For most of Silicon Valley’s history, liquidity arrived in one dramatic burst: an IPO that converted paper gains into spendable cash overnight. An uncomfortable truth has crept into the ecosystem—start‑ups now remain private for a decade or more, while employees, founders, and early backers confront real‑world expenses long before Wall Street rings the opening bell.

The quiet revolution solving that mismatch is the rise of structured, late‑stage secondary markets, and few firms illustrate the shift better than EquityZen, whose Co‑Founder and CEO, Atish Davda, recently laid out the industry’s mechanics and future trajectory.

The three eras of private‑equity liquidity

Secondary trading has unfolded in three distinct waves.

Phase 1—the dot‑com era—relied on early IPOs; Amazon, for instance, listed after just four years of founding, handing risk and opportunity to invest to public investors.

Phase 2 emerged in the late 2000s, when privately held giants such as Facebook and LinkedIn changed hands through US$25 million block trades arranged by bulge‑bracket desks. That market served hedge funds and family offices but excluded the rank‑and‑file employee & retail investors.

Phase 3 is today’s technology‑enabled marketplace, where standardised contracts and digital onboarding push minimums as low as US$10000, opening the asset class to accredited but not super‑rich investors.

Why structure beats heroics

Davda argues that two features differentiate modern platforms from ad‑hoc brokering: process standardisation and issuer alignment. EquityZen has amortised a single deal framework across ≈50 000 private placements touching 450–500 companies, collapsing legal costs that previously made sub‑US$1 million transactions uneconomic.

Also Read: Exploring the rise of finance-as-a-service in APAC

Equally important, issuers are invited to approve every transfer. Almost all start‑ups reserve a right‑of‑first‑refusal (ROFR); ignoring it spawns IOU‑style forwards that can evaporate if a seller disappears.

By working through company counsel, EquityZen not only avoids that risk but occasionally receives ROFR assignments when founders want price discovery without weakening an ongoing primary round.

A portfolio‑construction lens

Early‑stage venture is a power‑law game in which one decacorn must pay for many write‑offs. Late‑stage secondaries, by contrast, resemble public growth stocks: investors hope for doubles or triples, not 100 × returns. Portfolio implications follow:

• Sizing matters. Secondaries act as a bridge between liquid equities and classic venture; 5–10 per cent of alternatives is a typical allocation.
• Selection matters. Domain experts—say, security engineers vetting cybersecurity vendors—may favour single names. Generalists may prefer pooled vehicles that approximate thematic ETFs ​.

Inside the marketplace flywheel

Liquidity—not the sheer number of listings—defines marketplace health. EquityZen reports ~700 000 registered accounts alongside ≈2 000 SPVs holding US$1.5–2 billion of active positions​. Every time a late‑stage start‑up prices a new financing, closes an M&A transaction, or files to go public, that “external print” refreshes valuation anchors and pulls fresh supply onto the platform.

Supply itself is expanding. Employees hired during the 2015‑2021 boom are hitting four‑year vesting cliffs; many hold life‑changing equity yet still need down payments, tuition, or childcare funding. On the demand side, family offices, RIAs, and even municipal pension plans are hunting for mid‑risk growth assets that align with long‑dated liabilities.

When those two curves intersect on a compliant venue, friction—not appetite—becomes the bottleneck. Technology‑driven standardisation keeps eroding that friction quarter after quarter.

Also Read: Eco-investing: Driving change through climate technology and strategic finance

Regulatory moat

In a business where information asymmetry is structural, reputation compounds. EquityZen refuses to market individual deals, declines to sell order‑book data, and builds intentional friction—long FAQs, investor accreditation checks—into its funnel.

The result is slow initial conversion but durable trust ​. It is also why several high‑profile issuers now tag the firm as their “preferred partner,” steering employees away from grey‑market brokers that sidestep company approval.

What the next cycle looks like

The IPO window has been mostly shut for three years, yet the pressure is visible: sponsor‑driven M&A is rising, late‑stage rounds are re‑appearing, and macro expectations point to lower rates in 2025.

Any of those events—an acquisition, a pre‑IPO crossover round, a direct listing—generates price discovery that ripples through secondary markets. Davda contends that risk‑adjusted returns today mirror the opportunity set last seen in 2014, right before the unicorn wave crested.

Liquidity is not a post‑script to value creation; it is value creation’s connective tissue. The professionals have navigated secondary markets for decades. Thanks to infrastructure players like EquityZen, the rest of the innovation economy can finally participate on institutional terms—and that participation is set to accelerate in 2025.

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for educational and general‑interest purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or financial advice. All opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of any referenced companies. Before making any investment decision, readers should consult a qualified professional and conduct their own due diligence.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Join us on Instagram, Facebook, X, and LinkedIn to stay connected. We’re building the most useful WA community for founders and enablers. Join here and be part of it.

Image courtesy of the author.

The post How product design is democratising access to growth‑stage equity appeared first on e27.

SLEEK EV, a Singapore-headquartered electric scooter maker operating in Thailand, has announced a US$8.5 million first close of its Series A round, led by KYMCO Capital.

The round also drew participation from “more than twenty supply chain players from Taiwan and Mainland China”, according to the company.

The fresh capital lands as Southeast Asia’s two-wheeler markets — among the largest and most entrenched in the world — begin the difficult transition from internal combustion to electric. In Thailand, where scooters and motorcycles dominate urban commuting and last-mile delivery, SLEEK is betting that the next phase of electrification will be won not just on vehicle hardware, but on infrastructure, software, and distribution.

Also Read: SLEEK EV secures funding from ORZON Ventures to advance affordable electric mobility in SEA

SLEEK said the funding will be used to expand production capacity at a facility along Thailand’s Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC), accelerate R&D for “cutting edge AI-driven software and AI agents”, and increase the number of its EV S-Charge stations by more than seven times.

The company also pointed to existing relationships with partners, including PTT OR, Krungsri Auto, Toyota Tsusho, and Grab. It said it will continue to build strategic channel partnerships with dealers and national regulatory bodies.

Making Thailand a regional electric motorcycle hub

SLEEK — which also counts ORZON, January Capital, and A2D Ventures among its backers — is positioning its Thailand build-out as more than a local expansion. It wants Thailand to become a regional electric motorcycle hub — a credible ambition in a country that already plays a major role in the region’s automotive and parts supply chains.

The playbook implied by SLEEK’s announcement has three clear pillars:

1. Scale manufacturing inside Thailand (EEC expansion): By scaling production capacity domestically, SLEEK aims to shorten lead times, build closer supplier relationships, and create a platform that can support higher volumes as adoption rises. Locating along the EEC also signals an intention to align with Thailand’s industrial development corridor, where logistics and manufacturing ecosystems are already clustered.
2. Build charging and swapping infrastructure, not just sell bikes: Two-wheel EV adoption lives or dies on convenience and uptime, especially for riders who depend on their scooters for income. SLEEK’s plan to expand EV S-Charge stations by more than seven times is a direct attempt to remove the “where do I charge?” friction that slows mass adoption.
3. Push for safety and operational standards: The company said it aims “to set a new standard for regional charging and battery swapping on electric motorcycles to achieve safety, quality, and operational efficiency respectively.” In practical terms, this is a bid to shape norms in a market where inconsistent battery practices, fragmented charging experiences, and operational uncertainty can undermine consumer trust.

In Southeast Asia, becoming a “hub” is rarely about one factory. It is about whether a country becomes the place where supply chains concentrate, distribution networks anchor, and standards get adopted. SLEEK is trying to participate in that full stack.

The “OS” ambition for urban mobility

SLEEK is explicitly framing itself as more than an EV manufacturer. The company’s long-term ambition is to become “APAC’s trusted full stack EV motorcycle Operating System”, where “partners collaborate, data compounds, and actions convert to a new way of urban mobility.”

That positioning matters because electric two-wheelers produce a continuous stream of operational data through connected systems — vehicle health, battery performance, charging behaviour, route patterns, and rider usage. SLEEK describes itself as an IoT-enabled manufacturer, with scooter hardware “equipped with IoT and synced with a mobile application”.

This is where AI software can become a real differentiator in an end-to-end ecosystem:

• Fleet uptime and predictive maintenance: AI models can flag components likely to fail, reducing downtime — critical for delivery riders and fleet operators.
• Battery lifecycle optimisation: Software can manage charging behaviour and swapping cycles to extend battery life and improve safety.
• Demand-aware infrastructure operations: As station networks expand, AI can help allocate batteries, plan station expansion, and reduce congestion at peak times.
• User experience and support automation: The company’s mention of “AI agents” suggests it is building automated assistance and workflows — potentially spanning troubleshooting, onboarding, and service coordination.

Also Read: Electric vehicles at the crossroads: Trust vs innovation

Put simply, the scooter is the device; the software layer is the control plane that can make urban EV operations reliable at scale.

What KYMCO Capital brings: supply chain leverage and distribution acceleration

For SLEEK, the lead investor is not just a cheque; it is a strategic anchor.
KYMCO Capital is invested in by Kwang Yang Motor (KYMCO), described by SLEEK as a “global powersports manufacturer”.

SLEEK said KYMCO Capital will bring “60 years of industry experience in the two-wheelers” and support efforts to optimise supply chains, “synergise the proliferation of battery and charging/swapping technologies”, and “supercharge its distribution across Southeast Asia.”

This partnership can accelerate regional distribution in three concrete ways:

1. Manufacturing know-how and supplier access: Two-wheelers are a scale game. KYMCO-linked networks can help with vendor qualification, cost optimisation, and production ramp discipline — areas where many EV startups stumble when moving beyond pilot volumes.
2. Credibility with channel partners: In Southeast Asia, two-wheel distribution is relationship-heavy: dealers, service centres, financing partners, and fleet buyers all want proof that a brand can support vehicles for years. A strategic investor tied to a long-standing manufacturer can reduce perceived risk.
3. Technology alignment for charging and swapping: Interoperability and safety are major hurdles in battery ecosystems. A partner with deep two-wheeler experience can help ensure that charging/swapping approaches are operationally robust and scalable across markets.

EV two-wheeler fight is getting crowded

The competitive pressure in Southeast Asia’s electric two-wheeler space is intensifying, even as adoption remains uneven.

The region combines:

• deep-rooted incumbent brands with extensive dealer and service networks
• new EV-native startups offering connected vehicles and alternative ownership models,
• and low-cost imports and fast-moving entrants that can compete aggressively on price.

In this environment, winning is not just about launching an electric scooter. It is about building distribution, financing options, service reliability, and charging convenience—and doing so across multiple cities where infrastructure and regulations differ.

SLEEK’s strategy, as described in its announcement, addresses the competitive squeeze by leaning into:

• Channel partnerships (the company namechecked partners spanning energy, automotive services, and platform ecosystems),
• Infrastructure density (S-Charge expansion),
• Software integration (IoT + app + AI-driven layer),
• Manufacturing scale-up (EEC facility expansion).

That combination is also a defensive move: competitors can copy a vehicle design faster than they can replicate a functioning, high-uptime ecosystem.

EV space is maturing, but the transition will be uneven

Southeast Asia’s EV industry is maturing in a recognisable way: moving from early adopters and pilots toward infrastructure-building and operational scale. That maturation is visible in three broad shifts reflected by SLEEK’s announcement:

• From “vehicle-first” to “ecosystem-first”: The market is learning that charging, swapping, servicing, and financing are not optional add-ons.
  From consumer curiosity to fleet economics: Delivery and ride-hailing fleets can be powerful catalysts because total cost of ownership and uptime are measurable.
  From experimentation to policy and standards: As EV penetration rises, regulators and industry players tend to converge on safety expectations for batteries, charging, and operations.

Is the region “ready” to move to EV?

In practice, readiness is city-by-city and use-case-by-use-case. Dense urban areas with high two-wheeler utilisation and predictable routes are often the most viable starting points, especially when paired with charging/swapping networks and strong after-sales support.

Also Read: Electrifying Southeast Asia: Unleashing the radical potential of electric vehicles

SLEEK’s bet is that Thailand, with its industrial base and urban demand, can be a cornerstone market for that transition, and that the winners will be the companies building the system, not just the scooter.

With fresh capital, a strategic backer tied to decades of two-wheeler manufacturing, and a plan centred on production scale plus infrastructure and software, SLEEK is now stepping into the hardest phase of any EV story in Southeast Asia: execution at street level.

The post SLEEK’s Series A signals a more mature EV playbook appeared first on e27.

“You need to be a math genius to work in data.”

“Tech is only for engineers.”

“Women don’t belong in data leadership.”

Outdated misconceptions like these have long discouraged women from pursuing careers in data and technology. But as we celebrate Women’s History Month, the women of Confluent are here to challenge these myths—and show what it really takes to Accelerate Action.

For some of these women, joining the tech sector was a deliberate choice—an ambition fueled by a clear vision of where they wanted their careers to go. Others arrived by chance, discovering opportunities that piqued their interest and inspired them to learn more. 

While the industry has made steps forward in closing the gender gap, there’s still more ground to cover. Across engineering, HR, product, and sales, women are proving that success in data isn’t about checking every technical box; it’s about curiosity, problem-solving, and a drive to make a real impact.

Wait, so you don’t need to be an engineer to work in data?

The biggest misconception most women have? You must be an engineer with a relevant degree to excel in data. In reality, the most important skill is a willingness to learn. 

“One of the biggest misconceptions is that working with data requires you to be a ‘techie’,” says Marián Leonard, Director DACH & Southern Europe. “The truth is, anyone with a relentless curiosity about how data streaming solves problems for organisations and creates business value can thrive in this field.”

Collaboration and communication are equally critical. The tech industry doesn’t just need coders; it needs strategists, problem-solvers, and creative thinkers who can bridge gaps between teams, internally and externally, and be comfortable with ambiguity.

“We need professionals who understand human dynamics, manage stakeholders, and translate between technical and non-technical worlds,” says Veronika Folkova, Senior Director, People Business Partners for Global Legal Organisation and APAC. “Impact often comes from understanding organisational dynamics, creating effective development programs, and building inclusive cultures––none of which require deep technical expertise.”

Also Read: Women call for clearer, impartial financial education sources — Sophia Survey 2024

With AI and automation on the rise, there’s growing demand for roles that blend data insights with business acumen. According to Murielle de Gruchy, HR Leader, “There are plenty of roles that rely more on soft skills, relationship building, and the ability to understand customer challenges—and then solve them with data solutions.” 

Bringing more women on board is only the beginning

But recruiting women is only half the battle—retaining and advancing them is just as crucial. According to a 2024 report by the Infocomm Media Development Authority and Boston Consulting Group, the gender imbalance in Southeast Asia’s tech sector persists, with women making up only 34% to 40% of the workforce in technology, while Reuters reports that just 52 companies in the S&P 500 have female executive directors, underlining the global struggle to achieve gender parity in leadership. 

For Folkova, organisations that hire women without providing clear paths for leadership and support risk perpetuating the “pipeline to nowhere”.

“Companies often prioritise hitting diversity metrics in their hiring practices, which is important, but frequently stop there. They focus on the numbers––getting women in the door ––while neglecting the systematic issues that affect retention and advancement,” she says.

Even when women secure roles, systemic biases often stand in the way of their rise to senior positions. 

Keerthana Srikanth, Senior Software Engineer, notes: “Finding a sense of belonging can sometimes be a challenge because of the gender imbalance. This can translate to other issues such as disparity in recognition or compensation, and biases in day-to-day interactions.”

Caregiving responsibilities further complicate women’s career journeys. “Women often have to work harder than men to prove their capabilities, even when equally skilled,” explains Nadine Capelle, Staff Solutions Architect. “And even after proving themselves, many still struggle with imposter syndrome. For mothers, balancing work and parental responsibilities can be overwhelming.” 

Real progress requires a rethinking of workplace norms, from flexible scheduling and how leadership potential is measured, to creating an environment where women feel empowered   to speak up.

Also Read: Lifted by women, leading with gratitude

“Tech companies need to foster an environment of belonging and zero tolerance for mistreatment. Feelings of psychological safety enable everyone to work at their best and ensure those around them are held to the same standards,” says Charmaine Bernal, Senior Director, Customer Operations Engineering.

Advice for women embarking on—or advancing—their tech career

So what can women do to ensure they not only enter tech but stay and succeed?

Leonard: “Don’t let the fear of not ticking every box stop you. Curiosity, adaptability, and the ability to solve problems matter more than a perfect resume.”

Capelle: “Pursue tech if you truly love it. Gender is never a barrier—your passion and dedication are what count.”

Bernal: “Dive in! Find a company whose values match yours and build a support network. Pay it forward: when you get opportunities, share them with others.”

Srikanth: “Seek mentors, ask for feedback, and believe in yourself. Advocate for fair compensation and promotions—you’re worth it.”

Folkova: “Remember that your unique perspective and approach are precisely what the tech industry needs––they’re about reshaping the industry to be more innovative, inclusive, and effective through diversity of thought and experience.”

An inclusive future for everyone in data

I truly believe that by busting myths, breaking barriers, and supporting fellow women in the industry, there’s room for everyone to make their mark in tech. If you have the curiosity, drive, and readiness to adapt, you don’t just belong in the industry—you can help redefine it for generations to come.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Join us on Instagram, Facebook, X, and LinkedIn to stay connected.

Image credit: DALL-E

The post Women in data: Busting myths, breaking barriers and building an inclusive future for tech appeared first on e27.

Social media platforms and trends have transformed public PR. From spontaneous posts to viral videos, social media has significantly changed the way brands and businesses connect with consumers. 

Social media and public relations (PR) used to operate in different spheres. PR focused on managing reputations and getting media coverage, while social media was all about direct interaction with audiences. But today, the two are inseparable. Social media marketing has become essential for PR success, helping brands amplify their message, build trust, and connect with audiences like never before.

The influence of social media on public relations

Brand presence and visibility

Social media has significantly expanded brand visibility while enabling organisations of all sizes to leverage storytelling and foster meaningful community engagement. Unlike traditional media, which often demands substantial time and financial investment to secure coverage, social platforms offer direct access to target audiences. This allows brands to deliver tailored content that resonates with their followers and extends their reach beyond conventional media channels.

Understanding how audiences engage with content across different platforms is essential for effective public relations. Social media’s cost efficiency and capacity to reach niche audiences make it a critical component of modern PR strategies. When used strategically, it enables brands to build trust and credibility while strengthening their presence, visibility, reputation, and overall influence.

Crisis management 

Social media plays a critical role in brand crisis management due to its immediacy, extensive reach, and interactive nature. During a crisis, these platforms provide direct access to large audiences, allowing brands to respond swiftly and manage situations more effectively. This real-time communication enables PR professionals to shape the narrative, limit misinformation, and preserve trust with stakeholders and communities.

Compared to traditional public relations, social media enables faster, more direct communication with a broader reach and higher engagement. While conventional PR relies on formal channels such as press releases that may take time to circulate, social media allows for immediate responses. Integrating social media into PR strategies is particularly effective during crises, supporting brand reputation management, reinforcing credibility, and strengthening trust.

Content distribution

Social media has reshaped how public relations content is distributed, enabling brands to amplify their messaging far beyond the limits of traditional media. These platforms facilitate engagement with diverse audiences while supporting multiple content distribution approaches.

Also Read: Survey: Asia Pacific entrepreneurs over 45 redefine the unicorn dream

Unlike traditional PR materials such as press releases, which audiences typically consume passively, social media encourages active participation through likes, comments, and shares. Audience engagement also varies across platforms, making channel selection essential.

For instance, Instagram is well-suited for visually driven storytelling, while TikTok’s viral potential can rapidly boost brand awareness among younger demographics. LinkedIn prioritises professional and industry-focused content, Facebook supports long-term community building and message dissemination, and X enables real-time communication and hashtag-driven campaigns, particularly during breaking news or crises.

Data insights

Social media metrics provide PR professionals and marketers with clear insights into campaign performance, audience engagement, and brand perception. Unlike traditional public relations, where measuring return on investment can be difficult, social media offers quantifiable data that reveals what is effective and what requires adjustment. These insights enable data-driven realignment of PR strategies.

Social media also allows PR specialists to extract valuable insights across owned, paid, and earned media channels:

• Owned media: Brand-controlled platforms such as websites, blogs, and social media channels play a central role in PR. These channels enable direct message distribution while offering analytics that help refine content and improve performance.
• Paid media: Social media advertising, sponsored posts, and boosted content extend reach and target specific audiences. Performance metrics from paid media support campaign optimisation through improved audience targeting and more efficient ad spend.
• Earned media: Organic engagement, including mentions, shares, user-generated content, and influencer collaborations, strengthens credibility and trust. Earned media often signals authentic audience endorsement beyond paid promotion.

By leveraging these insights, PR professionals can optimise communication strategies, strengthen audience engagement, and drive more measurable outcomes for their organisations.

Influencer partnership

Influencer partnerships have become a key component of modern public relations strategies, involving collaborations with individuals who maintain large and highly engaged social media followings. Through authentic content and personal endorsements, influencers can significantly shape audience perceptions, influence behaviour, and impact purchasing decisions. 

Collaborating with influencers whose values and audiences align with a brand’s mission enables companies to increase visibility, drive deeper engagement, and strengthen overall brand awareness.

Also Read: APAC entrepreneurs are shifting the startup narrative beyond youth–and that is a great thing

Storytelling

Storytelling on social media is a powerful tool in PR campaigns, enabling brands to establish emotional connections with their audiences. By crafting narratives that reflect their mission and values, businesses can make messaging more relatable and memorable. For instance, sharing stories of individuals who have been positively impacted by a company’s products or services can resonate strongly with consumers.

Effective storytelling also humanises organisations, fostering a sense of connection with its audiences. Through authentic and compelling narratives, brands can create lasting emotional impact, build loyalty, and enhance public perception beyond what traditional marketing can achieve.

Social media and public relations: Ethical relations

Both public relations and social media practices rely on a strong ethical foundation. Transparency in influencer collaborations and clear communication during crises are essential for establishing trust, while accurate and timely messaging helps prevent the spread of misinformation. Undisclosed paid promotions can undermine credibility, and mishandling user data can result in legal issues and damage a brand’s reputation.

Upholding these ethical standards is critical for building trust and reinforcing brand credibility. PR professionals and social media marketers must consistently adhere to these principles to maintain reliable and trustworthy relationships with their audiences.

Conclusion

Integrating social media into public relations strategies is no longer optional. It is essential for enhancing brand visibility, managing crises, distributing content, and deriving actionable insights. When combined with influencer partnerships and storytelling, social media amplifies PR efforts by driving engagement and strengthening connections with target audiences.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image courtesy: Canva

The post How social media and public relations work together to drive brand success appeared first on e27.

When I first sold my company in 2011, I asked myself, What’s next? Start another startup, join a startup, or join an enterprise?

Instead, I invested in several startups, mentoring the Founders, helping others start their businesses, and facilitating exits.

Fast forward 14 years, and the world has changed so much that Blockchain, AR, VR, and AI have dominated businesses. So now, at 50 years old, what is next after three heart ops?

I was blessed to have the opportunity to work with some of the most brilliant people in the business world, as Mentors, Advisors, and they gave me a lot of guidance in life, too. For the past few years, I have been working with many to scale our own group of companies by scaling our clients (Startups and SMEs) business rapidly. It is fulfilling, fun, and at times difficult, but what isn’t in life?

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image courtesy: Canva

The post Why your 50s are the perfect time to start a business appeared first on e27.

Generative AI is now a default ingredient in startup narratives, but the lasting shift isn’t that founders can add a chat feature or generate marketing copy. Generative AI in startups is changing three fundamentals: how quickly products are built, what kinds of products are viable, and what “defensibility” looks like when models are widely accessible. 

At the same time, the hype cycle has created noise: inflated expectations, shallow demos, and ambiguous claims of “AI-powered” differentiation. A clearer view is to ask a more operational question: what has structurally changed in the startup playbook that is unlikely to revert? 

Below are the most meaningful changes that are vendor-neutral, practical, and grounded in the realities of building companies. 

Speed has moved up the stack: From code to decisions 

Startups have always been speed machines. What’s different is where speed is now being created. 

• Product iteration: Teams can prototype UI copy, onboarding flows, help content, and even basic feature scaffolding faster than before. This compresses time from idea → test → feedback. 
• Research and synthesis: Founders and PMs can summarise customer calls, draft PRDs, and explore competitive landscapes with less overhead to free humans to validate assumptions rather than generate first drafts. 
• Support and ops loops: Early-stage teams can triage inbound, draft responses, and extract structured signals from unstructured text. 

The practical result is not “AI replaces teams,” but that small teams can run more experiments simultaneously, raising the bar for execution speed across the ecosystem. 

“Software as a workflow” is replacing “software as a screen” 

A meaningful pattern in generative AI in startups is a shift from building interfaces to building outcomes. 

Traditional SaaS often required users to configure dashboards, set rules, and learn the product. Generative systems allow startups to design products that: 

• Accept messy inputs (emails, docs, notes)
• Interpret intent
• Produce a recommended output (a draft, a classification, a plan)
• Optionally execute actions via integrations

This reframes product value around “time-to-outcome” rather than “feature depth.” It is also why many new products look like copilots or agents: users want fewer clicks, not more configurable screens. 

Also Read: How marketing will be enhanced through generative AI

Distribution advantages are shifting from feature depth to trust 

When core model capabilities are broadly available, feature-level differentiation erodes faster. Startups are learning that defensibility increasingly comes from: 

• Proprietary data loops: unique user interactions that improve outputs over time (with consent and governance). 
• Workflow integration: deep embedding into the daily tools and systems where work happens. 
• Reliability and evaluation: consistent performance in real conditions, not demo conditions. 
• Compliance and auditability: the ability to explain outputs, control access, and meet regulatory constraints. 

In short, the moat moves from “we have AI” to “we can be trusted to run AI inside your real workflow.” 

This is particularly important given the scale of investment and experimentation underway. Stanford’s AI Index reports that private investment in generative AI reached US$33.9B in 2024 and that organisational AI usage rose sharply (e.g., 78 per cent of organisations reported using AI in 2024).  

The talent model is being rewritten (smaller teams, different roles) 

Generative AI changes hiring math. Startups can sometimes achieve output previously requiring larger teams, especially in content-heavy or operations-heavy functions. But that doesn’t mean “fewer people overall” as a universal truth. It means different skill mixes: 

• More emphasis on product thinking, domain knowledge, and systems design 
• More need for data discipline (taxonomy, labelling, quality checks) 
• More demand for “evaluation thinking” (how to test AI behaviour, identify failure modes, measure drift) 

In practice, early teams that treat evaluation and quality as first-class engineering concerns tend to move from novelty to reliability faster. 

MVP barriers are lower, but the “real product” bar is higher 

Yes, it is easier to build something impressive quickly. But that cuts both ways. If everyone can ship a compelling demo, the market becomes less forgiving of products that fail under real-world complexity. 

The gap between demo and durable product often shows up in: 

• Handling edge cases and ambiguous inputs
• Controlling hallucinations and overconfident outputs
• Building proper permissioning and data governance
• Ensuring consistent performance and latency

This is why “AI MVPs” are common, but “AI products that survive procurement” are harder. Startups that win are usually the ones that invest early in reliability, not the ones that chase novelty. 

Pricing and unit economics are becoming model-aware 

Another concrete change in Generative AI in startups is that unit economics now depend on usage patterns and inference costs, not only hosting and support. 

This pushes founders to think early about: 

• Which workflows require high-quality generation vs lightweight automation
• Caching and reuse of outputs
• Controlling token or compute spend in “always-on” experiences
• Aligning pricing with the cost-to-serve curve

The market’s growth expectations amplify this pressure. Statista’s forecasts for AI market expansion are frequently cited in industry analysis and illustrate why investors and buyers expect AI-enabled efficiency gains that are often faster than organisations can operationalise them.  

Also Read: 9 ways to use generative AI for PR

Risk is no longer only “product risk,” it’s now “system and policy risk” 

Generative AI introduces new categories of startup risk that are business-critical: 

• Data exposure: accidental leakage of sensitive data through prompts, logs, or training pipelines 
• IP uncertainty: rights and provenance questions around training data and generated outputs 
• Safety and misuse: harmful content, fraud enablement, and social engineering risks 
• Regulatory change: compliance requirements evolving unevenly across regions and industries 

The biggest change: Startups can compete on “cognitive throughput” 

Stepping back, the most durable impact is that startups can increase their “cognitive throughput”, which is the amount of analysis, drafting, synthesis, and iteration they can perform per unit time. 

That doesn’t guarantee product-market fit. It doesn’t replace customer empathy or distribution. But it does compress cycles and expand what a small team can attempt, especially in domains where the work is language-heavy, document-heavy, or decision-heavy. 

Economically, this aligns with broader forecasts that generative AI could contribute material productivity gains over time, depending on adoption and how work is redesigned. 

Closing view: Past the hype, the winners will look “boring” 

In the next phase, the most successful Generative AI in startups stories will sound less like “we use GenAI” and more like: 

• “We deliver a specific outcome reliably.” 
• “We prove it with measurable business impact.” 
• “We control the risks.” 
• “We integrate so deeply that switching costs become operational, not emotional.” 

Hype fades. Operational advantage compounds!

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Join us on Instagram, Facebook, X, LinkedIn, and our WA community to stay connected.

Image credit: Canva Pro

The post Beyond the hype: What generative AI is actually changing in startups appeared first on e27.

The narrative surrounding cryptocurrency is undergoing a fundamental transformation: a shift away from volatile speculation toward a more stable, utility-driven role within global financial infrastructure.

The 2025 Endeavour Catalyst Annual Report identifies emerging markets as the primary drivers of this change, particularly through the adoption of stablecoins and tokenised assets. Where legacy systems struggle — for payments, savings and cross-border transfers — digital assets are increasingly serving practical needs.

Solving the volatility crisis with “dollars as a service”

In many emerging markets, the appeal of stablecoins is straightforward: they preserve purchasing power and lower the friction of moving value across borders. Regions — where local currencies are volatile, or banking infrastructure is costly and slow — have shown robust adoption of dollar-pegged digital assets. Executives such as Farooq Malik of Rain describe their work as providing “dollars as a service”: enabling users to receive, hold, and send value in a stable unit relative to their everyday spending needs.

Also Read: How SMEs are using stablecoins to beat currency swings

This is not the 2021 speculative boom replay. The trend now is infrastructure-first: firms that provide rails for payments, custody, settlement and tokenisation are the companies capturing long-term value.

The Standard Chartered-cited data estimate that up to US$1 trillion could eventually move from traditional bank deposits in emerging markets into stablecoins, illustrating the scale of potential change. Infrastructure builders — from firms supporting stablecoin issuance to platforms enabling tokenised treasury and trade — are central to this transition.

From speculation to infrastructure: expert consensus

Experts in the Endeavor Catalyst report argue that crypto has shifted “from speculation to infrastructure.” This trajectory began earlier in the last decade, when companies began bridging bank-grade services and crypto rails; by 2025, the focus had shifted to embedding crypto primitives into real-world financial flows. The winners are those positioning themselves as platforms for commerce and payments, rather than venues for retail trading.

Stablecoin-powered payments, tokenised assets, and programmable money are being deployed to solve persistent frictions: remittance costs, long settlement windows for cross-border trade, limited access to dollar-denominated savings, and the challenge of onboarding small and medium enterprises into digital global markets.

Southeast Asia: why the region matters

Southeast Asia deserves special attention in this new phase. The region combines high mobile penetration, large remittance flows, substantial informal economies, and a sizeable unbanked or underbanked population — a fertile environment for stablecoin-based payments and tokenised financial services.

Key dynamics in the region include:

• Remittances and diaspora flows: Several Southeast Asian economies are materially remittance-dependent. Workers abroad sending money home require low-cost, fast, reliable transfers. Digital remittance models that use stablecoins for on-chain settlement and local rails for off-ramp can reduce fees and settlement times compared with correspondent banking.
• High mobile-first adoption: Many consumers in the region access financial services primarily through smartphones and e-wallets. That digital stack lowers the marginal cost of integrating tokenised payments or dollar-pegged digital assets for everyday transactions and merchant acceptance.
• Large informal and MSME sectors: Micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) often lack access to credit and traditional FX hedging. Tokenisation and programmable payments can create new on-ramps for these businesses to participate in borderless trade, invoice financing and supply-chain finance.
• Regulatory stewardship and regional hubs: Singapore’s continued positioning as a regulated digital asset hub — with licensing, industry sandboxes and a clear engagement model between regulators and firms — makes it a nexus for institutional-grade infrastructure. Other regional regulators have been evolving their approaches to virtual assets and payments, balancing consumer protection with innovation.

Concrete regional patterns (without overstating)

Several narrative threads from the Endeavor Catalyst report map directly onto Southeast Asian realities:

• Digital remittance players as blueprints: The report highlights digital remittance companies that use stablecoins as exemplars. In Southeast Asia, local and regional remittance and e-wallet firms have already experimented with more efficient cross-border settlement models. These initiatives mirror the broader trend of moving settlement onto faster, lower-cost rails while preserving local on/off-ramps for users who still transact in local currency.

Also Read: Endeavor report shows AI is eating venture capital alive

• From retail trading to B2B payments and trade finance: Startups that pivot away from retail crypto speculation toward infrastructure for B2B payments, payroll, and trade are better aligned with investor interest. Global fintech investors looking for “real-world applications” increasingly target companies focused on payments, custody, treasury, and compliance tooling — all essential for stablecoin adoption at scale.
• Banking the unbanked with regulated rails: The “dollars as a service” model can be a pragmatic way to offer dollar-like savings and payments in countries where holding physical dollars or accessing foreign currency accounts is difficult. When paired with regulated custody, transparent reserves, and robust compliance, stablecoin solutions can coexist with national monetary frameworks rather than undermining them.

Operational hurdles and the regulatory imperative

Adoption is not automatic. Practical and regulatory challenges remain:

• On/off-ramp infrastructure: For stablecoins to be useful to everyday users, reliable fiat rails and compliant local partners are necessary. This requires banks, licensed e-money issuers and regulated exchanges to work with tokenised-asset providers.
• Compliance and AML/KYC: Regulators across Southeast Asia have increased scrutiny on virtual asset service providers. Firms must embed strong know-your-customer (KYC) and anti-money laundering (AML) controls to gain institutional partners’ trust and to operate at scale.
• Reserve transparency: The credibility of dollar-pegged tokens depends on transparent, auditable reserves and governance. Markets and regulators will reward providers that regularly demonstrate backing and sound treasury practices.

What this means for Southeast Asian fintech and policy

• Startups: Firms that build payment rails, treasury services, merchant acceptance layers, payroll and remittance integrations around stablecoins and tokenised assets are best placed to capture demand. Focusing on compliance, predictable FX handling, and partnerships with incumbent players will accelerate adoption.
• Regulators: Policymakers can support beneficial outcomes by clarifying licensing regimes, enabling compliant fiat on/off-ramps, and facilitating industry sandboxes. This approach preserves monetary stability while allowing innovative payment and settlement systems to mature.
• Investors: Venture and growth investors increasingly favour enterprise-grade infrastructure and B2B propositions over retail speculation. In Southeast Asia, that translates to funding flows toward companies solving remittances, cross-border payroll, and trade settlement problems.

Conclusion

The shift from speculative trading to infrastructure use-cases is well underway, and Southeast Asia is both a beneficiary and a testbed for this transformation. Stablecoins and tokenisation are addressing real frictions — high remittance costs, volatile local currencies, and limited cross-border payment options — by offering dollar-equivalent stability combined with the speed and programmability of digital rails.

In a world of copyable AI, founders with scars win

With measured regulatory engagement, strong transparency, and partnerships across the banking and fintech ecosystem, the region could accelerate the global move toward a crypto-enabled layer of financial infrastructure that serves everyday commerce and cross-border value flows.

The full Endeavor report can be accessed here.

—

The image was generated using AI.

The post Stablecoins are becoming ‘dollars as a service’ for emerging markets appeared first on e27.

A Southeast Asian fintech founder recently counted seventeen significant regulatory changes her company had navigated in three years. That’s roughly one per quarter. When asked if she believed the mental model most founders operate under—”the regulatory landscape we launch into is stable for three to five years”—she laughed. “No founder truly believes it. We just operate as if we do, because the alternative seems too complex, too expensive, too uncertain.”

That assumption cost the industry billions in 2025. Companies treating regulatory stability as a baseline learned too late that it wasn’t. Enforcement letters arrived. Compliance gaps surfaced in third-party reviews. Single regulator reinterpretations forced multi-month platform re-architectures. By then, reactive remediation costs were 5–50 times higher than proactive design would have been.

The 2026 question isn’t whether to prepare for regulatory change. It’s whether to prepare now—in architecture and organisation—or later, in crisis mode.

Regulatory velocity has shifted

Regulatory frameworks once evolved on three- to five-year cycles. That era has ended in Asia. Regulation now moves quarterly.

India’s RBI published eight major guideline revisions in eighteen months. Vietnam reinterpreted data localisation rules twice in two years. Singapore, South Korea, and the Philippines are finalising divergent AI governance frameworks. Southeast Asia’s real-time payments platform has Q3 2025 deadlines with monthly requirement shifts.

The cross-border variance matters equally. A single data classification is “personal data requiring local storage” in Vietnam, “non-essential data allowing transfer” in Indonesia, “encrypted data acceptable elsewhere” in Thailand, and “metadata exempt from localisation” in Singapore. Founders building regional products cannot assume harmonisation—they must assume divergence.

The implication: Betting that regulatory environments will remain stable through your product roadmap has <20% odds in fintech/payments/lending/AI verticals.

Also Read: Building smart: A tech founder’s guide to the semiconductor supply chain revolution

The cost of miscalculation has exploded

Regulatory fines hit record highs in 2025. Non-compliance carries existential risk, not just financial penalties. Paytm’s RBI enforcement didn’t merely fine the company—it froze operations and demolished investor confidence. Indonesia’s startup winter exposed governance weaknesses at eFishery, Investree, and TaniHub; venture-backed growth metrics couldn’t compensate. TikTok Shop’s Philippines refund dispute fine was ₱1.6 million; the reputational damage was far steeper.

The math is stark: companies embedding regulatory resilience upfront—modular architecture, continuous monitoring, cross-functional governance—spend 5–10% of their engineering budget. Companies waiting until enforcement hits pay 5–50 times that in emergency re-architecture, fines, and churn. Proactive design overwhelmingly wins.

Yet most founders operate as if regulatory stability is the default. The question worth asking: why?

Two operating models

Static regulatory design treats compliance as periodic obligations managed by legal/finance. Requirements surface at audits, are embedded as hard constraints in product logic, and are updated when enforcement pressure arrives. This worked when regulatory cycles were long. It collapsed repeatedly in 2025.

Dynamic regulatory design embeds resilience into architecture and culture from day one. Compliance is a real-time dashboard, not an annual surprise. Regulatory functions are independent microservices—rule changes, update configuration, not core products. Product teams include regulatory engineers. Organisations scan quarterly horizons and stress-test scenarios. This assumes quarterly rule changes and designs for rapid adaptation.

The difference is architectural, not attitudinal. Static design locks compliance logic into monolithic systems; every rule change is expensive, risky re-architecture. Dynamic design compartmentalises so changes affect narrow surfaces—one microservice, API gateway rule, configuration parameter—rather than entire platforms.

Three architectural moves

• First: Modular compliance services. Separate AML screening, KYC, data localisation, and refund logic into independent microservices rather than embedding throughout the platform. India mandates T+1 auto-refunds? Update refund service configuration. Vietnam reinterprets data localisation? Adjust API gateway routing rules. Core product untouched; deployment in days, not months.

Baseella, Stripe, and leading APAC payment platforms use this pattern. Upfront cost is 15–20% higher; downstream savings are orders of magnitude.

• Second: Continuous compliance monitoring. Shift from annual audits revealing surprise gaps to real-time dashboards showing compliance status across jurisdictions. Automated systems track announcements, parse changes, and flag business impact. Gaps surface within 24 hours, not audit-time (months later).

This requires operational discipline, not novel technology.

• Third: Quarterly regulatory horizon scanning. Every quarter, the CEO, legal, product, and operations review a 6–12 month forward regulatory outlook in each market. What rules are likely to change? What constraints? What contingencies? This intelligence gathering is inexpensive but requires sustained commitment.

Also Read: Starting a business in 2026: What Founders should consider before chasing capital

The organisational piece

Dynamic design cannot live in legal silos. It requires compliance engineers embedded in product teams, regulatory risk reporting to the CEO level, and incentive structures rewarding governance alongside growth.

When legal and product don’t communicate, regulatory surprises become existential. When boards learn of regulatory risk only after enforcement, there’s only crisis management, no strategy.

The 2025 survivors had one thing in common: organising around regulatory resilience as a strategic capability, not a compliance obligation.

The self-assessment

If a major market reinterpreted one core regulatory assumption tomorrow, how long to adapt?

• Months = monolithic architecture, static organisation
• Weeks = progress, but architectural debt remains
• Days = designed for regulatory change

Which markets/products depend on regulatory assumptions plausibly shifting in twelve months? If that list is long and you’re in months-to-adapt mode, your risk surface is expanding faster than your resilience.

The paradox

Regulatory resilience appears to trade off against speed. The data shows the opposite. Companies embedding resilience upfront demonstrate faster cycles (changes affect fewer surfaces), fewer surprise fines (dashboards catch problems), higher investor confidence (seen as operationally sophisticated), and lower total compliance cost (prevention beats remediation).

The paradox is real: spending more on resilience makes you faster, not slower. It transforms compliance from a growth headwind into a competitive advantage.

For 2026

Founders thriving in Asian tech over 3–5 years won’t bet on regulatory stability. They’ll have already rebuilt assumptions. Asked “What if the rules change in six months?”, they’ll have architectures and organisations answering without panic.

That requires now: auditing whether your architecture is modular or monolithic, whether your organisation scans regulatory horizons, whether incentives reward governance, and whether your board discusses regulatory risk as intensely as product risk.

Most importantly: drop the assumption that regulatory environments are stable. In Asia in 2026, they are not. The question isn’t whether regulations change. It’s whether you’ll be prepared when they do.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image generated using AI.

The post When rules change quarterly: Regulatory resilience as competitive advantage appeared first on e27.

When Cheryl Goh joined Grab in its early days, the company was still a young startup navigating the messy realities of Southeast Asia’s fragmented markets. Over the years, she helped shape it into one of the region’s most recognisable consumer brands, and now that journey has earned her global recognition.

Grab’s founding Chief Marketing Officer and Group Vice-President (Marketing, Loyalty, Sustainability and Support) has been named the 2025 WFA Global Marketer of the Year, an award judged by an expert jury of client-side peers and partners including Kantar and The Drum. The honour recognises marketers who can prove that brand building translates into measurable business outcomes.

Goh was one of six finalists and notably became the first winner from an Asia-based brand in the award’s nine-year history.

Also Read: Marketing’s next big challenge? Making AI feel human

But the significance extends beyond personal achievement. It signals that Southeast Asia’s brand-building playbook — often shaped by constrained budgets, intense competition, and diverse consumer behaviours — is now being taken seriously on the global stage.

The marketing role that went far beyond marketing

Goh’s remit at Grab has never been limited to campaigns and messaging. Over time, she has overseen the company’s broader marketing engine across markets, spanning product marketing, communications, growth, loyalty, customer support operations, and sustainability.

That mix matters because it reveals how Grab has treated marketing not as a standalone creative department, but as a commercial function tied directly to the business.

One of the clearest examples is her responsibility for the P&L of Grab’s loyalty programmes. This role forces brand decisions to be measured against revenue, retention, and long-term customer value. In many companies, loyalty sits somewhere between product and marketing. At Grab, it became a key lever of growth economics — and Goh was placed in the middle of it.

The award jury highlighted her “grit, agility and pragmatism” in demonstrating that marketing can be a driver of growth in an “ethical and sustainable way”.

Why this matters for Southeast Asia’s startup ecosystem

In Southeast Asia, startup success stories are often told through product, funding rounds, and expansion maps. Marketing is sometimes treated as secondary — something you scale after the business model is proven. Goh’s recognition challenges that assumption.

Her win reinforces that marketing leadership can be a competitive advantage, particularly in consumer markets where trust, habit, and brand familiarity often decide winners. For founders across the region, it also strengthens the case for investing earlier in strategic marketing talent –not just growth hacking or performance spend.

It is also likely to influence how investors interpret consumer startup potential. In a market where distribution advantages are increasingly expensive to buy, brand equity becomes a defensible asset. Goh’s award is a reminder that strong marketing is not about spending more — it is about building systems that turn attention into repeat behaviour.

Grab’s brand as a blueprint for scaling across diversity

Grab’s rise was not simply a story of product-market fit. It was also a story of building trust across multiple markets that do not behave like a single region.

Singapore, Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines each come with their own languages, pricing sensitivities, consumer expectations, and regulatory environments. Scaling across them requires more than localisation; it requires a brand identity that feels consistent while still being culturally adaptable.

Also Read: 3 stages of marketing for your startup that can drive effective results

Over time, Grab became shorthand for convenience in many of these markets, building a mass consumer relationship that extended beyond ride-hailing into delivery, payments and financial services. That kind of category-building is difficult to replicate because it relies on habit formation and trust — the two most expensive things to acquire in consumer tech.

Kantar’s Mark Visser has noted that Grab’s marketing in Indonesia has improved both salience and meaningfulness, suggesting that the brand is not just widely recognised but also emotionally and functionally relevant. That combination is what gives platforms staying power.

The ‘commercial marketing’ playbook behind the recognition

Goh’s approach reflects a disciplined marketing model that many high-growth startups struggle to execute.

Rather than treating marketing as awareness-building alone, she appears to have operated with a tight link between brand activity and measurable business performance. Grab’s growth has depended heavily on repeat usage and ecosystem behaviour — the exact areas where loyalty mechanics, customer experience, and product marketing intersect.

Several patterns stand out: fast experimentation, rapid iteration across markets, and a willingness to align marketing decisions with operational realities rather than creative ambition alone.

In other words, it is marketing as infrastructure — not marketing as theatre.

Goh herself captured this mindset in her remarks, describing marketing as “often far more logical than it looks”, shaped by learning, iteration, and continuous adjustment.

A milestone beyond one award

Cheryl Goh’s WFA win lands as more than an industry headline. It reflects a deeper maturity in Southeast Asia’s tech ecosystem — one where global-standard leadership is emerging not only in engineering and finance, but also in brand strategy and commercial execution.

For founders, the lesson is straightforward: a product may get you started, but a brand is what keeps you in the game. And in a region as diverse as Southeast Asia, building trust at scale is not a soft skill; it is a serious competitive weapon.

—

The image was generated using AI.

The post Cheryl Goh’s global win signals Southeast Asia’s marketing maturity appeared first on e27.

The market landscape paints a stark picture of unravelling risk appetite, where optimism has given way to caution across nearly every asset class.

Equity markets led the retreat, with the Nasdaq falling 1.59 per cent, the S&P 500 down 1.23 per cent, and the Dow shedding 1.2 per cent. This was not merely a correction. It was a targeted unwinding of the very trades that had powered the post-2024 surge. Two members of the Magnificent 7 announced capital expenditure plans for AI infrastructure that far exceeded analyst projections, sparking fears that the much-touted AI profitability narrative may be overshadowed by unsustainable spending. Investors are beginning to question whether today’s AI investments will yield tomorrow’s returns or simply inflate balance sheets without corresponding earnings growth. The VIX’s 16.8 per cent jump to 21.77 confirms rising anxiety, signalling that volatility is no longer dormant but actively pricing in uncertainty.

This shift in sentiment spilt over into fixed income, where US Treasury yields fell sharply. Two-year yields dropped 10.3 basis points to 3.450 per cent, and the 10-year yield closed at 4.180 per cent, down 9.3 basis points, as traders sought safety amid equity turmoil. The move reflects growing conviction that the Federal Reserve will indeed pivot toward easing, especially as labour market data have become increasingly weak. Weekly jobless claims came in at 231,000, well above the expected 212,000, while December JOLTS data revealed job openings had slumped to 6.45 million, the lowest since 2020. These figures challenge the narrative of a resilient economy and bolster the case for rate cuts in the second and third quarters of 2026, as previously anticipated. The timing remains delicate, with Jerome Powell set to step down as Fed Chair in May, which will push markets into a period of heightened policy ambiguity.

Currency markets mirrored this flight to safety. The US dollar strengthened broadly, pushing the DXY up to 97.824, even as central banks elsewhere signalled a dovish stance. The Bank of England’s hold, interpreted as dovish, sent GBP/USD plunging 0.93 per cent to 1.3525, while the ECB’s decision left EUR/USD modestly lower at 1.1777. Despite the dollar’s short-term strength, the underlying trend still points toward depreciation later in the year, driven by expected Fed easing. Similarly, USD/JPY edged higher to 157.04, but sustained yen weakness appears increasingly untenable if U.S. rates begin their descent.

Also Read: Cheryl Goh’s global win signals Southeast Asia’s marketing maturity

Commodities suffered one of the sharpest reversals. Gold plummeted 3.7 per cent to 4,779 dollars per ounce, and silver collapsed nearly 20 per cent to 71 dollars, an extraordinary move that suggests forced liquidations rather than a fundamental reassessment. Brent crude also retreated 2.7 per cent to 67 dollars per barrel after Iran confirmed nuclear negotiations with the US would resume on Friday, temporarily defusing fears of Middle East conflict. This calm may prove fleeting. Any breakdown in talks could reignite supply concerns and push oil back toward last June’s 80-dollar peak. Gold’s long-term thesis remains intact, but its near-term path is hostage to macro liquidity conditions and risk sentiment.

Nowhere was the fragility of speculative positioning more evident than in crypto. The total market cap plunged 8.71 per cent to 2.22 trillion dollars, driven by a brutal deleveraging event in Bitcoin. A break below 70,000 dollars triggered over 1.01 billion dollars in BTC liquidations within 24 hours, a 213 per cent surge, creating a self-reinforcing spiral of margin calls and panic selling. Ethereum fared even worse, dropping more than 15 per cent as large holders reportedly moved tokens to exchanges, likely to meet collateral requirements or exit underwater positions. Critically, crypto’s 92 per cent correlation with the S&P 500 confirms it is no longer operating as a separate asset class but as a high-beta extension of tech-driven risk sentiment.

From my point of view, this moment reveals a structural truth about the current market regime. Despite narratives of decentralisation and digital scarcity, crypto remains deeply embedded in the macro financial ecosystem. When liquidity tightens or risk aversion spikes, leverage gets flushed out indiscriminately, and crypto, with its thin order books and high open interest, becomes a lightning rod for volatility. The extreme fear reflected in the Fear & Greed Index, now at 5, suggests capitulation may be nearing completion, but recovery hinges on two variables: price action and geopolitics.

If Bitcoin holds the 60,000 to 62,500 dollar support zone, a technical bounce toward 70,000 dollars is plausible, especially if spot ETF inflows resume or US-Iran talks yield de-escalation. A decisive break below 60,000 dollars could trigger another leg down, potentially dragging the total market cap toward 2.4 trillion dollars. The key signal to watch is a daily close above 67,000 dollars, which would invalidate near-term bearish momentum and invite short-covering.

Also Read: Cybersecurity and data governance in the boardroom: A strategic imperative for Asian boards

In conclusion, yesterday’s selloff was not just a correction. It was a stress test. It exposed over-leverage, over-optimism, and over-concentration in a handful of AI-linked equities and digital assets. The path forward depends less on narratives and more on hard labour trends, Fed communication, and geopolitical stability. Until those stabilise, markets will remain in a defensive crouch, waiting for either a catalyst for relief or confirmation of deeper economic cracks.

—

The lead image of this article was generated by AI.

The post From US$70K to freefall: Can Bitcoin hold the US$60K lifeline after US$1B liquidation event? appeared first on e27.