Tag: Drop Shipping

Restrooms may not be the most glamorous frontier for robotics, but they are among the most revealing. In malls, airports, hospitals and office towers, they sit at the intersection of hygiene expectations, labour shortages and operational cost pressures. For facilities managers, they are also one of the hardest spaces to keep consistently clean.

Singapore-based Hivebotics is betting that this is precisely where robotics can prove its commercial worth.

Also Read: Why robotics is just entering its prime phase

The company has raised US$6 million in a Series A round led by Vertex Ventures Southeast Asia & India, with participation from Fareast Land Development, part of Farglory Group, and Rigel, an Asian manufacturer of smart and eco-friendly restroom products.

The funding will move Hivebotics’s flagship robot, Abluo, from pilot deployments into volume production. It will also support the expansion of the company’s distributor network across Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and North America, in addition to further develop HiveIntelligence, its software layer that plans, monitors, and verifies cleaning jobs.

Founded in 2021 out of the National University of Singapore by Rishab Patwari and Nguyen Tuan Dung, Hivebotics has spent the past year testing Abluo in more than 20 sites, including hospitals, airport terminals, and shopping malls. The robot has logged close to 10,000 operating hours across 12 months of deployment.

Why restrooms are a serious automation problem

Most cleaning robots in commercial buildings focus on floors. That is useful, but limited. Restrooms are far more complicated: they are wet, cramped, uneven environments filled with fixtures, cubicles, pipes, mirrors, and human traffic. Cleaning them involves more than moving in straight lines across open space.

Abluo is designed to clean a commercial restroom end to end, covering toilets, urinals, sinks and floors. The machine uses a mobile base and an articulated arm to reach around fixtures and under rims. Instead of brushes or cloths, which can transfer dirt and bacteria between cubicles, it relies on high-pressure steam, a targeted chemical jet, vacuum extraction and blow-drying.

The company says the system replaces around 30 minutes of manual work with a five-minute human inspection. That framing matters. Hivebotics is not pitching Abluo as a fully invisible robot worker, but as a way to reduce the most repetitive, unpleasant and labour-intensive part of restroom cleaning while keeping people in the loop for checks and exceptions.

Onboard vision allows the robot to identify fixtures. Its AI system then generates a cleaning route in real time. Each job ends with a scored before-and-after check, giving building operators a record of what was cleaned and to what standard.

Also Read: Rise of the machines: 20 robotics startups shaping Southeast Asia’s future

That audit trail could become an important selling point. In facilities management, cleanliness is often judged by complaints, spot checks or subjective inspection. If robots can produce verifiable cleaning records, operators may be able to manage hygiene more like a measurable service level rather than a best-effort routine.

A labour crunch with regional relevance

The market Hivebotics is targeting is large, but the more immediate driver is labour. Soft facilities management, which includes cleaning, security, catering and related building services, was estimated at US$770 billion globally in 2024 and is projected to reach US$1.23 trillion by 2033, according to Grand View Research.

Within that broader market, restroom cleaning is among the most difficult jobs to staff and retain. Kimberly-Clark has reported annual janitorial turnover of 200 to 400 per cent, a figure that reflects how physically demanding and often undesirable the work can be.

That pressure is especially visible in developed Asian markets such as Singapore, Japan, South Korea and parts of the Gulf, where ageing workforces and tighter labour supply are reshaping service industries. In Singapore, cleaning wages have also been rising under structured wage policies, adding pressure on building owners and contractors to improve productivity rather than simply hire more workers.

For Southeast Asia, the picture is more mixed. Labour costs remain lower in some markets, but major cities are dealing with higher hygiene expectations in airports, hospitals, retail centres and transport hubs. The pandemic also made visible something facilities operators already knew: cleanliness is not just a back-office function, but part of public trust.

“Within three years, teams of robots will do most of the repetitive, labour-intensive work of running a facility,” said Hivebotics co-founder and CEO Rishab Patwari. “We started with restrooms because they are the hardest: wet, cramped, and full of moving parts. Solve that, and the rest of the building follows.”

The ambition is broader than toilets. Hivebotics sees restrooms as a proving ground for what the robotics industry increasingly calls “physical AI”, systems that do not merely process information, but perceive and act in messy real-world environments. For years, robots have performed well in controlled settings such as factories and warehouses. Buildings, by contrast, are less predictable.

The competitive field

Hivebotics is entering a robotics market that has grown more crowded over the past decade. Companies such as Avidbots, Tennant, Gaussian Robotics, Pudu Robotics, SoftBank Robotics, and Singapore-based LionsBot have built machines for floor scrubbing, vacuuming and commercial cleaning tasks. Many are already selling into airports, malls, offices and industrial facilities.

The distinction Hivebotics is trying to draw is depth rather than breadth. While floor-cleaning robots are increasingly familiar in commercial buildings, restroom-specific automation remains a tougher category because of the need to manipulate fixtures, apply different cleaning methods and work in confined spaces. If Abluo can perform reliably across diverse layouts, the company may occupy a more specialised niche than broader cleaning robot makers. The trade-off is that niche hardware can be harder to scale: every new building type, fixture design and operating environment introduces complexity.

From pilots to production

The Series A round suggests investors believe Hivebotics has moved beyond the technical demonstration stage. Vertex Ventures Southeast Asia & India, which has backed companies such as Grab, Nium, FirstCry and PatSnap, is positioning the investment around labour scarcity and non-discretionary demand.

“Restroom cleaning is one of the few labour markets where demand is non-discretionary and supply keeps tightening,” said Chan Yip Pang, Executive Director, Investment, at Vertex Ventures Southeast Asia & India. “In Hivebotics’ key markets, the cleaning workforce is ageing and wage floors are rising, so operators need a way to hold hygiene standards without adding headcount they cannot find.”

The next test will be commercial rather than technical. Robots in facilities management must survive long deployment cycles, conservative procurement processes and demanding service expectations. A machine that works in a pilot still has to prove it can be maintained, supported and justified financially across hundreds of sites.

Also Read: Ropedia raises US$22M to build the data layer for robots that understand the real world

Hivebotics has strengthened its commercial bench for that phase. Vincent Sim, formerly head of Kärcher’s Singapore business, joined the company as Chief Sales Officer in 2025, bringing experience from one of the best-known names in cleaning equipment.

For Singapore’s startup ecosystem, Hivebotics also reflects a broader shift. The city-state has long pushed robotics adoption in public services, logistics and built environments, but hardware companies often face a harder fundraising road than software startups. They need capital for manufacturing, field support and inventory before revenue scales.

If Hivebotics can turn restroom cleaning into a repeatable, exportable robotics category, it will show that Southeast Asian hardware startups can compete in global industrial automation from highly specific starting points. The company’s bet is simple: solve the job few people want to do, in the room every building needs to maintain, and the market will listen.

The post Hivebotics nets US$6M to take restroom-cleaning robot Abluo into volume production appeared first on e27.

Up front: the honest answer is, I don’t think anybody is proposing that. Yet.

I don’t know of any plan to put cybersecurity under state ownership, and I am misleading you if I suggest otherwise.

But at a recent industry discussion, an argument surfaced that gets you surprisingly close to that territory. Furthermore, Bill Gates warnings made me think about the issue further.

At the Singapore Press Club event, the question arose as to who is supposed to pay for keeping you safe, and who is answerable when you aren’t.

(The session ran under Chatham House rules, so I’ll share the thinking without naming anyone.)

Private good versus public good

For decades cybersecurity has been treated as a private good. Your company faces a threat, so your company buys protection, out of your own budget. Simple, and until recently, fair enough.

The argument made at this event however, is that this premise is quietly stopping being true. Cybersecurity, it was suggested, is becoming a public good — and we haven’t caught up to what that means.

A public good, is something whose benefits spill well beyond the person who pays for it. And for now, that’s cybersecurity to a tee. When one company hardens its defences, it doesn’t just protect itself — it removes a stepping stone that attackers would have used to reach everyone that company connects to. Your security is increasingly my security, whether or not I ever meet you.

The comparison that made it click was street lighting. No individual shopkeeper pays to install the lamp post outside their door. The city does, because a dark street is one where crime affects for the whole neighbourhood. Note how it’s done (this is important). The government doesn’t run a street-lighting department that builds the lamps itself. It pays a private company to install and maintain them. Privately delivered, publicly funded.

That’s the model the argument points toward for cybersecurity. Not the state taking over. The state paying, while private firms do the work — because the benefit is shared, so the bill should be too.

Also Read: Singapore’s cybersecurity paradox: Leading in digital, lagging in defense

Why private good is breaking

Today, every company is expected to defend itself against threats that are increasingly beyond any single company’s ability.

One line from the discussion put it perfectly. “I don’t build my own air force. I don’t defend my bank against a foreign special forces unit. When the threat is a nation state, I expect the nation to defend me.”

Yet in cyber, we routinely ask a private company or a small business to hold the line against state-sponsored attackers. And with quantum computing on the horizon, the adversary who will eventually be able to break today’s encryption isn’t some criminal gang. Realistically, it’s a state actor. Asking a company to defend itself against is unrealistic, and yet somehow we’ve normalised the notion.

The strain shows most at the bottom of the market. In Singapore, the government has found that around nine in ten businesses surveyed had experienced a cyber incident in the past year, and the costs when it happens are often severe. But the vast majority of companies aren’t large enterprises. They’re small firms, frequently with nobody whose actual job is cybersecurity. They can’t afford enterprise-grade protection, and increasingly they’re the soft entry point attackers use to reach everyone else. The people who need protection most can afford it least — and their exposure is now everyone’s exposure.

Who pays?

If cybersecurity really is becoming a public good, two questions follow.

The first is: who pays? If the benefit is shared, is it right that each company still shoulders the full cost alone? Singapore already nudges in the collective direction, requiring baseline certification in sensitive sectors like healthcare, using government procurement to demand minimum standards, funding schemes that help smaller firms get covered. None of that is nationalisation. But all of it is the state accepting that it has a stake in security it doesn’t directly own.

The second question came from the floor at the event, and it hung: if cybersecurity is a public good, who is independently accountable when preventable failures expose citizens’ data — the hospital records, the national digital identity, the bank accounts? And what enforceable standards protect public trust before the next breach, rather than after it?

That question didn’t get a clean answer. Perhaps an answer doesn’t exist yet. The gap between the benefits shared, costs private, and accountability is unclear. This is the space into which public policy tends to eventually move.

Also Read: The demand for SMB cybersecurity is inevitable, the supply was never built correctly

What this means for now

Leaders don’t need to wait for the policy debate to resolve to act on what it’s telling you.

If your organisation’s security affects the people and businesses around you then framing it purely as your own private cost could already be an out of date notion. Expect that framing to change: more sector requirements, more security conditions written into contracts, more pressure to prove you meet a standard before you win the work, not after you lose the data.

The organisations that will navigate this passage well are the ones that refrain from treating cybersecurity as a grudging line item and treat it as part of the trust they offer everyone they deal with.

That’s what this shift is really about. When what you’re protecting is no longer just your own information, but the confidence of an entire network that depends on you, security stops being an IT question and becomes a matter of reputation.

So — is Singapore about to nationalise cybersecurity? No. But it is, like everywhere else, edging toward treating it as something we all have a stake in and, eventually, all help pay for.

Recognise it. Position yourself as trustworthy custodians rather than reluctant spenders. You will be the ones still standing when accountability catches up with ambition.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. You can also share your perspective by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of e27.

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

The post Should cybersecurity be nationalised? appeared first on e27.

For much of the past decade, Southeast Asia’s startup story was told through speed. That narrative met its limit in 2025, when regional venture funding fell to a seven-year low, according to a new Southeast Asia Startup Funding Report from DealStreetAsia and Kickstart Ventures.

Investors are no longer rewarding growth stories on faith; they are asking harder questions about controls, board oversight, cash discipline and regulatory exposure, and the clearest evidence sits in climatetech and agritech, where fraud cases have made adaptation-focused deals far harder to close than mitigation ones.

Founders who once treated governance as paperwork before a funding round are now building it as infrastructure. At Singapore’s Eezee, co-founder Logan Tan enforces strict separation of duties on every payment; at Transcelestial Technologies, CEO Rohit Jha maintains open board reporting because enterprise and government clients assess reliability as closely as product performance. Corporate-linked capital is gaining weight for the same reason: strategic investors such as Ayala Corporation and Globe Telecom offer regulatory knowledge and distribution that cash alone cannot buy.

The takeaway for founders: in a fragmented, geopolitically exposed region, trust has become the product being sold to investors, customers and regulators alike, not a box to tick before due diligence.

Read the full story

---

Regional

Hivebotics raises US$6M to scale restroom-cleaning robot Abluo: Singapore’s Hivebotics raised a Series A led by Vertex Ventures Southeast Asia & India to move its restroom-cleaning robot Abluo from pilots into volume production, betting labour scarcity across Asia turns automation into a durable category.

Carsome posts record US$8.3M EBITDA in tenth profitable quarter: Malaysia’s used-car platform Carsome grew Q2 EBITDA 38 per cent year-on-year to US$8.3M, its tenth straight profitable quarter, as retail and financing sales outpaced wholesale volume across Malaysia and Indonesia.

Fintech, DeFi and applied AI define SEA’s 2025 venture discipline: Southeast Asia’s 2025 funding pattern split sharply by sector: fintech held its floor at US$1.3B, DeFi models matured into mainstream infrastructure, and applied AI overtook foundation-model bets, per DealStreetAsia and Kickstart Ventures.

Late-stage deals revive in SEA, early-stage founders still squeezed: Late-stage funding more than doubled to US$2.23B in H2 2025, minting four new unicorns, while seed valuations fell to a median US$2M as investors demand proof before backing early bets.

For SEA startups, distress may surface before the cash runs out: AlixPartners flags four early warning signs for Asian companies — costlier capital, EBITDA-cash mismatches, missed milestones and management churn — as regional insolvencies rose 39 per cent in 2025.

The AI wrapper reckoning has reached SEA’s funding tables: Strip out Kling AI’s US$2.8B round and SEA’s Native AI funding falls to US$1.3B, with deal count down sharply — evidence investors are punishing thin, undifferentiated AI interfaces across the region.

Hashed’s ShardLab invests in StoreHub to build merchant rewards tools: Malaysia’s StoreHub, which processes US$3.5B in annual transactions across 20,000 merchants, will build programmable payment and loyalty products with Hashed’s ShardLab, betting distribution beats pilot-stage blockchain rewards experiments.

DSGCP and Saket Gore buy bback to build a wider recovery brand: DSG Consumer Partners and ex-Himalaya Wellness executive Saket Gore acquired Singapore’s hangover-recovery brand bback from Evo Commerce, betting recovery can stretch from alcohol into travel, fitness and everyday fatigue.

Laters.com raises US$1.5M to expand flexible flight payments: The Singapore-founded travel agency, rebranded from Fly Fairly, raised a seed round led by XBO Ventures to widen buy-now-pay-later and crypto payment options, betting checkout flexibility beats fare discounts.

SEA’s blockchain sector has raised US$6.2B across 1,323 firms: Tracxn data shows Singapore holds 82.5 per cent of Southeast Asia’s cumulative blockchain funding, with crypto financial services the largest 2026 segment and acquisitions far outnumbering IPOs as the region’s main exit route.

Indonesia risks missing the AI boom without a manufacturing pivot: AMRO warns Indonesia could become a lucrative consumer market rather than a producer unless it shifts into tech manufacturing, noting high-tech goods make up just 8.7 per cent of its exports versus 60 per cent in Singapore.

The EU called ChatGPT a search engine. SEA should take note: Brussels’ decision to regulate ChatGPT like a search engine under the Digital Services Act will likely be copied across ASEAN, as regional regulators have imported the EU’s GDPR and AI Act templates before.

Malaysia fines, Singapore funds: two paths to the same digital wave: Malaysia’s e-invoicing mandate fines non-compliant SMEs while Singapore subsidises adoption — opposite tools producing the same outcome, with vendors selling compliance rather than growth now capturing the region’s quieter second digital wave.

500 Global winds down Southeast Asia operations: The US-based VC firm is exiting its SEA presence, marking a significant retreat from a region it helped seed for over a decade, with implications for early-stage funding pipelines across markets.

TaniHub founder’s corruption conviction upheld by court: An Indonesian court upheld the three-year prison sentence handed to TaniHub’s co-founder in a corruption case, dealing a further blow to the once-prominent agritech startup’s legacy.

---

International

Delivery Hero board backs Uber’s US$15B takeover bid: The tie-up, which follows Grab’s US$600M purchase of Foodpanda’s Taiwan business, would double Uber’s delivery footprint and intensify consolidation pressure on regional players competing with DoorDash and Just Eat Takeaway.

Uber is cutting 3,300 jobs, or 10 per cent of its staff: CEO Dara Khosrowshahi’s restructuring will shrink management layers by a fifth and end remote work for most employees, as Uber consolidates its engineering, delivery and robotaxi divisions.

Unacademy sells to upGrad for US$206M, 94 per cent below peak: The all-stock deal values India’s once-hot edtech firm far below its 2021 peak, underscoring how sharply investor appetite for pandemic-era hypergrowth stories has reversed across South Asian markets.

Adobe acquires Indian marketing-workflow startup Rilo: The India-founded startup, which built AI-driven competitor intelligence and campaign tools, will shut down post-acquisition as Adobe folds its six-person team and technology into its enterprise marketing suite.

India’s Jio opens its cloud-PC service to turn old computers AI-ready: Reliance Jio is betting consumers will pay roughly US$11 for two months of cloud computing rather than replace ageing hardware, challenging India’s traditionally strong preference for owning a physical PC.

Medtronic to invest US$700M in Hong Kong’s Cornerstone Robotics: The deal gives Medtronic distribution rights to Cornerstone’s Sentire surgical robot, approved in China, Europe and Singapore, as the medtech group widens its robotic-surgery portfolio beyond its own Hugo platform.

Japan’s NETSTARS, Singapore’s imToken to explore stablecoin store payments: The pair signed a non-binding agreement to bring imToken’s wallet onto NETSTARS’ Stablecoin Pay system, following a Lawson stores trial, aiming to extend stablecoin use from trading into everyday retail.

Amazon’s Zoox extends its robotaxi service to Las Vegas airport: The Amazon-owned firm becomes the only robotaxi operator serving Harry Reid International, picking up near baggage claim, as Tesla, Uber and Waymo prepare to launch competing services in the county.

Larry Page’s flying-car company Pivotal loses its CEO: Ken Karklin departs after four years leading the eVTOL maker; aviation executive Mike Ross takes over on an interim basis as Pivotal prepares to bring its fourth-generation Helix aircraft to market.

OpenAI faces 30 more lawsuits tied to a Canadian school shooting: New complaints allege OpenAI’s leadership, not just its safety team, decided against alerting police to a user’s violent conversations before a shooting in Tumbler Ridge, escalating claims beyond earlier negligence filings.

South Korea’s president warns rate rise is unavoidable in 2026: President Lee’s remarks signal a tightening monetary policy stance that could dampen startup valuations and venture activity across Northeast Asia and ripple into SEA investor sentiment.

---

Semiconductor

NASA-linked, MIT-trained founders’ nSWX raises US$2M for chip packaging: Kuala Lumpur’s nanoSkunkWorkX raised a seed round led by Tin Men Capital for graphene-copper interfaces that improve heat and current flow inside AI chip packages without replacing existing manufacturing lines.

Enflame targets US$908M in Shanghai IPO amid record demand: The Chinese AI chipmaker’s Shanghai listing drew 6,109x oversubscription in online demand, underscoring surging investor appetite for domestic chip alternatives as US export restrictions tighten.

Bluehill leads US$11M seed round in Indian semiconductor startup: The raise signals growing venture interest in South Asia’s chip sector, as investors look beyond established hubs to back semiconductor design talent across the broader Indo-Pacific region.

---

Cybersecurity

OpenAI’s GPT-6 Astra becomes its first Critical-tier cyber model: OpenAI’s new frontier model can reportedly find unknown exploits without step-by-step human direction, prompting stricter jailbreak defences and a US$1B subsidised-access programme for water, power and community-bank defenders.

Should cybersecurity be nationalised?: A Singapore Press Club discussion argued cybersecurity is quietly becoming a public good, like street lighting — privately delivered but collectively funded — even as no government is proposing outright state ownership.

---

AI

Nvidia agrees to acquire Hugging Face for US$12.93B: The deal pulls the open-model hub, used by more than 18 million developers, deeper into Nvidia’s orbit; the chipmaker has pledged to keep the platform hardware-neutral despite the obvious incentive not to.

Meta discounts its new AI model 95 per cent for user data: Meta’s Muse Spark pricing charges a fraction of standard rates to developers who let it train on their prompts and outputs, formalising what Claude Code once obtained by default retention.

OpenAI’s new reasoning technique alarms AI safety researchers: Astra’s “opaque recurrence” processes queries in loops rather than legible steps, prompting warnings from Redwood Research and other safety figures that chain-of-thought monitoring could erode as labs race to adopt it.

Google adds conversational AI voice features to Gmail, Docs and Keep: Gmail Live, Docs Live and Keep Live let subscribers query inboxes and dictate documents in natural language, extending Google’s push to embed Gemini-powered voice tools across its productivity suite.

---

Thought Leadership

Why most AI-driven reorgs are solving the wrong problem: Klarna’s rehiring reversal shows the pattern: 60 per cent of firms cut headcount anticipating AI, but only 2 per cent had AI actually doing the displaced work, a Harvard Business Review survey found.

Who’s building AI for the way Southeast Asia actually speaks?: Nearly 70 per cent of the region’s AI prompts now arrive in native languages, but national models remain uneven — Indonesia and Thailand invested heavily while Vietnam’s PhoGPT team was absorbed by Qualcomm.

You spent fifteen years building guanxi, then nobody picked up: Guanxi, nemawashi and Korea’s approval hierarchy are distinct systems, not interchangeable “Asia relationship-building” — foreign operators who mistake proximity for obligation often discover their network was never as deep as assumed.

The yellow flag problem: most risk functions fail at culture first: Institutions where the CRO reports to the CFO, not the CEO, train risk officers to soften red flags into amber ones — a cultural failure, the author argues, that precedes every technical one.

Vietnam’s new growth engine is built on constraint: Manufacturing captured 65 per cent of Vietnam’s H1 2026 registered FDI, with Samsung, LG Innotek and Viettel betting on semiconductors — but power reliability and technical talent now gate how far the country can climb.

The creator economy is distribution, not marketing: Indonesia’s 2023 TikTok Shop shutdown proved the point: platforms, not brands, own the storefront in creator-led commerce, and businesses budgeting for it as advertising rather than infrastructure are miscounting their real margins.

The Podular future: why AI demands new organisational architecture: Solo operators now match team-scale output, the author argues, but carry key-person fragility that small, three-to-seven-person “pods” of sovereign operators could resolve without recreating corporate bureaucracy.

I stopped hiring. I’m not sure it’s a strategy yet: A Jakarta founder who has run two years without a full-time hire warns that lean, AI-native teams are really a bet on subsidised model pricing — one that could unwind if frontier labs raise prices.

Enabling 22-year-olds to build judgement in the post-AI world: The author proposes a “Forward Deployed Learner” model, pairing students with real company problems years before graduation, arguing AI can accelerate the path to an expert conversation but not replace it.

The MMM barrier didn’t disappear. It moved: AI agents have made marketing-mix modelling trivial to run but not to trust, the author warns, since a 2019 Facebook study found observational methods misjudged true ad lift by a factor of three.

AI agents are outpacing companies’ ability to govern them: Over half of organisations have seen AI agents exceed their intended permissions, a Cloud Security Alliance survey found, as the author argues accountability must be designed into agent workflows before deployment, not after.

What building logistics tech in Sweden taught me about SEA: A Bangladesh-based CTO building for a Swedish logistics platform argues that engineering discipline travels between markets, but implementation — payments, compliance, onboarding — must always stay local.

Why vertical AI will define medicine’s next century: Healthcare is shifting from a product to a platform industry, the author argues, with AI models trained on deep clinical datasets becoming the defensible infrastructure layer beneath fluorescence-guided surgery and biosensor monitoring.

Staying secure in the AI era: the habits we need to rethink: The biggest AI-era security risk may be comfort rather than sophistication, the author writes, urging workers to share only the minimum information needed and verify AI output before trusting it.

The travel eSIM market is moving beyond price per GB: Revenue per gigabyte has fallen 13 per cent since 2023 even as user numbers head toward 215 million by 2028, pushing providers to compete on setup reliability and support rather than data alone.

Why podcasts are the next big data revolution: Roughly 15 per cent of financial podcast content the author’s team encounters now appears AI-generated, one of four problems — alongside transcription, fragmentation and speaker identification — blocking a searchable podcast index.

The AI dashboard gold rush: beyond the pretty charts: Claude-built dashboards have become an “AI flex” on social media, the author warns, but a beautiful dashboard built on bad data is just a persuasive way to make a bad decision.

The decision discipline: how to turn insights into action: Ninety-three per cent of leaders say they would perform better with plain-language access to their data, Salesforce found, yet most organisations remain report-driven rather than decision-driven, the author argues.

AI and human creativity: how ChatGPT Canvas bridges the gap: The interactive editing interface lets writers adjust tone, length and reading level in place rather than re-prompting from scratch, though the author cautions AI output still needs authentic, original input to stay credible.

Bitcoin just broke US$81,000: the real reason is not what you think: A short squeeze, not fresh spot demand, drove Bitcoin’s 5 per cent surge past US$81,000, the columnist writes, with September’s non-farm payrolls report now the key test of whether the rally holds.

Bitcoin slipped below US$80,000, so why bet on US$82,000?: Kalshi traders are pricing a September rebound on seasonal precedent even as Ethereum absorbed a US$367M liquidation cascade, the columnist notes, with the Fed’s September 16 decision the next catalyst.

Can Bitcoin defend the critical US$76,500 zone before September 11?: Rising Brent crude and Treasury yields pressured both Bitcoin and Ethereum, the columnist writes, even as US spot ETFs logged a US$216.7M daily inflow that he reads as a structural demand floor.

 

The post Ecosystem Roundup: Governance is Southeast Asia’s new venture currency appeared first on e27.

In Southeast Asia’s tougher VC market, governance is no longer boring
For much of the past decade, Southeast Asia’s startup story was told through speed: faster user growth, faster market entry, faster fundraising, faster expansion. In 2025, that narrative met its limits.

The region’s venture capital market has entered a more selective phase, according to the Southeast Asia Startup Funding Report for 2025 published by DealStreetAsia and Kickstart Ventures. With startup fundraising falling to a seven-year low, investors are no longer rewarding growth stories on faith. They are asking harder questions about controls, compliance, board oversight, cash discipline, and regulatory exposure.

Also Read: The AI wrapper reckoning has reached SEA’s funding tables

In other words, governance, which was once treated by many founders as an administrative burden to be tidied up before a funding round, has become a competitive advantage.

That shift matters deeply in Southeast Asia, where founders do not operate in a single, harmonised market. They build across economies with different licensing regimes, tax rules, labour laws, data policies, foreign ownership restrictions, and political realities. In a funding winter shaped not only by interest rates but also by geopolitics, the startups that can prove they are trustworthy may find themselves at the front of the queue for scarce capital.

Trust becomes the bottleneck

The clearest evidence of this reset can be seen in climate and agricultural technology.

On the surface, climatetech appeared resilient in 2025. It accounted for 15.4 per cent of total deal volume in Southeast Asia, up from 13 per cent in 2024. But beneath that headline, capital moved unevenly. Mitigation-focused sectors, such as renewable energy and waste management, raised US$563 million across 60 deals. Climate adaptation, by contrast, fell sharply to just 16 deals and US$43 million.

The pain was concentrated in agritech, where deal volume dropped 57 per cent and deal value plunged 79 per cent. The problem was not that Southeast Asia suddenly stopped needing agricultural innovation. Quite the opposite: the region remains highly exposed to food security pressures, extreme weather, and the productivity gaps of smallholder farming.

The issue was trust.

The report notes that investor caution in adaptation was intensified by governance concerns after several high-profile fraud cases in agriculture. For limited partners, those episodes reinforced a simple lesson: even sectors with strong long-term demand can become difficult to back if transparency is weak.

“LPs are now demanding stronger accountability, greater transparency, and more rigorous startup governance standards before reallocating capital to funds,” said Minette Navarrete, President and Managing Partner of Kickstart Ventures.

That demand is flowing down the chain. Venture funds are under more pressure to show discipline to their own backers. Startups, in turn, are being asked to prove that their numbers, contracts, reporting lines and internal controls can withstand scrutiny.

Also Read: For Southeast Asian startups, distress may show up before the cash runs out

In a looser market, gaps in governance could be patched later. In this market, they can stop a deal from happening at all.

The founders treating governance as infrastructure

Some founders in the region are already treating governance not as a defensive exercise, but as core operating infrastructure.

At Eezee, a Singapore-based e-procurement marketplace, compliance is built into the company’s day-to-day model. Procurement is a sensitive corporate function: buyers need clear records of who approved what, when, at what price and under which terms. Eezee therefore tracks transactions end-to-end, using real-time dashboards and audit trails across four countries.

Co-founder and CEO Logan Tan describes the company’s approach through clear separation of duties, careful hiring and direct reporting to the board. “We have a strict separation of duties — what I call ‘you can’t eat the food you cook,’” he said, referring to the need for multiple approvals on payments and transactions depending on their value.

Tan said Eezee reports its financial, operational and business metrics to the board “without sugarcoating”. That may sound basic, but in a region where many startups scaled quickly across borders before their internal systems matured, it is not always the norm.

The same principle applies in more technically complex and regulated sectors.

Transcelestial Technologies, which develops laser communications systems, works in areas that intersect with telecommunications, space and defence. For such companies, governance is tied directly to customer confidence. Enterprise and government clients do not only evaluate product performance; they also assess reliability, security, oversight and continuity.

Rohit Jha, Co-founder and CEO of Transcelestial, said the company maintains broad oversight from its board, leadership team and employees, with open sharing of wins, losses and operational challenges. In sectors where a single misstep can damage trust with regulators or customers, transparency is not a cultural nicety. It is a risk-control mechanism.

Geopolitics enters the investment memo

Governance is also becoming more important because Southeast Asian startups are operating in a more complicated geopolitical environment.

Inflation and interest rates still matter, but investors are increasingly focused on structural risks: US-China rivalry, supply chain protectionism, cybersecurity threats, data localisation rules and fragmented regulation across the region. These factors affect where startups can expand, which customers they can serve, how they source components and whether they can move data or capital across borders.

This is particularly relevant for Southeast Asia because the region is economically connected but politically and legally diverse. A fintech licence in one market does not guarantee an easy path into another. A supply chain that works in Vietnam may face different constraints in Indonesia or the Philippines. A data product that scales in Singapore may need significant changes before entering markets with stricter localisation rules.

Also Read: Late-stage deals revive in Southeast Asia, but early-stage founders remain under pressure

As a result, investors are no longer underwriting only total addressable market and revenue growth. They are also assessing whether management teams can navigate regulation, protect customer trust and adapt to sudden policy shifts.

Navarrete described experienced leadership as the “steady hand on the tiller” in such an environment. That phrase captures the mood of the current cycle. The market is not closed to ambitious startups, but it is less forgiving of improvisation.

Why corporate capital is gaining weight

This also explains the rising importance of corporate-linked venture ecosystems.

In a difficult fundraising market, strategic investors can offer more than money. They can provide distribution, procurement credibility, regulatory knowledge and access to established operating platforms. For startups trying to sell into heavily regulated sectors — banking, telecoms, energy, healthcare or infrastructure — that support can be as valuable as capital itself.

Ayala Corporation, one of the Philippines’ oldest conglomerates, illustrates this model. Its venture arm, Kickstart Ventures, gives the broader group exposure to emerging technologies across areas such as fintech, telecoms, renewable energy and enterprise software. For Ayala President and CEO Cezar Consing, good governance, execution and portfolio selection are not optional extras but table stakes.

Globe Telecom follows a related path through internal venture building via 917Ventures and global strategic investing through Kickstart. Globe President and CEO Carl Cruz said the company looks for technologies that can improve its network, customer experience and internal efficiency.

For startups, such partnerships can act as a form of institutional validation. Transcelestial’s backing from investors including Japan’s NTT Finance and Australia’s Paspalis Capital, for instance, gives it not only funding but also credibility in markets where local relationships and trust matter.

The next phase of Southeast Asian VC

The region’s funding reset is painful, but it is also forcing a healthier conversation about what durable companies look like.

The last cycle rewarded speed. The current one rewards proof. Founders need to show clean reporting, responsible capital use, realistic expansion plans and boards that ask difficult questions. Funds need to show LPs that they can spot not only market opportunity but also operational and governance risk.

Also Read: Fintech, DeFi and applied AI define Southeast Asia’s new venture discipline

That does not mean Southeast Asia’s startup ecosystem has become less ambitious. It means ambition now needs stronger foundations.

For founders, governance is no longer a box to tick before due diligence. It is part of the product they are selling to investors, customers, regulators and partners. In a fragmented and geopolitically exposed region, trust may be the most valuable currency left.

The post In Southeast Asia’s VC reset, governance becomes the new growth story appeared first on e27.

OpenAI has launched GPT-6 Astra, its newest flagship model, pitching it as a step-change in artificial intelligence systems that can not only answer questions, but also operate software, browse the web, write code, analyse data, and complete multi-step professional tasks with limited human intervention.

The model is being rolled out today to a limited set of organisations, before becoming available over the coming days to ChatGPT Plus, Pro, Business, and Enterprise users. It will also be accessible through the OpenAI API and AWS, a distribution path that matters for startups and larger companies in Southeast Asia already building AI into customer support, internal operations, software development, financial services, and logistics workflows.

Also Read: Thailand’s AI startup push gets OpenAI backing through new public-private accelerator

OpenAI said Astra is its “most intelligent and aligned” model to date, built on advances in pre-training, reinforcement learning, and alignment. Stripped of the technical phrasing, the company is arguing that Astra is better at learning from large-scale data, improving through feedback, and following user intent safely.

Greg Brockman, President of OpenAI, framed the launch in unusually sweeping terms. “If we fast forward a couple years, and we look back and say when was it really that AGI was created, I think it’s going to be about this time, and I think it might be about this model,” he said.

That is a big claim, and one the broader industry will scrutinise closely. Artificial general intelligence, or AGI, has no universally accepted definition. But in practical terms, Astra’s significance lies in whether it can make AI agents more useful in everyday work — particularly in areas where previous systems have been impressive in demos but brittle in production.

From chatbots to computer operators

Astra’s headline capability is computer use. OpenAI said the model can carry out multi-step workflows, produce polished documents, spreadsheets, and presentations, create websites, and test whether their features work. It can also navigate across web pages, fill out forms, and move through spreadsheets at high speed.

“Computer use is a particularly important part of what’s new; the model can zip through spreadsheets, fill out forms, and navigate across web pages often at superhuman speed,” Brockman said.

In latency simulations on the offline subset of OSWorld 2.0, Astra achieved higher computer-use performance in about 47 per cent less time per task than GPT-5.6 Sol, OpenAI’s current model. OSWorld is a benchmark designed to test how well AI agents operate computers across realistic tasks, rather than simply generate text.

For Southeast Asian companies, this is where the launch may become commercially relevant. Many businesses in the region still run on fragmented workflows: spreadsheets, web dashboards, PDF invoices, WhatsApp conversations, accounting software, customer relationship management systems, and government portals that do not always talk to each other. A model that can reliably operate across these interfaces could reduce manual work in finance, compliance, procurement, and customer service.

That said, reliability will matter more than raw speed. A model that fills forms quickly but makes quiet mistakes could create new operational risks, especially in regulated sectors such as banking, insurance, healthcare, and cross-border trade. For founders, the near-term question is not whether Astra looks intelligent in a benchmark, but whether it can be trusted with repetitive, high-volume workflows where errors are costly.

A stronger model for developers and researchers

OpenAI is also positioning Astra as its best model for software engineering. The company said it performs better on complex tasks in real codebases and, on DeepSWE v1.1, outperforms GPT-5.6 Sol at approximately 57 per cent lower estimated API cost per task when comparing each model’s highest-scoring setting.

That combination, stronger capability and lower task cost, will be watched closely by startups. Engineering talent remains expensive across Southeast Asia, especially for AI, cybersecurity, fintech infrastructure, and enterprise software companies. Tools that help smaller teams understand large codebases, write tests, fix bugs, or ship features faster could shift how early-stage startups allocate resources.

Also Read: The real difference between OpenAI and Anthropic is what happens when AI gets cheaper

OpenAI cited Canva as one early customer example. According to the company, Astra navigated Canva’s codebase of more than 80 million lines, wrote and analysed over 1,000 data queries, and drew on more than 21 internal knowledge sources to recommend improvements. While Canva is far larger and better resourced than a typical regional startup, the example hints at where AI coding agents are heading: not just autocomplete, but systems that can reason across engineering, analytics, and company documentation.

Astra is also being presented as a scientific research tool. OpenAI said an internal version of the model contributed to ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science, with proofs formalised in Lean, a programming language and proof assistant used to verify mathematical reasoning. Astra also scores 98 per cent on FrontierMath Tier 4, a benchmark focused on difficult mathematical problems.

If such capabilities hold up outside OpenAI’s own testing, the implications could extend beyond software companies. Universities, research institutes, biotech startups, climate modelling teams, and semiconductor firms in the region may eventually gain access to tools that can support formal reasoning, literature review, experiment planning, and technical validation. But those gains will depend on pricing, local access, data governance, and the ability to adapt models to domain-specific knowledge.

Cybersecurity becomes both use case and risk

One of the more sensitive parts of the launch is cybersecurity. OpenAI said Astra’s stronger cyber capabilities can help defenders find and patch weaknesses, but also create a need for stronger safeguards. The model meets the Critical threshold in cybersecurity under OpenAI’s Preparedness Framework.

The company said it is strengthening protections against misuse. Through OpenAI Daybreak, it plans to expand access and roll out less restrictive safeguards in the coming weeks for work such as vulnerability validation, malware analysis, and detection engineering.

This will be especially relevant in Southeast Asia, where digital adoption has often outpaced security readiness. Banks, e-commerce platforms, healthtech providers, government systems, and small businesses face rising cyber threats, while cybersecurity talent remains in short supply. AI tools that help defenders test systems and detect suspicious behaviour could be useful. But the same capabilities, if poorly controlled, could assist attackers.

For regulators and enterprise buyers, Astra’s launch will likely reinforce a growing tension: the most capable AI systems are also the ones that require the strongest governance. Companies using Astra for cyber work will need clear audit trails, permission controls, and policies on what the model can and cannot do inside production environments.

Rivals are moving quickly

OpenAI is not alone in trying to turn large language models into capable workplace agents. Google has been pushing Gemini deeper into Workspace and developer tools, while Anthropic’s Claude models have gained traction among companies that prioritise coding, reasoning, and safety. Meta continues to compete through its open-weight Llama models, which appeal to developers and companies seeking more control over deployment. Microsoft, OpenAI’s key partner and investor, is embedding AI agents across its enterprise stack, while AWS is advancing Bedrock and its own agent infrastructure.

In Asia, competition is also intensifying. China’s DeepSeek, Alibaba’s Qwen, and Baidu’s Ernie models have pushed the market on price and performance, while open-source communities are giving startups alternatives to closed US models. For Southeast Asian companies, the choice will rarely be ideological. It will come down to cost, latency, language support, data residency, integration, and whether a model performs reliably on local business workflows.

Astra’s launch suggests the next phase of AI competition will be less about chat and more about execution. The winners will not simply be models that write fluent answers, but systems that can safely complete work across messy digital environments.

Also Read: Singapore lands OpenAI’s first lab outside the US with US$225M commitment

For founders and operators in Southeast Asia, that could be an opportunity — and a warning. The opportunity is to build new products on top of more capable AI agents, automate back-office bottlenecks, and give small teams leverage once reserved for large companies. The warning is that every competitor will get access to similar tools soon enough.

The question, then, is not only what Astra can do. It is how quickly companies can redesign their workflows, safeguards, and teams around a world where software increasingly uses software on their behalf.

The post OpenAI’s Astra aims to turn AI from chatbot into digital worker appeared first on e27.

Southeast Asia’s startup market did not bounce back in 2025. It reorganised.

After years in which capital chased super-app ambitions, consumer land grabs and speculative technology narratives, the region’s venture ecosystem has settled into a more sober phase. Funding has stabilised at a lower base, and investors are now looking for businesses that can prove commercial urgency, cleaner unit economics and a shorter path from product to revenue.

“What we’re seeing at this point is stabilisation rather than a rebound,” said Minette Navarrete, President and Managing Partner of Kickstart Ventures, in the Southeast Asia Startup Funding Report 2025 by DealStreetAsia and Kickstart Ventures.

Also Read: Late-stage deals revive in Southeast Asia, but early-stage founders remain under pressure

That distinction matters. A rebound would suggest a return to the easy-money cycle that shaped much of the 2010s and the pandemic-era boom. Stabilisation points to something different: a market learning to live without excess liquidity. The result is a sharper sector-by-sector sorting of winners, with fintech, applied AI and defensible commerce models emerging as the clearest signs of where capital still has conviction.

Fintech finds its floor

Fintech remained Southeast Asia’s most active and heavily funded startup vertical in 2025, even as overall numbers reflected a cooler market. The sector raised US$1.3 billion across 111 equity deals, one of its quietest performances in six years. Yet the slowdown appears to have eased, suggesting fintech has found a workable funding floor.

That resilience is not surprising. Financial services in Southeast Asia remain fragmented, underpenetrated and unevenly digitised. Across markets such as Indonesia, Vietnam and the Philippines, large populations are still moving from cash-based transactions into digital banking, payments, investments and insurance.

In Singapore, meanwhile, fintech has become more institutional, tied closely to wealth management, capital markets infrastructure and digital asset regulation.

The standout category was wealthtech, which recorded 39 deals worth US$375 million. Its rise reflects both demographic and market realities: a growing middle class, higher mobile adoption and increasing demand for digital investment products beyond basic payments.

Some of the year’s largest fintech rounds reinforced this shift. Cross-border payments company Thunes raised a US$150 million Series D round, valuing the company at US$1.42 billion. Digital wealth platform Endowus secured US$87.5 million, while Syfe raised US$53 million. Digital asset banking group Sygnum also raised an oversubscribed US$58 million strategic growth round.

Also Read: The end of Southeast Asia’s unified startup funding story?

These deals show that investors are not abandoning fintech. They are moving away from loosely defined financial inclusion stories and towards infrastructure, wealth platforms and regulated digital asset services that can serve both consumers and institutions.

DeFi moves inside the system

Perhaps the most notable change is the way decentralised finance, or DeFi, has shifted from crypto speculation into mainstream financial plumbing.

In 2025, DeFi-focused models accounted for 39.6 per cent of all fintech equity deal volume, or 44 deals, and 29.6 per cent of total fintech deal value, with US$380 million raised. That marks a significant maturation from the pre-2021 period, when blockchain startups in the region were often treated as high-risk bets linked to token trading cycles.

The newer wave is more pragmatic. Blockchain infrastructure is being applied to lending, cross-border settlement, custody and tokenisation — the process of representing real-world assets such as funds, bonds or private equity on digital ledgers. In theory, tokenisation can reduce settlement time, improve transparency and make some assets easier to access or trade. In practice, it only works if regulators and institutions trust the system.

That is why compliance has become central to the next phase of digital assets. “Trust is paramount — this is why we continue to operate with full regulatory compliance across all regions,” said Mathias Imbach, Co-founder and Group CEO of Sygnum.

Sygnum’s work on tokenised money market and private equity funds with global names such as Fidelity International and Hamilton Lane illustrates how the sector is changing. The point is no longer to build parallel financial systems outside regulation. It is to use blockchain architecture to remove inefficiencies within existing capital markets.

For Southeast Asia, this is especially relevant. The region has long struggled with fragmented payment rails, varying regulatory regimes and cross-border settlement frictions. If digital asset infrastructure can reduce those bottlenecks without increasing systemic risk, DeFi’s next chapter may look far more institutional than ideological.

AI grows up, painfully

Artificial intelligence went through a similar reset.

The data analytics and AI or machine learning category recorded just 20 deals in 2025, with total funding of US$214 million. On the surface, that looks like a sharp fall from the excitement that followed the rise of generative AI. But it also signals a more disciplined market.

Also Read: Southeast Asia startup funding finds a floor, but not a rebound

Investors are no longer rushing to fund expensive attempts to build foundation models, which require enormous capital, specialised talent and computing power. Instead, money is flowing into applied AI: agents, document processing, customer service automation and enterprise software that can reduce costs quickly.

The year’s notable AI-linked deals included Whale’s US$60 million Series C and Video Rebirth’s US$50 million transaction. Other funded companies included fileAI, which raised US$14 million for document processing; Pollo AI, which secured US$14 million for generative tools; and WIZ.AI, which raised US$12 million for conversational automation.

The common thread is immediate business utility. AI is being judged less by how futuristic it sounds and more by whether it can shorten workflows, improve service quality or protect margins.

That fits the mood among Southeast Asian conglomerates, which remain important customers, partners and investors for startups. Carl Cruz, President and CEO of Globe, said inflation and changing consumer behaviour have pushed large companies to optimise capital expenditure and prioritise technologies that “move the needle”. For Globe, that means embedding AI into customer engagement and network operations rather than treating it as a side experiment.

Cezar Consing, President and CEO of Ayala Corporation, similarly identified AI, fintech and renewable energy as strategic priorities. His comment that “the big bucks go to the mature platforms” captures the broader investor mindset: in this market, technology must attach itself to clear corporate needs.

E-commerce splits in two

E-commerce, once the region’s favourite consumer-internet story, shows the harshest version of this reset.

Deal flow fell to a historic low of 26 transactions in 2025, largely because early-stage funding froze. Investors are wary of new platform models that require heavy spending on subsidies, logistics and customer acquisition before profitability is visible.

Yet e-commerce was not written off entirely. Instead, capital clustered around a small group of scaled, de-risked companies. Six late-stage deals made up most of the vertical’s US$472 million in funding value.

Malaysia’s Ashita Group reached unicorn status after raising US$155 million in growth equity. Singapore-based Carro secured US$60 million for its automotive transaction platform. Indonesia’s ASTRO raised US$51.9 million, while SIRCLO secured US$38.3 million to support e-commerce tools for merchants and brands. Vietnam’s Coolmate raised US$22.3 million, showing that vertically integrated consumer brands with stronger economics can still attract capital.

The lesson is clear: generic consumer marketplaces are out of favour, but B2B and B2B2C models remain investable when they offer transparency, repeat transactions and clearer monetisation.

The new regional playbook

Across sectors, Southeast Asia’s 2025 funding pattern points to the same conclusion. Capital is still available, but not for growth at any cost.

Also Read: Inside SEA’s AI gold rush: The 20 investors writing the biggest cheques

SaaS, B2B workflows, regulated fintech infrastructure and applied automation are benefiting because they promise predictable revenue and lower customer acquisition burdens. Startups are also placing more value on strategic investors that can open doors to procurement channels, regulated industries and overseas markets.

Logan Tan, Co-founder and CEO of Eezee, summed up the lesson bluntly: “The collapse of several highly funded unicorns here is proof that raising large sums to chase hypergrowth without solid fundamentals is unsustainable.”

That is the region’s new venture reality. Southeast Asia is not short of opportunity. It is short of patience for weak business models. The startups best placed for the next cycle will be those that can sell into real pain points, survive slower fundraising windows and grow without depending on perpetual subsidy.

The reset may feel uncomfortable. But for an ecosystem built across diverse, fragmented and often difficult markets, this discipline could become a strength.

The post Fintech, DeFi and applied AI define Southeast Asia’s new venture discipline appeared first on e27.

Bitcoin trades at US$77,260.09 today, with a 24-hour trading volume of US$26,479,119,535. The premier digital asset gained 0.22 per cent over the last day. The asset briefly climbed above US$80,000 before sellers dragged the valuation back to US$76,000. Kalshi participants currently favour an US$82,000 target for September.

Market participants betting on this outcome expect the asset to rise by at least seven per cent from its current US$76,000 level. This collective mood suggests speculators view the short-term pullback as a minor hurdle rather than a trend reversal. Buyers halted the August rise and pushed the token into a weaker trading range.

My perspective aligns with these speculators because market psychology often treats brief corrections as healthy consolidation phases before the next major breakout. Smart investors use these minor dips to accumulate more assets at discounted prices. The sheer size of the daily trading volume proves that immense capital continues flowing into the ecosystem.

Buyers step in aggressively whenever the valuation dips below key psychological thresholds. This underlying strength provides a solid foundation for future upward momentum and sustained investor confidence across all global exchanges. Global institutions allocate substantial portfolios to this sector to hedge against traditional currency devaluation and to secure long-term wealth preservation.

August delivered a phenomenal rally for the digital asset. Buyers pushed the valuation up about 25 per cent, from roughly US$62,500 to over US$78,000. The token peaked near US$81,138 during that specific period. The current US$82,000 Kalshi forecast sits slightly above that recent high. Buyers repeatedly tested the US$80,000 resistance level over the past few days.

These persistent attempts prove that underlying demand remains robust despite the immediate drop in valuation. Analysts see a high probability that the asset will touch US$82,000 this month. Market observers focus heavily on whether buying sentiment will hold near the resistance line.

Repeated tests at the resistance level eventually weaken that barrier. Sellers exhaust their supply during these tests, and buyers eventually absorb all available sell orders. Historical patterns support this optimistic outlook. The asset maintained a consistent record of September gains over the past four years. Seasonal strength often drives investor confidence and attracts fresh capital into markets. Traders remember these historical trends and position their portfolios accordingly.

This collective anticipation creates a self-fulfilling prophecy that drives valuations higher. Retail participants join the rally when they see large institutional funds accumulating positions during these seasonal windows, and they mimic those trading behaviours to capture similar financial rewards.

Also Read: Can Bitcoin defend the critical US$76,500 foundation zone before the September 11 inflation data triggers another massive liquidation cascade?

The broader digital asset market faces distinct challenges even as Bitcoin shows relative strength. Ethereum dropped 0.93 per cent to US$2,389.35 over the last 24 hours. The second-largest digital asset underperformed Bitcoin’s slightly positive price action. A massive cascade of leveraged long liquidations was the primary driver of this underperformance. Exchanges wiped out approximately US$96 million in Ethereum long positions.

The broader crypto market saw exchanges liquidate over US$367 million in total positions during the same time. Long positions accounted for the vast majority of these forced closures. This derivatives squeeze created immense forced selling pressure. Algorithms automatically sold assets to meet margin calls, pushing the valuation below the critical US$2,400 support level. High leverage always fuels rapid declines. The market effectively cleared overextended bullish bets and generated a sharp, high-volume downward move.

These liquidation cascades are necessary market cleanings. They remove fragile leverage and build a much stronger foundation for future valuation appreciation. Healthy markets require periodic flushes to wipe out greedy speculators and reward patient long-term holders. Trading platforms constantly monitor these margin requirements and adjust their internal risk parameters to prevent systemic failures during extreme volatility spikes.

Broader macroeconomic pressures also weigh heavily on digital assets. Ethereum shares a strong 67.8 per cent correlation with the S&P 500. This high correlation indicates that traditional stock market movements heavily influence digital asset valuations. A broad risk-off shift swept through global financial markets.

Geopolitical tensions pushed Brent crude oil prices above US$95. Higher oil prices ignite inflation fears and drive Treasury yields higher. Investors typically sell risk assets when inflation fears rise and bond yields offer better returns. Spot selling pressure increased alongside these macro headwinds. A major market participant moved 70,739 Ethereum tokens worth roughly US$174 million to exchanges over two days.

Large holders usually signal an intent to sell when they transfer assets to exchanges. Institutional exchange-traded fund inflows also slowed significantly during this period. I interpret these whale movements as strategic portfolio rebalancing rather than a complete loss of faith in the asset.

Smart money often takes profits after strong rallies and waits for better entry points. These large players have the capital to move markets and always seek optimal liquidity conditions to execute large trades. Professional fund managers analyse these on-chain metrics daily to predict future supply shocks, and they adjust their exposure levels based on precise wallet movements.

Also Read: Sellers reject Bitcoin at US$81,000 and Asia has not even opened: what the next session will reveal

Market participants now watch critical support levels to gauge the future direction of valuations. The immediate technical structure looks bearish after sellers broke US$2,400. The next major support cluster sits between US$2,350 and US$2,320. Liquidation heatmaps show dense liquidity resting in this specific zone.

Buyers must defend this area to prevent a deeper correction. A successful defence could allow the asset to consolidate and range between US$2,320 and US$2,440. A failure to hold this zone opens the door for a drop toward US$2,200. The Federal Reserve’s policy decision on September 16 is the most important near-term catalyst. Traders currently price in a 68 per cent chance of a rate hike. A hawkish central bank decision could easily extend the current downturn.

A dovish surprise might catalyse a massive relief rally across risk assets. I expect extreme volatility surrounding the central bank announcement. Investors should watch the valuation reaction at the US$2,320 level and monitor exchange-traded fund flow data closely.

These metrics will reveal true institutional sentiment and dictate the next major market trend for the remainder of the year. Economic analysts constantly track these interest rate probabilities and model various economic scenarios to prepare clients for potential monetary policy shifts.

Evaluating both assets together reveals a complex market environment. Bitcoin leads the charge with resilient price action while Ethereum battles intense derivative liquidations and macro headwinds. Traders must navigate these diverging narratives carefully. I advise market participants to focus on underlying fundamentals rather than short-term valuation fluctuations.

The digital asset space always experiences violent swings before establishing long-term trends. Patient observers will capitalise on these temporary dislocations and build substantial wealth over time.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. You can also share your perspective by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of e27.

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

The post Bitcoin slipped below US$80,000, so why are traders still betting on US$82,000? appeared first on e27.

For many companies in Asia, distress rarely arrives as a single dramatic event. It tends to build quietly: a more expensive lender replacing a bank, a missed fundraising target explained away as timing, profits that look healthy on paper but do not turn into cash, or a trusted senior executive leaving without a clear successor.

Those signals are now becoming harder to ignore. New analysis from global consulting firm AlixPartners has identified four early warning signs that APAC business leaders, investors and lenders should watch closely as insolvencies rise across the region: declining access to quality capital, a mismatch between EBITDA and cash, missed milestones and targets, and senior management churn.

Also Read: Malaysian pension fund KWAP moves to contain damage after eFishery fraud shock

The report comes at a tense moment for Asian businesses. According to Allianz’s Global Insolvency Outlook 2026-27, company insolvencies in Asia rose by 39 per cent in 2025, with increases recorded across almost every major financial centre. Hong Kong and Singapore, two of the region’s most important capital and restructuring hubs, each saw insolvencies climb by 33 per cent.

For Southeast Asia’s startup and growth-company ecosystem, the findings land close to home. The region has spent the past two years adjusting to a funding environment where capital is still available, but far less forgiving. Investors are pushing harder on unit economics, lenders are scrutinising cash flows, and founders who raised during the low-interest-rate era are discovering that survival depends less on headline growth and more on discipline.

Capital gets more expensive before it disappears

The first red flag, AlixPartners says, is a company’s declining access to quality capital. In simple terms, this means a business is no longer able to raise money from the most reliable or lowest-cost sources, such as established banks, existing shareholders or institutional investors, and is forced to turn to more expensive or less sophisticated providers.

That shift matters in Asia because the region’s corporate landscape is dominated by smaller, privately held and family-owned businesses. Micro, small and medium-sized enterprises make up an estimated 97 per cent of all companies in APAC. Many do not disclose detailed financial information, making it harder for lenders, suppliers and investors to spot problems early.

“When companies start tapping higher cost debt providers or less sophisticated retail investors for additional funding, it can be an indication that a company’s relationship with banks or shareholders is no longer willing to commit additional capital,” said Patrick Bance, Partner and Managing Director in Singapore at AlixPartners.

In Southeast Asia, this is particularly relevant for startups that previously relied on frequent equity rounds to fund expansion. When venture capital slows, some firms turn to venture debt, revenue-based financing, bridge notes or informal sources of capital. These tools are not inherently problematic. But when they are used to plug operating losses rather than finance clear growth, they can indicate that the business is running out of room.

Profit is not the same as cash

The second warning sign is a persistent gap between EBITDA and cash generation. EBITDA, or earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation, is often used as a rough measure of operating performance. But it excludes several real costs, including debt servicing, tax payments and the ageing of assets.

That distinction is becoming more important as interest rates remain higher than they were during the funding boom. AlixPartners cited data showing that nearly one-fifth of total Asian corporate debt is owed by companies with low interest coverage ratios. An interest coverage ratio measures how comfortably a company can pay interest on its debt from earnings. A low ratio suggests that even a profitable-looking business may struggle to meet its obligations.

Also Read: Indonesia detains 3 more suspects in TaniHub investment fraud case

“A persistent mismatch between EBITDA and cash generation is the surest warning sign,” said Matt Hinds, Partner and Managing Director in Singapore at AlixPartners. “As an early client said to me, ‘It’s never too early to start worrying about cash.’”

For founders, this is a reminder that growth metrics cannot indefinitely substitute for liquidity. A company may show rising revenue, improving gross margins or positive adjusted EBITDA, while still burning cash because customers pay late, inventory builds up, expansion costs rise, or loans come due. In sectors such as e-commerce, logistics, electric vehicles and hardware, working capital can quickly become the difference between a turnaround and a restructuring.

Missed targets start to tell a story

The third signal is repeated failure to meet milestones and commitments. One missed target may reflect market conditions or operational friction. A pattern of delayed filings, reduced fundraising plans, broken lender promises or shifting shareholder updates points to something deeper.

Bance noted that “delayed statutory filings and delayed or downsized fundraising efforts can be an early warning sign of potential disagreements about asset valuation, business performance, forecast cashflows, and investor confidence in the company.”

This is especially relevant in Southeast Asia, where private companies often disclose less than listed businesses but still depend heavily on trust. A startup that repeatedly misses product launches, revenue targets or fundraising deadlines may find that stakeholders become less willing to extend patience. Suppliers may tighten payment terms, investors may demand harsher conditions, and lenders may ask for additional security.

Also Read: Nadiem Makarim, eFishery, and the end of blind faith in startups

In a weaker funding market, missed milestones can also create a valuation problem. Companies that raised at high valuations in 2020 or 2021 may resist down rounds, while investors may be unwilling to price new capital on outdated assumptions. The result is delay — and delay can consume cash.

Leadership exits can deepen the damage

The fourth warning sign is churn at the top. Leadership changes are not unusual, particularly in young companies. But repeated departures among senior executives can disrupt operations, weaken morale and worry investors. AlixPartners estimates that replacing departing leaders can set a company’s progress back by as much as 12 months.

“If you are seeing increasingly high levels of management churn, the thing you are going to worry about is that they are not getting rid of those who are responsible for poor performance,” Hinds said. “It is the good ones who will go somewhere else. And management churn, in itself, is disruptive.”

In Asia, the issue is not limited to professional management teams. Many companies are family-controlled, and succession planning can become a material risk. If strategy, relationships and institutional knowledge sit with one founder, patriarch or matriarch, an unplanned transition can quickly destabilise even a viable business.

Una Ge, Partner and Managing Director for Greater China at AlixPartners, said many Chinese companies still view the business as part of the family legacy, making ownership continuity important. “The issue is whether the right succession planning is in place and being executed. In many cases, formal succession planning remains limited,” she said.

The same concern applies across Southeast Asia, where many large private groups remain family-run and many startups are still founder-dependent. Investors often back founders as much as business models. When key people leave, confidence can leave with them.

The cost of waiting

The common thread across AlixPartners’ four warning signs is time. Early distress gives companies options: refinancing, cost restructuring, asset sales, management changes, fresh equity, or a negotiated reset with creditors. Late distress narrows the menu and raises the cost.

Also Read: “Special Projects” and shady metrics: TaniHub whistleblower speaks as top execs detained

That lesson is increasingly relevant for the region’s startup economy. The easy-money years rewarded speed and scale. The current cycle is testing resilience, transparency and cash discipline. For founders and boards, the warning signs are not reasons to panic. They are reasons to act before the market acts for them.

The post For Southeast Asian startups, distress may show up before the cash runs out appeared first on e27.

In the second year of my country risk role at an Indonesian insurer, I sat in a senior management meeting where a proposed product was on the table. The credit risk was material, the operational risk was novel, and the regulatory positioning was ambiguous. I raised three specific concerns. The chief executive listened, nodded, thanked me, and approved the product. Two weeks later, when the proposal moved to the Risk Committee, my concerns were not in the materials. The committee approved unanimously.

Eighteen months later, the product produced the loss event the three concerns had predicted.

The failure was not technical. The risk analysis had been correct. The framework had been adequate. The reporting lines were documented. What had failed was the culture around all of it, the small, accumulated decisions that determined whose voice carried weight in the room, whose concerns made it into the materials, and what it cost professionally to say something the room did not want to hear.

After fifteen years inside risk functions across banking, insurance, and multifinance, I have come to believe most risk failures inside financial institutions are not technical. They are cultural. The frameworks have improved dramatically over two decades. The cultures around them often have not. The technical fixes do not solve what is broken.

Three cultural failures I see most often

These show up across institutions, sectors, and geographies. The institutions that have one of them often have all three.

• The marginalised CRO. The Chief Risk Officer reports to the Chief Financial Officer instead of the Chief Executive Officer. The CRO’s compensation is influenced by institutional profitability. The CRO is not part of the executive committee that decides strategy, only the one that reviews risks afterwards. Every piece of this signals to the rest of the organisation that risk is a function, not a counterweight.
• The rubber-stamp committee. The Risk Committee meets monthly. Materials are prepared two weeks in advance, reviewed by management, finalised by the chair. By the time the committee meets, the decisions have been made. Committee members ask polite questions. Minutes record consensus. The information that should have been challenged was never presented in a form that allowed challenge.
• The yellow flag problem. Risk officers learn, often through specific incidents in their early careers, what it costs professionally to colour something red. A red flag stops a deal, blocks a senior executive’s project, requires the institution to file an awkward disclosure. A yellow flag does none of those things. The same situation that should be red, the loan exposure that exceeds prudent limits, the operational gap that has not been remediated, the regulatory finding that has not been closed, becomes yellow, then amber, then “acceptable with monitoring.” The risk function learns to be polite. The institution accumulates the losses anyway.

Also Read: Why building a people-first work culture in HR tech matters more than ever in Southeast Asia

What healthy risk culture looks like

Three patterns separate the institutions where risk works from those where it does not.

The CRO sits at the executive table. Direct reporting to the CEO, not through the CFO. Part of the executive committee that decides strategy. Compensation independent of short-term performance. None of this is sufficient on its own. All of it is necessary.

Disagreement is rewarded. The institutions with the strongest risk cultures actively promote risk officers who, at some specific moment in their tenure, said something the room did not want to hear and turned out to be correct. The promotion is the signal. The rest of the function notices. The next time a difficult call needs to be made, more than one person is willing to make it.

Public losses are studied. When something goes wrong, the institution does a serious, written post-mortem, shared internally, that does not assign individual blame. It maps the decisions, the assumptions, and the cultural mechanisms that allowed the loss to happen. Institutions that do this once become institutions that do it routinely. The ones that do not accumulate the same loss patterns for decades.

What CEOs and boards should watch for

A small number of signals reliably indicate which side of this line an institution sits on.

How does the CRO leave a Risk Committee meeting? If the CRO consistently leaves more agitated than they arrive, the meetings are not working. The risk function is bringing issues the committee is not engaging with.

How long has it been since a risk officer was promoted on the strength of a specific disagreement? If the institution cannot name an instance, the message inside the function is that disagreement does not pay.

When the last significant loss event happened, what document existed afterwards? If there is no written post-mortem, or it was a defensive memo rather than an honest analysis, the next loss event is already in motion.

Also Read: The unspoken crisis: Are we building a new digital divide in agriculture?

The macro stakes

The conventional response to risk failure is to invest in technical infrastructure, better systems, more granular models, deeper reporting. Most of these investments are reasonable. None of them solves the cultural problem they often distract from. The institution that buys better risk software while leaving its CRO reporting to the CFO has spent money on the wrong layer.

The cultural changes are harder than the technical ones. They require uncomfortable conversations about reporting lines, compensation, and the unspoken rules about who gets to disagree. They cost executive capital. They produce no software contract to point to. They are also the only ones that consistently work.

After fifteen years inside risk functions, the institutions I trust most are not the ones with the most sophisticated frameworks. They are the ones where the risk officer in the back of the room is willing to interrupt the CEO, and where the CEO listens. Most risk failures, when you trace them back honestly, are cultural failures wearing a technical disguise. The institutions that figure that out, and act on it, are the ones whose risk function will be doing more than reporting when the next significant loss event arrives.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. You can also share your perspective by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of e27.

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

The post The yellow flag problem: Most risk functions fail at culture before they fail at technique appeared first on e27.

For years, Southeast Asia’s online used-car platforms were judged mainly by how fast they could expand: more inspection centres, more listings, more buyers, more cities. Carsome’s latest numbers suggest the sector has entered a different phase, one where scale still matters, but profitability is becoming the sharper test.

The Malaysia-headquartered used-car e-commerce group reported record quarterly EBITDA of US$8.3 million for the second quarter of 2026, up 38 per cent from a year earlier. It marks the company’s tenth consecutive profitable quarter on an EBITDA basis, a milestone that matters in a market where digital automotive players have often struggled with high operating costs, thin margins and uneven consumer trust.

Also Read: Carsome hits US$5M EBITDA in most profitable quarter yet

The firm sold 35,903 vehicles during the quarter ended June 30, up 11 per cent year-on-year. Gross profit rose faster, climbing 15 per cent to about US$43.8 million. The company said the improvement was driven by a larger share of retail transactions and financing services, rather than simply higher vehicle volumes.

That distinction is important. Wholesale used-car transactions can drive scale, but retail sales, financing, warranties and related services typically create stronger unit economics. In plain terms, Carsome is trying to earn more from each car it touches, not just sell more cars.

“Q2 delivered what we set out at the start of the year. We sold 11 per cent more cars, grew gross profit by 15 per cent, and grew EBITDA by 38 per cent,” said Eric Cheng, co-founder and Group CEO of Carsome. “Each line growing faster than the one before is what operating leverage looks like in practice.”

From volume chase to operating leverage

EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation) is not the same as net profit. But for high-growth companies, it is often used as a measure of whether the core business can generate cash-like earnings before accounting and financing costs.

In Carsome’s case, the latest quarter indicates that its cost base is not rising as quickly as gross profit. That is the operating leverage Cheng referred to: once inspection infrastructure, showrooms, logistics networks and technology systems are in place, every additional transaction should ideally contribute more to earnings.

This is a notable shift for a company that, like many venture-backed platforms, spent its earlier years building density across markets. Southeast Asia’s used-car trade remains fragmented, with many purchases still happening through small dealers, informal networks or offline classifieds. Platforms such as Carsome have tried to bring more structure to the process by offering inspections, fixed-price retail experiences, trade-ins, financing and after-sales support.

The challenge has always been execution. Cars are expensive physical assets. Unlike purely digital marketplaces, used-car platforms carry inventory risk, require refurbishment capacity, need large inspection networks, and must win trust from both sellers and buyers. Expansion can become costly if volumes do not rise quickly enough to absorb fixed expenses.

Carsome’s tenth straight EBITDA-positive quarter suggests the company is finding a more sustainable balance between growth and cost control, at least at the operating level.

Malaysia deepens, Indonesia expands

During the quarter, Carsome continued to add physical locations in its core markets. In Malaysia, it opened three new sites in Sungai Petani, Bukit Tinggi in Klang, and Sungai Buloh, bringing its network to 55 inspection centres and showrooms nationwide.

Also Read: Carsome turns profitable in FY2024 with US$10.5M EBITDA

Malaysia remains a strategically important market for the group, not only because it is Carsome’s home base, but also because vehicle ownership is high by regional standards. The country has a mature used-car ecosystem, but it remains highly fragmented, leaving room for players that can offer standardised inspections, transparent pricing and financing options.

Carsome also expanded in Indonesia, opening four new locations in Greater Jakarta. The company now has 10 inspection centres and showrooms in the area. Indonesia is a more complex prize: it is Southeast Asia’s largest economy and has a vast population, but car ownership remains lower than in Malaysia or Thailand. That creates long-term upside, though the market can be difficult to serve because of geography, financing gaps and varying consumer behaviour across cities.

The group’s partnership with Suzuki Cars Malaysia as the carmaker’s exclusive official trade-in partner also points to a wider industry trend. Automakers and distributors are increasingly looking for structured trade-in channels to support new-car sales, while digital platforms want access to higher-quality used-car supply. In markets where affordability is under pressure, the line between new and used-car ecosystems is becoming more intertwined.

Why used cars matter in Southeast Asia

Used cars occupy a practical space in Southeast Asia’s transport economy. New vehicles have become more expensive for many households, while public transport access remains uneven outside major urban centres. At the same time, motorcycles dominate in several markets, but as incomes rise, many families still aspire to own a car for safety, comfort and mobility.

Financing is central to that transition. A platform that can combine vehicle discovery, inspection, credit assessment and loan facilitation has a better chance of capturing more value across the transaction. It may also reduce friction for consumers who are wary of hidden defects, unclear pricing or unreliable dealers, long-standing pain points in the used-car market.

For Carsome, the shift toward financing and retail is therefore not just a margin story. It is also a way to become more deeply embedded in the buying journey, rather than acting only as a marketplace or sourcing channel.

Still, risks remain. Higher interest rates can dampen demand for vehicle financing. Inventory-heavy models can suffer if prices move suddenly. Consumer confidence, fuel prices and regulatory changes can all affect car purchases. In Indonesia especially, competition for reliable supply and affordable credit can be intense.

A crowded road ahead

Carsome’s closest regional rival remains Singapore-headquartered Carro, another major integrated used-car platform with operations across Southeast Asia. In Indonesia, players such as Moladin have also targeted the used-car and auto-financing chain, while traditional dealers, bank-backed financing networks, and classified platforms continue to compete for consumer attention. Globally, companies such as CarMax in the US have shown how large used-car retailers can scale, but they have also demonstrated how exposed the model can be to credit cycles, inventory costs and shifts in vehicle prices.

That competitive backdrop makes Carsome’s profitability streak more relevant. The company is not operating in a winner-takes-all software market; it is competing in a capital-intensive, operationally messy industry where local execution often matters more than brand alone.

Cheng said Carsome’s priorities for the rest of the year remain “growing transactions, expanding unit economics, and demonstrating operating leverage”. The phrasing may sound like standard corporate discipline, but in the context of Southeast Asia’s startup ecosystem, it reflects a broader reset.

Also Read: Riding into its first profitable year, Carsome looks forward to strengthen its presence in the Philippines

Investors are no longer rewarding growth at any cost as freely as they did during the low-interest-rate years. Startups across the region, from fintech to logistics to commerce, have been pushed to prove that their models can generate durable margins. Carsome’s latest quarter fits that wider narrative: the company is still expanding, but the bigger story is that each layer of growth appears to be contributing more to earnings.

The next test will be whether it can maintain that trajectory as it adds more sites, pushes deeper into Indonesia, and grows financing-led transactions without taking on excessive risk. For now, its second-quarter results give the used-car platform something many scaleups in Southeast Asia are still trying to secure: evidence that growth and profitability can move in the same direction.

The post Carsome posts tenth profitable quarter as SEA’s used-car race matures appeared first on e27.