approximately $126,270. The rally was characterised by a palpable sense of euphoria dubbed “Uptober” as market participants anticipated a “super-cycle” driven by the convergence of sovereign adoption and corporate treasury accumulation.

The role of ETFs in this rally cannot be overstated. BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) alone amassed massive assets under management by 2025, with the fund becoming the most successful ETF launch in history. The “passive bid” from these products created a constant demand shock that stripped supply from exchanges, forcing prices upward in a classic liquidity squeeze.

The euphoria came to an abrupt halt in November. Bitcoin crashed approximately 30% from its peak, sliding to trade near $82,605 on November 21. The correction wiped out over $1.2 trillion in total digital asset value in just six weeks, a destruction of wealth equivalent to the GDP of a mid-sized G7 nation.

The catalyst for the crash was a “stagflationary” shock delivered by the US labour market. A long-delayed US jobs report released confusing data that showed job creation rebounding while the unemployment rate simultaneously climbed to 4.4%. The mixed signal clouded expectations for Federal Reserve rate cuts, triggering a “risk-off” event across all global markets.

The crash revealed the double-edged sword of institutionalisation. While ETFs provided inflows during the rally, they also provided a frictionless exit door during the panic. United States-listed Bitcoin ETFs recorded $903 million in outflows on a single Thursday as the “paper hands” of the new cohort folded at the first sign of trouble.

When code became cash

Bitcoin dominated the macro narrative of 2025 and has matured as an asset class with store-of-value propositions. But the focus is slowly shifting to high-throughput utility, and all eyes are on alt-coins. The “State of Crypto” report highlighted that Hyperliquid and Solana combined to account for 53% of revenue-generating economic activity, signalling a changing of the guard in where value is actually accrued.

Solana emerged as the undisputed leader of the high-performance blockchain sector. In stark contrast to the broader market, Solana’s ecosystem metrics exploded to the upside. Builder interest increased by 78% over the prior two years, making it the fastest-growing ecosystem for developers. That surge in developer activity translated directly into user adoption, with the network processing a significant plurality of the industry’s transaction volume.

The market acknowledged this differentiation. Even during the November crash, Solana-based investment products showed remarkable resilience. While Bitcoin ETFs bled assets, Solana and XRP ETFs recorded consistent inflows, suggesting that investors were actively decoupling their views on “utility” tokens from the macro-driven Bitcoin trade.

If there was one undeniable success story in 2025, it was stablecoins. The total stablecoin supply reached a record high of over $300 billion. More impressively, stablecoins settled $46 trillion in total transaction volume over the year. Even after adjusting for artificial trading volume, the figure stood at $9 trillion, more than five times PayPal’s annual throughput and more than half of Visa’s.

The data proves that stablecoins have found product-market fit beyond crypto trading. They are being used for cross-border B2B payments and remittances in inflation-stricken nations, and as a dollarised savings instrument globally. The GENIUS Act further catalysed this usage by providing the legal certainty needed for banks and multinational corporations to integrate stablecoins into their treasury operations, effectively turning them into a new rail for global commerce.

Patchwork of progress and pain

While the GENIUS Act provided a unified path for the United States, the rest of the world navigated a fragmented and often contradictory regulatory landscape in 2025. The divergence created significant friction for cross-border projects and forced issuers to adopt regional containment strategies rather than global expansion plans.

The European Union (EU) fully implemented its Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation in late 2024 and throughout 2025. While initially hailed as a pioneering framework, MiCA has revealed the steep cost of compliance. Startups faced immense operational burdens to meet prudential and conduct standards, which diverted resources away from innovation. The stablecoin market in Europe faced a specific crisis of relevance. US dollar-denominated tokens continued to hold a 99% market share globally, leaving Euro-denominated stablecoins on the fringes with a market capitalisation of less than EUR 350 million.

In response to this dominance, a consortium of nine major European banks, including ING and Deutsche Bank, formed a new venture in September 2025. Their goal is to launch a fully MiCA-compliant Euro stablecoin to compete with American giants. However, analysts warn that Europe may be “too late” as the network effects of USD stablecoins are already deeply entrenched in global DeFi and payment rails.

In Asia, the regulatory narrative is split between two primary hubs. Hong Kong moved aggressively to capture the digital asset market by enacting the Stablecoin Ordinance, which became effective on August 1 2025. The law introduced a dedicated licensing regime for fiat-referenced stablecoins and required issuers to maintain full reserve backing with high-quality liquid assets. In parallel, regulators proposed new licensing regimes for OTC dealers and custodians to close remaining oversight gaps.

Singapore took a more restrictive approach to offshore risks. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) enforced a strict deadline of June 30 2025, for Digital Token Service Providers (DTSPs). Any entity providing services from Singapore to customers outside the country was required to obtain a license or cease operations. The move was designed to prevent regulatory arbitrage where firms would set up in Singapore solely to project an image of legitimacy while serving high-risk jurisdictions without local oversight.

Emerging markets continued to drive grassroots adoption, often outpacing regulatory frameworks. Brazil emerged as a leader by establishing a Central Authority for Digital Assets (CADA) in January 2025 and implementing a comprehensive licensing framework that will be fully enforceable by February 2026. The clarity helped boost daily trading volumes in Brazil to USD 1.8 billion.

Nigeria also witnessed a surge in activity after lifting its banking ban on crypto firms. Monthly trading volumes on licensed exchanges rose by 47% in the first quarter of 2025 alone. India similarly saw a recovery in volumes after the initial shock of its tax regime wore off, with the government launching a “Regulatory Sandbox 2.0” to explore tokenised real estate and carbon credits. Together, these developments signal a decisive shift from the “ban and ignore” policies of the past to a “regulate and tax” approach.

The starkest challenge of 2025 remains the lack of global harmonisation. The GENIUS Act in the US and MiCA in the EU operate on fundamentally different principles regarding foreign issuers. The GENIUS Act encourages the US Treasury to pursue mutual recognition, but currently requires foreign issuers to meet US standards to access the American market.

Conversely, MiCA’s strict localisation requirements have forced some global exchanges to delist non-compliant stablecoins for European users. Such a regulatory “spaghetti bowl” threatens to balkanise liquidity and complicate the dream of a seamless global value-transfer layer.

As we look toward 2026, the trajectory is clear. The infrastructure is ready for prime time, and the regulatory wars are largely over, yet the challenge now shifts from survival to scale in a high-stakes macroeconomic environment.

The post The great crypto reckoning appeared first on International Finance.

Comprising 4.3 billion people and accounting for more than 60% of world output, APAC is changing under the influence of four key forces: urbanisation, digital transformation, green infrastructure, and demographic changes.

APAC has a unique opportunity to shape the direction of economic growth thanks to the mix of young labour markets, advanced tech centres, hyperconnected megacities, and digital finance innovation.

This promise, however, has restrictions. If structural disparities, climate vulnerabilities, and geopolitical pressures are not handled quickly and foresightedly, those factors could limit or distort such growth.

Urbanisation and geographic rebalancing

Unprecedented in scope and speed, APAC’s urban growth is expanding. Megacities such as Jakarta, Bangkok, Manila, and Ho Chi Minh City are generating a boom in infrastructure investment, estimated at over $1.7 trillion yearly across the region.

Attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) has resulted in new economic zones, satellite cities, and logistics corridors that strengthen regional supply chains.

The World Bank predicts that the region’s urban population will rise from 2.3 billion in 2020 to over 2.8 billion by 2040. Another pillar of change is the emergence of a middle-class, tech-enabled customer base. APAC is currently the main driver of global consumption growth. Millions are rising into the middle class annually in nations such as Indonesia, Vietnam, and the Philippines. Domestic demand, not only exports, is driving GDP.

Southeast Asia’s digital economy is projected to grow from $300 billion in 2024 to $1 trillion by 2030. From healthcare and education to tourism and fintech, local consumption, on which dependency on export markets wanes, is generating strong new businesses.

A rebalancing is undoubtedly needed here. Countries like Vietnam and Malaysia historically depended on outside demand, especially from China and the United States.

APAC is already heading toward a self-sustaining ecosystem of demand, investment, and innovation as regional trade agreements like RCEP and the development of intra-Asian value chains take hold.

Tokenised finance and the digital economy

APAC’s forward momentum is most evident in its digital transformation. Comprising some of the highest mobile penetration rates and more than 2.6 billion internet users, the region is a powerhouse of digital adoption.

Since 2016, digital payment volumes in India have increased twentyfold, largely due to the growth of fintech. Currently, over 70% of people in Southeast Asia engage in digital commerce or mobile banking.

One of the most transformative developments is the rise of tokenised finance. Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan are leading the way in developing regulated systems for digital asset trading.

With tokenised green bonds issued in many currencies totalling HK$6 billion, the Hong Kong government set a global first in sovereign tokenisation. Meanwhile, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has tested initiatives to tokenise mortgages, private credit money, and other real-world assets (RWAs).

Institutional investors are embracing this change. A 2024 SBI Digital Asset Holdings research report indicates that approximately 70% of Asian institutional investors now possess digital assets, compared to only 40% in the United States. Family offices, sovereign wealth funds, and corporate treasuries looking for adaptable, real-time asset management drive this trend.

By launching tokenised bond offerings in Singapore, OCBC enables customers to trade bond tokens with daily liquidity, replicating the behaviour of conventional securities but with faster settlements and lower costs.

Technical and regulatory obstacles still exist, particularly in guaranteeing legal clarity and interoperability between countries, especially regarding decentralised finance and tokenised capital markets. But the momentum toward these markets is unstoppable. This positions APAC at the forefront of the next stage of global financial innovation.

Sustainable funding

The economic future of the Pacific depends largely on its climate resilience. Megacities like Jakarta, Manila, and Bangkok are facing existential risks from rising sea levels and extreme weather. The region has 15 of the 20 most climate-vulnerable nations.

However, APAC is also becoming a centre for green finance and climate innovation.

Investment in green infrastructure is sharply rising. Vietnam’s solar explosion has positioned it as a regional leader in sustainable energy. Indonesia’s energy transformation roadmap calls for the closure of 118 coal-fired reactors by 2040.

BloombergNEF claims that by 2030, the Asia-Pacific region will account for nearly half of global renewable energy investment. As part of their decarbonisation plans, nations including Australia, Japan, and South Korea are also investigating hydrogen and carbon capture technologies.

Speaking financially, APAC’s green bond market has grown exponentially. In 2023, ASEAN countries issued a record high of nearly $40 billion in green and sustainable bonds.

Regulatory changes can help drive the shift to climate-aligned portfolios. For all listed firms, Japan’s Financial Services Agency now requires TCFD-aligned climate disclosures, setting the standard for market-wide transparency.

Still, challenges persist. China and India still rely largely on coal, and many Southeast Asian nations have limited financial capacity to support greener changes.

Furthermore, lagging far behind mitigation efforts are climate adaptation, investments in water management, coastal defences, and disaster readiness. The climate issue could undo APAC’s development successes without faster finance and regional cooperation.

Human capital, labour, and demographics

The demographic landscape of APAC is both a fault line and a benefit. Young countries like the Philippines, India, and Indonesia have a sizable and growing workforce on the one hand. Conversely, ageing nations, including Japan, South Korea, China, and Singapore, deal with declining fertility rates, smaller workforces, and growing pension liabilities.

According to UN projections, India and Southeast Asia will account for more than half of the global new labour force by 2040. This offers a historic opportunity, if productivity and skills improve in line. Often touted as a model is Vietnam’s success in upskilling manufacturing workers to meet the needs of the electronics and renewable industries.

Offering adult workers government credits for upskilling in artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and fintech, Singapore’s SkillsFuture programme has also become a global benchmark in ongoing education.

Still, digital and educational gaps remain sharp. Teacher shortages continue, and internet connectivity is still erratic in rural Indonesia and Cambodia. According to a World Bank analysis, more than 60% of students in emerging APAC nations lack basic digital skills, which is a major obstacle as automation and artificial intelligence transform sectors.

In South Asia, a growing gender disparity exists in labour force participation. Programmes aimed at including women in the formal sectors are becoming popular through microfinance, digital literacy, and parental leave incentives, but development is not uniform.

Coordinated policy action, such as investing in early childhood education, extending vocational training, and developing flexible labour regulations supporting both gig and formal employment, will determine the workforce of APAC going forward. Not only inexpensive labour but also human capital will dictate the direction of future growth.

Risk, control, and fragmented regions

The path for the Asia-Pacific region is filled with challenges, even though it is full of hope. Three main hazards loom large: geopolitical conflict, overly concentrated markets, and inconsistent government policies. Geopolitics remains a risky wildcard.

Strategic rivalry between the United States and China continues to change trade paths, tech alliances, and financial flows. Ongoing flashpoints include North Korea, Taiwan, and the South China Sea. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), and trade treaties by ASEAN all mirror overlapping domains of influence that can split regional unity.

Moreover, domestic government challenges persist. Although nations like Singapore and Japan are known for their policy consistency and openness, others (like Myanmar or Cambodia) have ongoing problems with corruption, poor institutions, and inconsistent policies. Investors increasingly distinguish between “safe harbour” economies and those with opaque legal systems or political instability.

Market concentration also poses concerns. While some countries like Mongolia, Laos, and Brunei remain dependent on a limited range of exports or single international markets, making them sensitive to demand shocks and price volatility, economies like Vietnam and India are diversifying.

Pandemic-era nationalism and supply chain concerns have led certain APAC nations to re-impose tariffs and tighten capital restrictions, resulting in increased protectionism. This threatens the region’s historical advantage of unrestricted trade, free international financial movement, and deep integration.

Still, organisations like ASEAN and venues like the RCEP continue to provide frameworks for communication, standardisation, and conflict resolution. If used well, these can shield the region from global turbulence.

Different perspectives, but same goal

To ground the region-wide analysis, it’s instructive to look at key member states (Vietnam and Singapore), each illustrating different facets of ASEAN’s opportunity and risk profile. These country spotlights highlight how the common themes play out in specific national contexts, from growth strategies to unique vulnerabilities.

Vietnam has been one of Southeast Asia’s standout success stories. Often dubbed the “next Asian tiger,” it has transformed from a largely agrarian, post-war economy in the 1980s into a manufacturing dynamo and rising middle-income nation today.

Vietnam’s formula has centred on political stability, export-led growth, and a willingness to embrace globalisation. By offering investors a stable environment (under its one-party system), relatively low wages, and an industrious workforce, Vietnam became a magnet for foreign direct investment, attracting factories in electronics, textiles, and more. Global brands like Samsung, Intel, Nike, and Apple suppliers have set up large operations there.

This boosted manufacturing to account for about a quarter of Vietnam’s GDP and drove exports to surpass 100% of GDP, indicating that Vietnam exports more goods than the size of its economy, a clear sign of its deep integration into global supply chains.

As mentioned, Vietnam’s GDP growth has been vigorous, topping 7% in 2022, and is projected to remain in the mid-6% range for the coming years, among the fastest in Asia. Even during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, Vietnam managed positive growth thanks to effective virus containment and strong exports.

The country leveraged trade deals to its advantage, joining agreements like RCEP, the CPTPP, and a bilateral FTA with the EU, giving its exporters preferential access to major markets. This has buttressed industries from furniture to smartphones.

Notably, Vietnam has carved a niche as an alternative manufacturing hub to China; companies looking to diversify production (due to tariffs or to mitigate concentration risk) found Vietnam’s scale and improving infrastructure attractive. Vietnam’s rise has also challenged China’s dominance in certain sectors and is drawing comparisons to “the next China” for factory relocation.

Now, Vietnam is eyeing the next stage, which is moving up the value chain. It doesn’t want to remain just a workshop for low-cost goods. The government is pushing for the development of high-tech parks, encouraging sectors like software services, renewable energy technology, and higher-end electronics.

There’s also an ambition to emulate India’s success in IT services, turning Vietnam’s growing cadre of IT graduates into a force in software outsourcing and digital innovation. Cities like Danang and Hanoi have budding tech scenes, and Vietnamese startups in fintech and games have gained global recognition.

However, Vietnam faces a confluence of risks as it develops. Infrastructure, while improved, is still playing catch-up: ports are congested, the energy supply is stretched as power blackouts hit manufacturing in 2023 due to heatwaves and hydroelectric shortages, and roads and logistics need upgrading to sustain growth.

Vietnam’s youthful population is also ageing gradually. It needs productivity gains to compensate. Environmental issues are pressing: the Mekong Delta, Vietnam’s rice bowl, is under threat from climate-induced saltwater intrusion and upstream damming, which could hit agriculture and fishing livelihoods.

Industrialisation has also brought pollution. Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City suffer severe air pollution at times, and industrial waste management is a growing issue.

The country’s rapid growth has also led to inequality between booming coastal cities and rural hinterlands, as well as corruption challenges in its bureaucracy.

Singapore presents a very different, but equally instructive, case—a high-income oasis in the region, known for its exceptional governance and innovation-driven approach. As a small city-state with 5.6 million people, Singapore leapfrogged into developed economy status (with per capita income on par with Western Europe), and established itself as a global financial and trading hub. For investors, Singapore often serves as the gateway to ASEAN. Its rule of law, stable politics, and ease of business provide a secure base.

Singapore’s economic model emphasises continual upgrading and diversification. Lacking natural resources or hinterland, it has invested heavily in human capital and infrastructure to stay competitive. The government’s foresight in policy planning is a hallmark. Through its national plans, it identified electronics, petrochemicals, and finance as pillars in the late 20th century, later moving into biotech, precision engineering, and now digital tech and green finance.

Today, Singapore is pushing frontiers in fintech, biomedical sciences, and smart city technologies. It has positioned itself as a leader in fintech regulation, enabling innovations such as digital banks and a vibrant startup scene in blockchain and payments.

It’s also a regional leader in AI and robotics research; universities and government labs are working on AI applications ranging from port logistics to healthcare. As noted, Singapore’s aggressive automation, such as building the world’s largest automated port, demonstrates its drive to mitigate labour constraints through technology.

That said, Singapore faces its own challenges as a mature economy. Growth has slowed to typically 2%-3% in recent years (aside from the volatile pandemic swing). An ageing population is a pressing issue, fertility rates are extremely low, and the workforce is ageing, requiring the country to rely on productivity gains and selective immigration to sustain growth. This is partly why automation and productivity are emphasised; Singapore sees technology as the key to doing more with a lean workforce. The city-state also must continue innovating to justify its high-cost base. It can’t compete on cost with neighbours, so it must provide higher value.

This includes positioning itself as a hub for high-tech manufacturing, such as semiconductor fabrication. Singapore is a global player in chipmaking, hosting companies like GlobalFoundries and Micron. Additionally, it aims to be a centre for services like wealth management and medical tourism.

Inequality and the cost of living are the talking points in Singapore. It has some of the world’s richest people, highly paid professionals, and a sizeable low-income immigrant worker population in construction and domestic work.

The government mitigates inequality through heavy subsidies in housing, healthcare, and education, with over 80% of Singaporeans living in subsidised public housing, and a progressive fiscal system. Still, wealth gaps have drawn more attention in recent years domestically, prompting policies like higher taxes on luxury properties and cars, and more social support for the elderly poor.

Considering the environmental and climate matters, Singapore is unique: a tiny island nation extremely vulnerable to sea-level rise. It has committed to net-zero emissions by 2050 and is investing in climate defences.

It’s also driving green initiatives like becoming a carbon trading hub, mandating sustainability reporting for companies, and electrifying its vehicle fleet (to phase out petrol vehicles by 2040). Given its limited land, it’s exploring importing renewable energy from neighbours. Plans are underway to import solar or hydro power from Malaysia, Indonesia, and Australia via subsea cables.

Singapore plays a crucial role in ASEAN as both an innovator and intermediary. It channels global capital into the region through its banks, funds, and investors such as Temasek and GIC, which are sovereign funds that invest across Asia. Additionally, Singapore shares its technical expertise with neighbouring countries by providing advice on urban planning and governance.

However, Singapore’s high level of development also means it sometimes has different interests. For example, it champions high-standard trade agreements and IP protection, which some developing ASEAN members are slower to adopt.

Singapore continues to be an appealing destination for investors seeking stable, although relatively lower, returns. This includes sectors such as real estate and high-end manufacturing, and serves as a hub for regional operations.

The Singapore government also provides incentives for emerging industries, particularly in areas like green technology, digital technology, and high-value manufacturing, which currently receive substantial support.

The country also has a stable currency, which eliminates the foreign exchange risks often seen in emerging markets. Essentially, this makes Singapore a low-risk option for investors looking to benefit from the high-growth potential of the ASEAN region.

The post APAC: The world’s next economic powerhouse appeared first on International Finance.

He slowly included phoney numbers into the financial report. Instead of five years of hard labour, he turned his firm into a winner in one hour. He clicked send to show his investors; surely, he would get caught.

But he did not. It pleased his backers that his business was growing. Without knowing the data were manufactured, they contributed extra money to help Gibran avoid bankruptcy. In late 2018, he began building a house of cards that would cost some of the world’s greatest money managers hundreds of millions of dollars.

Six years after starting a second set of accounts (a real one for his team and a second, inflated book for investors), eFishery was one of Asia’s brightest firms with $1.4 billion in valuation and 2,000 employees. In addition to automated fish feeders to enhance output, it offered financing.

By the time it fell, the fraud had spread worldwide with bogus shell firms and inflated accounts. According to an internal enquiry, the corporation reported $752 million in first-nine-month 2024 revenues but actually earned $157 million.

Deception caught several of the world’s most prominent venture capitalists, including SoftBank Group Corp. and Temasek Holdings. Abu Dhabi’s 42XFund and Chamath Palihapitiya’s Social Capital to Sequoia India and Southeast Asia (now Peak XV).

The episode raises unpleasant concerns about ego, groupthink, and how so many red flags were missed in backing a business darling. At least $300 million was lost by investors. It is unclear how much each fund lost, and some may have sold shares at a greater valuation.

The beginning

Gibran was reared in East Jakarta’s slums by a construction worker father and a homemaker mother. MIT of Indonesia, Institut Teknologi Bandung, was his biology school. When his family struggled financially, Gibran was on his own. As food was scarce, he slept in mosques and at school, tutoring for money, working in a convenience store, and various side jobs.

Inspired, he rented ponds after taking a fish-farming course. He rapidly discovered hard work, small margins, and finicky fish.

Aquaculture, or water agriculture, is hard. Too little feed starves fish, while too much wastes money and produces algae. Spawned eggs are nursed in a series of pools before being released into larger ponds and given precise amounts at specific intervals. After months of care, fish must be sold and transported, sometimes alive, to processors and customers. Prices can vary greatly.

Gibran was determined. To make more money, he opened warungs to sell cooked fish and urged grocery stores to carry his product. While managing over 70 ponds, he intended to start a seafood restaurant franchise.

One veteran farmer advised him that growth makes feeding a chore. Gibran welded and programmed an automated fish feeder himself. His student project was a shiny milk bucket connected to a funnel that gravity-fed fish meal pellets onto a rotating disk. Texting opened a slide to release the feed, which scattered across the water.

Using a prototype on his motorcycle, he travelled between farms on rutted roads and village pathways for months. As the initially reluctant farmers observed yield benefits and provided testimonials, the initiative gained traction.

To raise awareness and win cash prizes to keep the business alive, he entered Jakarta startup competitions and quickly learnt the ABCs of venture capital: how to write a pitch deck, present his business model, and thrill investors with vision and financials.

eFishery struggled with their feeders’ expensive pricing and small-scale fish farming’s tight margins. Costs range from $400 to $600, depending on size and incentives. That was too expensive for many Indonesian clients, where 10% of the 280 million people live below the poverty line, and labour is inexpensive.

Gibran immediately switched from selling to renting his machines to farmers. He thought he could launch his feeders faster and recoup their expenditures in a few years. Because he had to buy the equipment ahead, he was spending money.

He tried to attract regional venture funders but was turned down. Singapore regulatory documents show the startup had $8,142 in cash by December 2017.

Aqua-Spark remained interested. It offered $1.5 million in three equal tranches for the Series A round in May 2018. Only other investors could provide the final $500,000.

The bargain bought him time, but no one else joined. Gibran believed he was responsible for the first million dollars if he failed to get investors. Aqua-Spark co-founder Amy Novogratz stated that the agreement did not impose personal liability.

He asked fellow Indonesian founders how they raised new investments, dejected. Gibran believed the unclear, coded advice meant fudging the figures. He had a moral dilemma: be honest and fail, or manipulate the stats and keep the show going for himself, staff, and farmers.

The trolley speeds up

The sentiment changed drastically after a successful Series A fundraising, attracting Singapore-based Wavemaker Partners and San Francisco-based 500 Global’s Southeast Asia fund. It raised $4 million, including Aqua-Spark’s third tranche.

Gibran had to justify the spreadsheet’s new numbers. He started with a simple system. He said fish farmers had already bought feed and sold fish, so he offered 2% to 3% to “move” their business onto eFishery.

It was a sophisticated trick. Field consumers were unaffected. They used the same systems to sell to the same customers at the same prices. However, eFishery’s income increased after those transactions were added to its financial accounts.

Kabayan, a finance scheme that used the startup’s aquaculture expertise to assess harvesters’ credit scores and secure loans from lending platforms, was riskier. A 1% to 3% commission and little risk were promised by eFishery. The truth was worse: eFishery owed the debts, and default rates were high.

eFishery’s Singapore-filed financial filings indicate a 50-fold increase in sales from $185,405 in 2018 to $10 million in 2019. Investors were thrilled. In the same period, it went from a loss to a gross profit, attracting term sheets inconceivable months earlier. With greater money came rapid expansion: applications to buy fish directly from farmers and drop points across islands to distribute feed and collect fish.

It affected some farmers. In Cirebon, West Java, Suganda was one of the first to use the eFeeder machine. A chest-high plastic drum can carry 100 kg (220 lbs) of fish feed. The barrel’s bottom control box decides how much feed the pond fish receive. Farmers downloaded an eFishery app and entered feeding times and feed amounts to utilise the machine. Suganda denied that Gibran asked him to inflate numbers.

Suganda and his Cirebon collective farmers grew with $150,000 in loans from eFishery. His revenue increased by 20% to $603 a month as his pond count went from 10 to 70.

This progress occurred as startup investors sought more help-the-world concepts. Morningstar reported that sustainable fund assets rose 67% to roughly $1.7 trillion in 2020 as investors sought social and environmental partnerships.

With Gibran’s rags-to-riches story and increasing financials, eFishery was a rising star. Gibran raised $20 million in Series B funding in 2020 from private equity firm Northstar Group and Go-Ventures (formerly Argor Capital).

Money and pride

Gibran said eFishery did not need extra money now. The pandemic even helped him balance the books: investors expected revenues to drop, but the business was doing well. He fabricated slow growth to catch up with the genuine data.

He learnt that SoftBank founder Masayoshi Son wanted to talk. In 2021, the COVID-19 pandemic peaked. He could not show SoftBank the fish farms in Indonesia that used his product like he did with prior investors. He only had an hour.

Gibran was anxious at his Bandung office. He bred fish on a small Indonesian farm a few years ago, and now SoftBank, which had raised roughly $100 billion for startup deals through its “Vision Fund,” was ready to verify his conviction in eFishery’s future.

The company provided support to Yahoo Japan, Alibaba Group Holding, and Grab Holdings, which is one of Southeast Asia’s most promising companies. Gibran mentioned that Son, who was listening from Tokyo, interrupted the pitch after 15 minutes. One of SoftBank’s term sheets valued the company at $200 million, which made Gibran very happy.

Sequoia India and Southeast Asia (Peak XV) suddenly submitted a $300 million bid. Temasek, Singapore’s multibillion-dollar state-owned investor, also sought allocations. Gibran opened WhatsApp and saw a text from Temasek CEO Dilhan Pillay, which he thought was spam. Pillay requested time to discuss.

He enjoyed the attention his small startup was getting, but he spent nights worrying about its weak foundations. eFishery reported 1.6 trillion rupiah ($95.3 million) in revenue and 142 billion rupiah before-tax profit in 2021. Revenue fell 40% to 958 billion rupiah, with a pre-tax loss of 164 billion rupiah.

Gibran felt uneasy with the lie, but he remembered the trolley problem. He noticed how eFishery helped certain farmers. His startup had an impact, he believed. Taking this money would put further pressure on eFishery to grow, thus reconciling its two books would have to wait. He was split.

After the interest, SoftBank, Temasek, and Sequoia India offered $90 million in new funding at a $410 million value, according to Gibran, sources, and Alternatives.pe. The price was high for a young firm led by an unskilled Indonesian fish salesperson. Three years ago, eFishery was worth $12 million, but the world’s greatest investors noticed. The deal was accepted.

Red flags missed

In retrospect, warning indicators existed. The 2020 Singapore holding company financial statement was filed in 2024. The lack of disruption in markets where eFishery claimed to be making waves was noteworthy. The company purportedly had over 300,000 feeding units in the field and over 44,000 fish and shrimp farmers buying from its platform by 2023, which should have shaken the supply chain.

Gibran ghosted them when one investor with feed producer ties tried to connect them with eFishery, a win-win for both parties. Another said Gibran was typically three months late with basic numbers and that a feeder component manufacturer told them it only produced enough for 5,000 units per year. Senior officials at Indonesia’s largest fish feed distributors informed a separate investor that their unchanging sales were confusing.

Gibran said he needed larger farms with over $1 million in annual sales for his inflation approach to make sense after his Series C funding round, because the claims and targets were so big. After searching the nation, he found nothing to join.

He states that an employee proposed a solution in early 2022. By establishing a complex network of subsidiaries and managing farmers’ accounts, the firm became sophisticated enough to exaggerate transactions. He notes that this led to the creation of five enterprises with over 5,000 accounts related to fish feed and fish sales.

While trying to meet investor claims, he burned through actual money. The lax checks and collections on the lending site made it popular with fish farmers, but default rates rose. The software had major troubles, requiring nationwide field teams and sales matchers.

By then, phoney numbers made eFishery seem supercharged. Series D fundraising spearheaded by Abu Dhabi-based sovereign fund 42X raised $200 million at a $1.4 billion value. The investors included Malaysian pension fund KWAP.

During all these raisings, eFishery was reviewed by top investors and auditors. Three sources said Grant Thornton audited the Indonesian entity’s 2022 annual financial statements while PwC was a week away from signing off.

Grant Thornton is investigating the eFishery claims and is concerned about them. Gibran said 20 farmers were visited for Series B fundraising and 70 for Series C. He said the due diligence firms used eFishery’s database of farms to tell the startup which they planned to visit, aside from a few random spot inspections.

This allowed Gibran to prepare the ground. Gibran adds that local area managers were handed fact sheets with numbers to tell visitors and informed farmers; the rest was luck.

The same issues that make Indonesia a difficult market can make auditing corporations difficult. The nation has over 17,000 islands, and much of the job is done in rural areas where exact addresses are not enough, and farmers need to reach the front door.

The fall

Gibran planned to fix the business after investors were told it was stopping expansion to focus on financial sustainability before going public. Make eFishery Great Again was his Project MEGA.

To improve its financial health, eFishery aimed to more than halve its losses before tax to 107 billion rupiah, cut late loans on its Kabayan programme, and persuade more farmers to use its technology. It also wanted additional farmers to buy and sell fish through them. They had a challenge: half of their 28,000 Kabayan fish and shrimp growers were idle. Documents showed another 7,000 frozen accounts. Over 90% of eFishery’s sales came from firms with less than 2% gross profit margin.

Gibran revealed in a 30-minute Zoom chat on December 11 that he confessed to Aqua-Spark co-founder and eFishery board member Novogratz, who was one of the company’s original investors and his mentor. Gibran stated that Novogratz was deeply disappointed in him.

Two days later, on December 13, eFishery’s Steering Committee suspended Gibran. An interim CEO and CFO took control of eFishery, including its bank accounts.

Many lessons learnt

Investors are contemplating how to close the company. The board hired FTI Consulting Singapore to evaluate and manage the organisation. It advised closing the business and returning investors’ money. Abu Dhabi’s 42X, which spent $100 million in April 2023, may receive $8.3 million two years later.

A mystery is what happened to all the money. The FTI research suggests that some staff stole money, and Gibran received a salary and bonus comparable to a much larger company, but he seemed to live modestly. One worker drove a Hyundai Ioniq 5 to work. Indonesian tycoons have fled with millions of investment dollars, while he stays in Bandung, a second-tier city where he founded the firm to cut costs. None of his critics have proven he embezzled.

According to Winnie Yamashita Rolindrawan, partner at Indonesian law firm SSEK, the scandal exposed vulnerabilities in regulatory oversight and corporate governance in Indonesia.

While Rolindrawan advocated for VCs adopting a more thorough due diligence approach, on their part, startups must maintain accurate and verifiable records. Investors need to closely monitor, apart from carrying out post-funding audits, to ensure that startups operate transparently.

The post The rise & fall of eFishery appeared first on International Finance.

Singapore’s geopolitical approach is intricately linked to its economic survival, particularly in light of its small population and limited resources. Singapore, being an important hub of international trade and finance, has to contend with the challenge of navigating an increasingly fragmented world, characterised by shifting allegiances and economic uncertainty.

Geopolitics and economics

The US, as a key security ally and major investor in Singapore, has a corresponding role. Meanwhile, China’s proportion of trade with Singapore makes the nation a key economic partner. To this end, Singapore has kept its word. The city-state has cultivated close ties with both superpowers and promoted multilateralism through ASEAN and other regional economic frameworks.

Today, geopolitical tensions in the form of South China Sea disputes and the United States efforts to exit Chinese supply chains have left Singapore in a challenging situation. Counterintuitively, the city-state is extending its trade treaties with emerging markets, as well as working to advance digital trade with other value-hungry nations like Australia, the European Union (EU), and Japan.

Being a small country, Singapore is sensitive to changes in international trade, investment flows, and technological progress. With its policy of globalisation, Singapore’s open economy has thrived. However, the global shift away from a rules-based multilateral system due to prevailing protectionist policies poses a threat to Singapore’s economic stability.

The pandemic-induced supply chain disruptions and global push toward self-reliance in producing semiconductors have shed light on the middleman vulnerabilities of Singapore. In response, Singapore has shifted its attention towards diversifying its economic base through giant investments in frontier industries such as artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and financial technology.

The government has implemented incentives to attract multinational companies while backing local firms, particularly those involved in green energy and sustainable finance. Additionally, Singapore is going digital, focusing on cross-border e-commerce and fintech products, all to stay relevant in a future where digital commerce is as significant as traditional trade corridors. Despite these strategic initiatives, Singapore is also facing some long-standing issues that could slow down its economic growth in the future.

“With our population ageing and fertility rates dropping, the labour shortage problem remains a top priority. The government is trying to attract foreign skilled talent while ensuring that domestic workers are able to remain competitive through lifelong learning and retraining opportunities,” says Faizal Bin Yahya, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore.

However, immigration remains an issue that provokes strong emotions, with individuals voicing growing concerns about how the newcomers fit into society and what it does to our national identity.

“Singapore’s limited geographical size restricts its ability to expand its physical footprint. This limitation has resulted in innovative urban planning strategies such as underground infrastructure development and land reclamation schemes. Climate change further compounds our challenges, as the rising sea level and climate-related disasters pose threats to Singapore’s long-term sustainability,” Yahya added.

The government has made significant efforts to mitigate this challenge through investment in green technology. The government is introducing renewable energy, funding carbon capture initiatives, and advancing financial instruments tied to sustainability, as the world economy moves towards sustainability.

One important aspect of Singapore’s economic policy is trade diversification, which can mitigate some adverse effects. Beyond strengthening trade relations with its immediate neighbours, Indonesia and Malaysia, Singapore has signed 27 bilateral and regional free-trade agreements.

Moreover, Singapore has further deepened sub-regional development cooperation with Indonesia and Malaysia. In Batam, Indonesia, for example, Singapore has jointly developed industrial and high-tech parks. Furthermore, it is a partner to the Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone, which aims to open Johor, Malaysia, to Singapore-based companies.

Structural and demographic challenges

Singapore’s labour force and resources, particularly its land, limit its ability to grow and develop. The number of foreign workers rose from 1.2 million in December 2021 to 1.52 million in December 2023, despite strict regulations such as the dependency ratio ceiling, which limits the number of foreign workers in relation to the overall labour force.

As of June 2024, the population of Singapore includes 1.86 million non-residents, 3.64 million citizens, and 544,900 permanent residents. The median age of the citizens was 42.8 years old in 2022. As of today, it is 43 years old. It is worrying that 19.9% of its citizens are 65 years and above, and in 2030, this number is expected to rise to 24.1%.

In 2023, 34,491 people were granted permanent residence, and 23,472 people were granted citizenship, a 1.7% increase from the previous year. To manage the flow of new citizens, social integration, ethnic, and interreligious peace activities have been at the forefront, although the number of new citizens granted has remained stable recently.

Immigration and foreign labour have become significant issues, particularly as general elections like the one in 2025 approach. The politicisation of immigration and foreign labour issues draws attention to the importance of maintaining racial harmony and ethnic balance. Racial classification by the Singaporean government is done using the Chinese-Malay-Indian-Others model.

During his 2025 budget speech, Singapore Prime Minister and Finance Minister Lawrence Wong presented several measures to aid Singaporeans to ensure that the nation maintains its economic growth and social compact with its residents.

These policies aim to encourage lifelong learning, offer job assistance, and help with workforce transformation. These included regular training subsidies for certain full-time and part-time courses, and enhanced workfare skills assistance for low-income individuals.

As part of its National AI Strategy 2.0, which the Singaporean government updated in 2023, Singapore is focusing on building its AI capability alongside leveraging technology to drive economic growth. The aim is to triple the number of AI experts to 15,000 by 2023. Furthermore, by enhancing its connectivity, the state continues to utilise and maximise its locational advantage.

Among the most densely populated countries is Singapore. Singapore’s housing market is in a dilemma situation—while it has made many homeowners by providing housing to residents through the Housing Development Board (HDB), it has also seen escalating property prices that have created giant concerns regarding affordability.

The government has introduced stringent regulations to curb speculation and ensure stability, such as cooling measures, additional stamp duties, and restrictions on loan-to-value ratios. However, demand continues to outstrip supply, leading to record resale levels and increasing rental costs.

Increasing foreign investment in luxury homes and a rising tide of expatriates have been pushing housing costs sky-high, posing difficulties for younger Singaporeans and lower-income groups in being able to find housing that they can afford.

The rising price of private flats has contributed to inflationary pressures, and Singapore is now among the most expensive cities to live in globally. The government has taken measures by increasing the supply of Build-To-Order (BTO) flats and introducing first-time homebuyers’ subsidies. However, the extent of their impact remains uncertain.

The current cost-of-living crisis is not limited to housing alone; it affects our everyday essentials such as food, transport, and healthcare. The global supply chain disruptions and higher energy prices have driven the increasing cost of living. Singapore imports most of its food and products, leaving it exposed to price fluctuations.

The hike in the Goods and Services Tax (GST) from 8% to 9% in 2024 has caused consumer prices to go up, despite the assurance of assistance from the government to lower-income earners.

The government has rolled out schemes such as U-Save rebates, cash handouts, and transport subsidies to alleviate the burden. But concerns about wage stagnation and income inequality persist.

As Singapore attracts increasing numbers of high-net-worth individuals and multinational companies, a means of balancing economic expansion with affordability for residents will be a key issue for policymakers over the coming years. Trade hub, sustainable energy, and AI: Singapore must enhance its global connectedness to consolidate its position as a node within the global value chain.

Changi Airport served over 58.9 million passengers in the aviation sector in 2023. Singapore is now restarting the construction of Terminal Five, which will be larger than Terminals One to Four combined and accommodate 50 million annual passengers to help it compete with other airline hubs.

The aviation sector supports around 200,000 individuals and contributes to 3% of Singapore’s GDP. In its 2025 budget, the government injected S$5 billion (US$3.7 billion) into the Changi Airport Development Fund.

The maritime sector supports around 170,000 individuals and contributes 7% of Singapore’s GDP. With the development of the Tuas Mega Port, Singapore continues to enhance its geographical benefits.

Singapore’s aspiration to be zero-emitting by 2050 means that it will have to rely increasingly on its neighbours because it is resource-constrained. S$5 billion (US$3.7 billion) was allocated to the Future Energy Fund in the 2025 budget.

To achieve its target of importing four gigawatts of clean energy by 2035, Singapore would purchase 1.2 gigawatts from Vietnam. Singapore also has deals with Indonesia to import one gigawatt of clean energy and two gigawatts of low-carbon electricity from Cambodia.

It is enabled by automation and investments in emerging technologies, such as AI, but this strategy must be accompanied by the retraining and education of Singapore’s ageing workforce. There must be collaboration with key stakeholders, such as small and medium enterprises, global corporations, and trade unions.

Singapore is employing sub-regional development and digital trade, including e-commerce, with like-minded partners in a bid to seek alternatives to strengthen multilateral trade. In the transition to a greener economy for more sustainable growth, connectivity also needs to be enhanced, but this has to be paired with cooperation with sub-regional partners.

Singapore’s economy grew faster than expected into the end of 2024. The city-state’s economy grew 5.0% in the fourth quarter from a year earlier, higher than both an official advance estimate of 4.3% and economists’ forecast of 4.7% growth. However, the government anticipates slower growth in 2025, as trade frictions and ongoing geopolitical conflicts may lead to higher production costs.

Ultimately, the city-state needs creativity, collaborative partnerships, and a relentless policy reform drive to ensure its prosperity as a vital stakeholder in the global marketplace, while the trade war wages on.

The post Singapore: Balancing power and survival appeared first on International Finance.

finexis advisory Deputy CEO Irene Ho, “We are incredibly honoured to receive these prestigious awards. They reflect our team’s dedication to delivering exceptional service and expertise. As we continue to innovate, we aim to set new benchmarks in financial advisory excellence.”

A Leading Homegrown Firm With Global Recognition

finexis advisory’s pursuit of excellence has propelled them to rank 5th among all qualifying Singapore companies and 83rd globally in the 2024 MDRT (Million Dollar Round Table) Top 100 companies (Global). MDRT, a prestigious global association, recognises professionals for their exceptional knowledge, strict ethical standards, and outstanding client service.

As the only homegrown financial advisory firm in Singapore to earn a spot in the 2024 MDRT Top 100 rankings, this achievement reflects the exceptional calibre of finexis’ consultants and their commitment to delivering world-class service. This recognition also reflects the firm’s ability to attract top talent in a dynamic financial landscape.

Innovation Driving Award-Winning Technology

Under the leadership of Deputy CEO Irene Ho, finexis advisory is driving innovation and transforming the client experience through the development of cutting-edge digital solutions designed to streamline processes, improve efficiency, and foster meaningful client engagement.

The Financial Dreams Manager is an interactive tool that allows clients to visualise and assess their financial goals, deepening their involvement in the planning process. The finConnect mobile app provides seamless access to financial information, enhancing transparency and convenience.

The digitalisation of the eKYC process has significantly reduced the time needed for client onboarding, verification, and compliance checks, while the integrated WhatsApp chatbot ensures consultants receive timely support to address queries and work more effectively.

“These digital solutions have transformed the way we engage with clients and deliver value, improving efficiency by more than 30%. By automating routine tasks and offering intuitive tools, we enable our consultants to focus on building stronger client relationships and delivering expert advice that’s in the best interest of the clients,” Irene Ho noted.

Commitment To Clients

At the heart of finexis advisory’s success is its focus on putting clients first. With over 800 consultants, finexis empowers its consultants to offer unbiased advice by leveraging partnerships with over 79 international fund houses, 19 life insurance companies, 32 general insurance companies, and 16 banks through mortgage partners. These extensive partnerships provide consultants with access to an extensive range of financial products, enabling them to deliver comprehensive solutions tailored to each client’s unique financial needs and goals.

Path Ahead

finexis advisory remains steadfast in its commitment to innovation, service excellence, and client satisfaction. As the firm continues its mission of impacting lives beyond finance, it is focused on expanding its capabilities and market reach while staying true to its core values of client focus and independence.

The post finexis advisory shines in global financial rankings appeared first on International Finance.

From the Boeing strike and lingering 737 MAX controversies to widespread aircraft shortages and jet delivery delays, 2024 shaped up to be a defining year for aviation. This article provides a comprehensive review of the year’s critical developments and a forward-looking perspective for 2025.

A record-breaking travel

After years of pandemic-induced stagnation, 2024 witnessed a robust recovery in global travel demand. Passenger traffic soared, with IATA reporting an estimated 4.6 billion passengers taking to the skies, an increase of 12% from 2023. Key markets, including North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific, saw record-high ticket bookings as both leisure and business travel rebounded.

Pent-up demand, the easing of travel restrictions, and attractive pricing strategies by airlines fuelled the surge. Notably, international routes experienced a remarkable revival, with Asia-Pacific destinations recording a 30% rise in tourist arrivals compared to pre-pandemic levels.

However, this sharp uptick exposed underlying vulnerabilities in the industry’s supply chain and operational infrastructure. Airlines found themselves grappling with operational constraints, and airport congestion surged to unprecedented levels during peak travel seasons, leading to frustrations among travellers and challenges for ground staff.

Airports struggled to manage the influx of passengers, with reports of flight delays increasing by 20% compared to 2023. Major hubs such as Heathrow, Dubai International, and Changi faced logistical bottlenecks, prompting calls for accelerated infrastructure upgrades. The rapid recovery also strained the workforce, as airlines and airports raced to recruit and train personnel to meet operational demands.

Supply chain disruptions: A persistent headwind

Supply chain disruptions continued to hamper the aviation sector in 2024. The ripple effects of global semiconductor shortages, constrained raw material supplies, and logistical bottlenecks significantly impacted aircraft production and maintenance schedules. Leading manufacturers like Boeing and Airbus faced mounting backlogs, with combined deliveries falling short of targets by nearly 18%.

A six-week strike at Boeing’s key production facility in Everett, Washington, exacerbated the situation by bringing the manufacturing pipeline to a standstill. Workers’ demands for better wages and working conditions highlighted underlying tensions within the labour force and disrupted the delivery of hundreds of aircraft.

Airlines awaiting Boeing’s 737 MAX and 787 Dreamliner faced operational challenges, compounding the strain on their fleets. Meanwhile, Airbus, though better positioned, faced delays due to its reliance on a global supplier network that continued to experience inefficiencies.

The ripple effects extended beyond manufacturers to maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) providers, who faced mounting challenges in sourcing critical components essential for keeping fleets operational.

Airlines reported significant delays in aircraft repairs, with turnaround times increasing by an average of 25%. This in turn led to prolonged groundings of aircraft and further strained global fleet availability. Airlines had to adjust schedules and rely on older, less efficient aircraft still in service, leading to a surge in operational inefficiencies.

According to industry experts, problems in the supply chain cost MRO providers nearly $10 billion in lost sales. The bigger picture for the economy as a whole is $25 billion when you add in the effects on airlines and suppliers. The delays also created ripple effects across the value chain, as major MRO hubs like those in Singapore and Dubai reported backlogs stretching into months.

Additionally, rising costs for alternative components due to shortages further exacerbated financial pressures, with some airlines resorting to cannibalising parts from grounded planes to meet urgent repair needs. These cascading challenges underscored the urgent need for more resilient supply chain strategies and partnerships to weather future disruptions.

Boeing under the spotlight

Boeing’s turbulent year extended beyond the strike, as the company grappled with renewed scrutiny over manufacturing quality issues. In a significant blow, the FAA flagged anomalies in the 737 MAX’s production process, sparking concerns over safety and compliance. This scrutiny followed high-profile incidents that raised alarm about the model’s reliability, reviving memories of the 737 MAX’s grounding in 2019.

Airline customers deferred orders, and several carriers, including Ryanair and Southwest Airlines, publicly voiced frustrations over delays. Boeing’s efforts to reassure stakeholders, including ramped-up quality control measures and enhanced customer communication, provided some relief but failed to offset the year’s financial and reputational setbacks. Additionally, the company has announced plans to heavily invest in AI-powered monitoring systems to enhance quality control and mitigate future risks. But it will take years for these initiatives to yield results.

The regulatory scrutiny also led to increased oversight of other Boeing models, including the 787 Dreamliner. Delays in certifications for these models caused further disruptions for airlines awaiting deliveries, prompting several carriers to seek compensation for the setbacks. Analysts projected that Boeing’s total compensation payouts could reach $2 billion by the end of 2024.

For airlines, 2024 was a balancing act between meeting soaring demand and contending with aircraft shortages. Fleet utilisation rates hit unprecedented highs, with carriers like Delta Air Lines and Emirates operating at over 90% capacity during peak seasons. However, the inability to procure new jets on time led to widespread cancellations and schedule disruptions.

Industry-wide, airlines reported collective losses exceeding $15 billion, attributing a significant portion to delayed aircraft deliveries. Budget carriers, which rely heavily on narrow-body jets for short-haul routes, were particularly hard-hit. Wizz Air, for example, slashed its growth projections by 20%, citing a lack of available aircraft.

Compounding the issue, jet leasing rates surged by 25% as airlines scrambled for stopgap solutions. Leasing firms capitalised on the crunch, with AerCap and Avolon posting record revenues. However, for many airlines, the higher costs eroded profit margins, further straining their financial health. As airlines pushed older aircraft into service for longer than expected, maintenance costs escalated, resulting in increased fuel consumption and operational inefficiencies.

Airlines also faced challenges in fleet optimisation, with many carriers resorting to using larger jets on shorter routes to manage capacity shortages. While this approach allowed airlines to accommodate passenger demand in the short term, it presented significant drawbacks.

Larger jets operating on shorter routes consumed more fuel per passenger mile than smaller, more efficient aircraft, resulting in increased operational costs. The need for additional crew training and scheduling adjustments to operate these aircraft on unconventional routes exacerbated this inefficiency.

Additionally, the use of larger jets on shorter routes reduced flexibility in scheduling and network planning. Airlines struggled to redeploy aircraft to high-demand routes, which led to suboptimal utilisation of their fleets.

For example, during peak travel periods, airlines reported a 15% decline in the availability of narrow-body jets, which are typically better suited for short-haul flights. This situation created many disruptions, including flight delays and cancellations, as carriers scrambled to balance their resources.

These challenges underscored the far-reaching impact of delivery delays on airline operations, with ripple effects extending to customer satisfaction. Surveys conducted in late 2024 revealed a 20% increase in passenger complaints related to delays and schedule disruptions, highlighting the strain on carriers during this period.

Spotlight on key markets

North American airlines fared relatively well, buoyed by strong domestic demand and strategic cost-cutting measures. American Airlines and United Airlines reported modest profits, driven by high load factors and ancillary revenue streams.

However, labour disputes and fuel price volatility remained persistent concerns. In Canada, the government’s push for stricter carbon emissions regulations added a layer of complexity for carriers.

European carriers grappled with operational inefficiencies and rising regulatory pressures. Legacy carriers like Lufthansa and Air France-KLM struggled to maintain profitability amid mounting competition from low-cost rivals. Significant investment was also necessary for the expansion of the European Union’s green aviation initiatives, which further stretched already limited budgets.

Asia-Pacific has emerged as a promising region, exhibiting strong recovery momentum in international travel. Airlines like Singapore Airlines and Cathay Pacific capitalised on the region’s reopening, achieving double-digit revenue growth.

However, the slow pace of aircraft deliveries dampened expansion plans, particularly for Chinese carriers. India saw remarkable domestic growth, but infrastructure constraints at major airports hindered operational efficiency.

The Gulf carriers—Emirates, Qatar Airways, and Etihad—continued to dominate the long-haul market, leveraging their strategic hubs. Emirates launched six new routes in 2024, despite capacity constraints, showcasing its resilience.

However, geopolitical tensions and fluctuating oil prices added layers of complexity to their operations. The region also made significant strides in sustainability, with Qatar Airways piloting biofuel-powered flights on select routes.

The industry’s outlook for 2025

As the aviation industry enters 2025, stakeholders remain cautiously optimistic. The following are key trends and developments to watch:

Manufacturers expect supply chain stabilisation as they ramp up production to clear backlogs, with investments in automation and supply chain digitisation aiding them. Airbus has projected a 15% increase in deliveries for 2025, while Boeing aims to restore its credibility with a renewed focus on quality and transparency. Collaborative efforts between manufacturers and suppliers to build more resilient networks are likely to gain traction.

The push for greener aviation will gain momentum in 2025. Airlines and manufacturers are investing heavily in sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and electric propulsion technologies. IATA has set a target for SAF to constitute 10% of global jet fuel use by 2030, with incremental progress expected this year. We anticipate that regional collaboration to establish SAF supply chains will play a key role in achieving these targets.

Carriers will prioritise fleet renewal to enhance efficiency and reduce costs. The introduction of next-generation aircraft, such as the Airbus A321XLR and Boeing’s anticipated 797, could redefine market dynamics. We expect fleet modernisation programmes to closely align with sustainability goals, incorporating lightweight materials and more efficient engines.

Financial pressures may drive consolidation within the industry. Smaller airlines could merge or form alliances to achieve economies of scale and withstand competitive pressures. Collaborative regional partnerships aimed at optimising route networks and resource sharing are likely to emerge as a trend.

Digital transformation will remain a key enabler for growth. We expect airlines to differentiate themselves in a competitive market by leveraging AI-driven analytics, contactless solutions, and enhanced customer experiences. We also anticipate that predictive maintenance technologies and real-time operational monitoring will reduce downtime and enhance fleet reliability.

Governments and private stakeholders are expected to invest in airport infrastructure upgrades to accommodate the rising number of passengers. Expansion projects in regions such as Asia-Pacific and the Middle East will focus on addressing capacity constraints and improving the overall travel experience.

The post Airlines battle delays amid travel surge appeared first on International Finance.

The Monetary Authority of Singapore polled 25 economists, and their median forecasts predicted growth of 3.1% in the last quarter of 2024 and 2.6% in 2025.

Following third-quarter growth that exceeded projections at 5.4%, the trade ministry increased its 2024 GDP growth forecast to 3.5% last month from a previous range of 2.0% to 3.0%.

The MAS is expected to stick to its current monetary policy in its quarterly reviews in January, April, and July, according to the majority of economists polled.

Even though inflation decreased and growth increased in October, the MAS maintained its monetary policy settings.

Since a tightening in October 2022—the fifth consecutive tightening—it has not altered its policy.

Just 33% of respondents anticipate monetary policy to be loosened in January through a decrease in the slope of the Singapore dollar nominal effective exchange rate, or S$NEER, down from 50% in the September survey.

Singapore’s central bank determines the direction of the S$NEER’s policy band, which influences the value of the local currency relative to its major trading partners.

Core inflation this year was 2.8%, down from 2.9% anticipated in the September survey, while headline inflation for 2024 was 2.5%, down slightly from that forecast. According to the survey, core inflation in the last quarter of this year was 2.1%.

Compared to a year earlier, core inflation decreased to 2.1% in October, the lowest increase in nearly three years. Both headline and core inflation in 2025 are predicted by the economists polled to be between 1.5% and 1.9%.

Meanwhile, US President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to raise tariffs to as high as 20% on imports from around the world including Singapore.

The post Singapore economists see growth of 3.6% in 2024, monetary policy remains unchanged appeared first on International Finance.