Southeast Asia is trying to do something rare in tech: scale fast without pretending risk doesn’t exist.

A study titled “AI in Southeast Asia: An era of opportunity” by McKinsey and the Singapore Economic Development Board argues that regional coordination is positioning Southeast Asian countries as responsible AI leaders, primarily through ASEAN’s non-binding governance approach.

Also Read: Southeast Asia’s AI boom is built on steel, not startups

But “responsible AI” in Southeast Asia faces a structural problem: the region is fragmented by regulatory frameworks, languages, and data practices. If cross-border AI scale is the goal, governance cannot remain an afterthought.

ASEAN’s approach: guidelines instead of penalties

The report lays out a global contrast. Some jurisdictions (such as China and the European Union) pursue enforceable AI-specific regulation. Others (including ASEAN, Canada, and Japan) focus on principles, guidelines, and voluntary commitments.

ASEAN’s key milestone is its Guide on AI Governance and Ethics (2024), designed to promote consistent standards across borders and align countries on responsible use.

This is pragmatic for a region where economies are at different development levels. But nonbinding guidelines only work if enterprises and governments treat them as operational requirements, not press-release accessories.

The cross-border data problem is the whole game

AI at scale needs data flows. Southeast Asia has spent years talking about digital integration; AI sharpens that urgency. Models trained and deployed across markets will collide with:

• data localisation rules
• sector-specific regulations (especially finance and healthcare)
• varying enforcement capacity
• inconsistent data quality and metadata standards

Singapore’s Minister for Digital Development and Information, Josephine Teo, said: “Recognising the importance of cross-border data flows, we got the ASEAN community to agree on a data management framework.”

Also Read: Momentum without maturity: Southeast Asia’s AI reality

That is the right direction. But frameworks must translate into interoperable compliance processes, not just shared vocabulary.

Sovereignty is rising because foreign dependence is obvious

The report notes a potential imbalance: international tech companies pushing AI in Southeast Asia could leave local firms dependent on imported models, infrastructure, and standards. It cites moves by governments such as Malaysia’s and Singapore’s to invest in sovereign AI infrastructure through national AI centres, partly to retain strategic control and tailor AI to local contexts.

Malaysia’s NAIO head Sam Majid uses an analogy in the report that captures the governance logic: “The braking is the governance part, the responsible part, which makes you realise the creation of the car brake allows the car to go faster.”

That line is more than rhetorical. In regulated industries, governance is the precondition for deployment speed. Without it, organisations slow down because risk becomes unmanageable.

Enterprises are already getting hurt by AI risk, and responding

Responsible AI is not hypothetical. The report says 41 per cent of companies have experienced adverse consequences from AI inaccuracy, and 21 per cent report cybersecurity incidents.

It also shows active mitigation:

• 61 per cent addressing AI inaccuracy
• 58 per cent strengthening cybersecurity
• 46 per cent working on regulatory compliance

This is the shape of the next phase: not “do we adopt AI?” but “how do we operate AI safely across markets?”

Singapore’s role: governance export, not just infrastructure

Singapore is positioned in the report as a regional nerve centre—home to extensive AI CoEs and a strong regulatory environment. That combination creates a potential export: governance tooling and standards that can travel.

Also Read: AI is now a budget line. It’s still not a profit line

The report references initiatives such as AI Verify Foundation, which aims to promote testing frameworks for responsible and trustworthy AI.

If Southeast Asia’s AI future is cross-border, tools like AI testing, model evaluation standards, and incident reporting mechanisms become part of regional competitiveness, not just compliance.

The inclusion challenge: “responsible” also has to mean “not just for big tech”

The report repeatedly warns about uneven outcomes: MSMEs are the backbone of Southeast Asian economies, yet they risk being left behind by the complexity and cost of AI adoption.

Responsible AI cannot be defined only by safety and ethics. In Southeast Asia, responsibility must include access:

• affordable tools
• multilingual support
• practical onboarding
• shared data assets and sector collaborations

Otherwise, the region builds a two-tier AI economy: governed, scaled AI for big enterprises—and ad-hoc, risky AI use for smaller firms.

The regional playbook: collaborate or fragment

The report’s “way forward” agenda calls for collaborative ecosystem building across:

• government
• tech providers
• academia
• enterprises

It outlines enablers such as trusted data flows, talent pipelines, responsible AI at scale, sector collaborations, and infrastructure inclusion.

The message is simple: no single stakeholder can solve the scale problem alone. But the underlying reality is sharper: without collaboration, Southeast Asia will scale AI in pockets, not as a region.

That outcome would be familiar. It is what happened with many earlier digital transformations. AI raises the stakes because it rewards scale and punishes fragmentation.

Also Read: Everyone wants AI agents but few have the plumbing

Responsible AI in Southeast Asia will not be won by policy documents. It will be won by operational alignment: shared standards, cross-border data mechanisms, and enforcement-capable governance—built in a way that small firms can actually use.

The post Responsible AI won’t scale on good intentions alone appeared first on e27.

In hospitality, trust is everything. 

Imagine checking into your hotel room only to find out that your personal data has been leaked. Your vacation is ruined even before it begins! 

This isn’t fiction; it’s the reality facing millions in Southeast Asia’s booming digital economy.

And when incidents like this happen, the damage goes far beyond financial loss or regulatory penalties and breaks the guest’s sense of safety, the very trust that hospitality is built on. 

In an industry where comfort is the product, cybersecurity is no longer just a backend concern but a core part of the customer experience.

A trust layer that drives business growth

For too long, the hospitality industry has viewed cybersecurity as a technical shield, a series of defensive measures against digital attacks. However, our experience shows that cybersecurity is not merely a cost of compliance or a defensive necessity but a “trust layer” that drives business growth. By framing security through the lens of the consumer experience, we unlock the ability to expand their digital footprint and foster deep, lasting loyalty. 

At RedDoorz, our success, including a repeat booking rate of approximately 70 per cent, is built on the foundation that our guests feel their journey is safe and free of hidden surprises.

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has accelerated this conversation. AI depends entirely on data, and the quality of that data dictates the level of trust a customer can place in a platform. We leverage AI for critical functions such as property quality assessments during onboarding and sentiment analysis of guest reviews. By using AI to understand specific goals rather than making subjective judgements, we introduce objectivity and eliminate bias. This is to ensure that the property a guest sees on their screen is the same one they find upon arrival.

However, AI is a double-edged sword; although it enables us to personalise recommendations and secure payments, it also empowers bad actors to automate “human-like” deception at scale. We are entering an era where AI-driven scams and impersonation, through faked images, videos, or audio, will make it increasingly challenging to discern what is real. As CTOs, we must accept that “AI thieves” are becoming more sophisticated, which necessitates the development of “AI police”-tools capable of detecting and thwarting these advanced threats in real-time.

Also Read: From grid to code: Why good cybersecurity will help deliver net zero

Building the fortress: Security by design

To navigate this landscape, our security architecture is built on the principle of restraint. We treat cybersecurity as a multi-layered journey: it begins with safety and security on day one, then moves to privacy, trust, and finally, comfort.

One of our most significant strategic decisions has been to keep our AI workloads firmly within our own data warehouse. By ensuring that sensitive data never moves to external Large Language Model (LLM) platforms, we eliminate an entire class of privacy and leakage risks. All personally identifiable information (PII) is masked, anonymised, or aggregated before it touches a model, and a full audit trail backs every decision.

This philosophy extends to our customer-facing automation. Our chatbots that handle everything from bookings to payments are designed with narrow, time-bound boundaries because anything customer-facing will be tested by malicious actors. Therefore, we separate conversational context from sensitive systems like payments.

Authentication is not a “forever” state; access typically lasts only for microseconds during a specific session and expires the moment the job is done. We believe that convenience must never come at the expense of security; if trust cannot be established at any given step, the transaction simply does not proceed.

Cultivating a security-first culture

For a startup to truly treat cybersecurity as a trust layer, it must move beyond the “compliance checkbox” mentality. This requires a cultural shift across product, engineering, and data science teams. 

At RedDoorz, security clearance is a mandatory step in our release process. Every team member understands that a vulnerable tool or feature will not go live, regardless of the urgency of the launch.

Also Read: AI and cybersecurity in healthcare: Building resilience for better patient care

For fellow CTOs and founders in the ecosystem, I offer a few practical “rituals” to embed this thinking:

• Prioritise minimum viable security: On day one, invest in the elements that could break your startup if compromised—namely, personally identifiable information and payments.
• The 10 per cent rule: Commit at least 10 per cent of your time to reviewing security risks and infrastructure to ensure that security remains a shared responsibility rather than a siloed task.
• Leverage off-the-shelf tools: Startups often lack the resources to build everything in-house. Use proven third-party tools for security coverage and employ ethical hacking or external audits to find your own loopholes before someone else does.
• Human-in-the-loop: Never treat AI as a self-learning experiment. We use human and subject-matter experts to regularly conduct quality checks on AI outputs, ensuring accuracy and accountability.

The path forward

The role of the CTO has become multifold and significantly more complex in the age of AI. We are no longer just architects of systems; we are the guardians of the customer relationship. We must constantly monitor for model drift, malicious data poisoning, and unauthorised internal access through strict role-based controls and logging.

In the digital economy, trust is the only currency that truly matters. Whether it is through showing honest guest reviews, ensuring secure conversational context, or protecting data at rest, every security measure we take is a brick in the wall of customer confidence. By treating cybersecurity as a foundational trust layer, we do more than just protect our businesses; we enable the innovation and growth that will define the future of Southeast Asia.

—

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

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

The post The trust layer: How cybersecurity became hospitality’s most valuable asset appeared first on e27.

The property investment landscape is evolving faster than ever as we approach 2026. Economic shifts, changing buyer behaviour, and technological innovation are redefining how investors evaluate and manage real estate assets. What once relied heavily on instinct and location alone is now driven by data, sustainability, and long-term strategic thinking. Understanding these changes is essential for investors who want to remain competitive in a dynamic global market.

The future of property investment will favour those who adapt early and align their strategies with emerging trends rather than relying on outdated models.

Evolving investor mindsets

Modern property investors are becoming more informed and selective. Instead of focusing solely on short-term appreciation, there is a stronger emphasis on stability, rental demand, and long-term value. Lifestyle changes such as remote working and flexible business operations have also influenced property choices, increasing demand for versatile spaces.

Residential investors are now looking beyond major city centres, while commercial investors are prioritising functionality and adaptability. Properties that can serve multiple purposes or attract diverse tenants are gaining stronger attention in the market.

The influence of technology in real estate

Technology is playing a central role in reshaping property investment decisions. Advanced analytics, virtual tours, and digital documentation have streamlined the buying and selling process, reducing uncertainty for investors. Access to real-time data allows investors to analyse trends, assess risks, and identify opportunities more efficiently than ever before.

Also Read: Why Southeast Asia’s fragmented property data is an AI opportunity, not a barrier

By 2026, technology is expected to impact property investment in several ways:

• Improved market forecasting through data-driven insights
• Faster and more transparent property transactions
• Enhanced tenant management and operational efficiency

These advancements are not only improving decision-making but also increasing investor confidence across different markets.

Sustainability as a core investment factor

Sustainability has shifted from being a niche consideration to a core investment requirement. Environmental awareness, government regulations, and rising energy costs are pushing investors toward eco-friendly and energy-efficient properties. Sustainable buildings tend to attract quality tenants and reduce long-term operational expenses, making them more appealing from an investment perspective.

Smart technologies such as energy monitoring systems and automated maintenance solutions are becoming standard features in modern developments. Properties that prioritise sustainability are more likely to maintain value and demand in the years ahead.

Market stability and risk management

While property investment remains one of the most stable asset classes, it is not immune to economic fluctuations. Interest rate changes, inflation, and geopolitical factors can influence market performance. However, investors who focus on fundamentals tend to navigate these challenges more effectively.

• A future-ready investment approach includes:
• Diversifying across property types and locations
• Conducting detailed market research before investment
• Focusing on long-term growth rather than short-term market movements

This strategic mindset helps reduce risk and supports consistent returns over time.

Also Read: Real estate meets AI: Why property agents need to adapt before they fall behind

Emerging opportunities in 2026

As urban development expands and infrastructure improves, new investment opportunities are emerging in growing regions. Secondary cities and developing markets are attracting attention due to lower entry costs and strong growth potential. Investors who identify these areas early may benefit from long-term appreciation and rising demand.

Additionally, alternative property segments such as co-living spaces, logistics facilities, and flexible commercial properties are expected to grow steadily. These segments align well with modern lifestyle and business needs, making them attractive options for forward-thinking investors.

Conclusion

The future of property investment in 2026 will be shaped by innovation, sustainability, and informed decision-making. Investors who embrace technology, prioritise long-term value, and adapt to changing market conditions will be better positioned for success. Strategic planning and adaptability are of utmost importance in navigating the evolving real estate landscape.

—

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

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

Featured image courtesy: Canva

The post The 3 pillars of 2026 property investment: Tech, sustainability and strategy appeared first on e27.

As Southeast Asia’s digital economy enters a new phase of expansion, trust is transitioning from buzzword to core economic infrastructure.

According to Acua’s Southeast Asia Digital Payment Trends 2026 report, the regional digital payments market is projected to exceed US$789 billion in transaction value, reflecting rapid adoption across platforms and services. This growth is being fuelled by an increasingly connected population and the rise of mobile wallets, super-apps, and digital financial services that reach more than 700 million consumers and millions of businesses across ASEAN.

Yet this remarkable momentum also reveals a structural tension: as digital adoption deepens, so too do systemic vulnerabilities. Cybersecurity is now becoming the layer that enables trust, which in turn fuels adoption, innovation, and economic participation.

Digital adoption is outpacing trust infrastructure

Southeast Asia’s digital economy continues to grow at a double-digit pace. According to the e-Conomy SEA 2025 report, the region’s digital ecosystem is on track to sustain robust expansion, with gross merchandise value (GMV) growing by roughly 15 per cent year-on-year.

Digital payments illustrate this acceleration clearly. Acua’s data shows transaction value rising from under US$250 billion in 2023 to nearly US$789 billion by 2026, signalling not just broader adoption, but deeper integration into daily commerce and enterprise operations across the region.

This growth, however, is not driven by convenience alone. As digital services become embedded in everyday economic activity, expectations around security, low-friction experiences, and cross-border interoperability rise in parallel. Consumers and businesses increasingly assume that systems will protect their data, funds, and identities by default.

As usage expands, so does the cost of insecurity.

In ASEAN, the cybersecurity market is estimated to reach US$6.44 billion in 2026, with projections pointing to a nearly 17 per cent compound annual growth rate through 2031 — a trajectory that closely mirrors the pace of digital adoption. Enterprise priorities are shifting accordingly. A 2024 PwC survey found that 84 per cent of business and technology leaders in the Asia Pacific have increased their cybersecurity budgets, with total security spending in the region expected to reach US$52 billion by 2027.

Together, these trends point to a clear reality: enterprises leading in digital transformation are also investing ahead of threats, recognising that trust now underpins everything from customer retention to regulatory compliance and operational resilience.

Also Read: From grid to code: Why good cybersecurity will help deliver net zero

From innovation to execution: where trust is really built

Despite abundant cybersecurity innovation across Southeast Asia, a persistent challenge remains: moving beyond pilots to scalable, enterprise-ready execution.

Many promising security tools stall in proof-of-concept limbo because they lack clear integration pathways, governance alignment, or measurable implementation frameworks. When cybersecurity solutions sit on the periphery of enterprise workflows — rather than being embedded into them — trust becomes fragile or superficial.

This gap is particularly visible in markets like Indonesia, where public-sector and private-sector technology stacks overlap. State-owned enterprises (BUMN), digital service providers, and startups increasingly operate within shared digital ecosystems, making execution complexity the real barrier to trust.

One approach to addressing this challenge is through integrated threat intelligence that aligns startup capability with enterprise reality.

A recent example comes from the collaboration between Digiserve by Telkom Indonesia and Cyfirma, a cybersecurity company in the MDI Ventures portfolio. Through this cooperation, Cyfirma’s Cyber Threat Intelligence (CTI) capabilities have been integrated into Telkom Solution’s enterprise portfolio, allowing customers not only to detect threats but to contextualise risk and act earlier.

As Roby Roediyanto, Director of MDI Ventures, noted, “One of the biggest challenges when startups work with enterprises or state-owned companies is ensuring from the outset that the solution truly addresses business needs and can be executed in practice. MDI helps match enterprise requirements with the most relevant portfolio solutions, then works with both sides to move the process from discussion to implementation and go-to-market.”

Similar approaches can be seen globally. In Singapore, Singtel Cyber Security integrates threat intelligence and managed security services directly into enterprise and telecom infrastructure across APAC, positioning cybersecurity as a foundational layer of digital trust rather than a bolt-on solution. 

Globally, major enterprise security players are adopting similar models. Palo Alto Networks integrates its Unit 42 threat intelligence directly into enterprise security platforms, enabling coordinated, real-time risk mitigation. Microsoft embeds threat intelligence into Azure, Microsoft 365, and Defender, ensuring security insights are woven into cloud and productivity infrastructure instead of operating as standalone tools.

This focus on relevance, execution, and repeatability — rather than theoretical innovation alone — highlights how cybersecurity increasingly functions as economic glue. When security capabilities are embedded into trusted enterprise channels with clear governance and go-to-market alignment, they strengthen confidence, accelerate adoption, and enable digital ecosystems to scale sustainably.

Governance: The often-overlooked half of trust

Technology without governance is like a vault without locks: it may be present, but it is not secure in a way that instils confidence.

To build repeatable trust in digital ecosystems, institutions are increasingly turning to structured governance mechanisms and transparent standards. In late 2025, MDI Ventures and AMVESINDO co-hosted Synergy Innovation Week, bringing together startups, corporate partners, and regulators — including OJK, Jamdatun, Bappenas, and Komdigi — to discuss governance alignment and trust frameworks that can support sustainable collaboration.

Initiatives like this, coupled with certifications such as ISO 37001 (Anti-Bribery Management System) and recognition like the Indonesia Trusted Company award — both achieved by MDI Ventures — illustrate how formal governance practices can strengthen stakeholder confidence across complex partnerships.

Also Read: In Southeast Asia, cybersecurity is booming but funding is not

Across the region, governments are also strengthening formal governance frameworks to support digital trust. Singapore’s Cybersecurity Act, for example, imposes stricter compliance and reporting obligations on operators of critical information infrastructure, reinforcing accountability in sectors such as finance, telecoms, and energy. By formalising oversight and incident reporting, such regulatory frameworks signal that cybersecurity is not optional but foundational to economic stability.

At the corporate level, global firms are also embedding governance into their cybersecurity strategies. Microsoft’s Secure Future Initiative, for instance, integrates security accountability across product development and executive oversight structures, signalling that governance is becoming embedded at the organisational core rather than treated as an afterthought.

Trust as repeatable economic infrastructure

As digital ecosystems scale across Southeast Asia, trust can no longer rely on informal relationships or one-off successes. It needs to be repeatable, institutionalised, and embedded into how partnerships operate.

This is especially relevant in environments where collaboration happens quickly and across many stakeholders. Trust is the foundation for consistent value creation — and for corporate venture capital (CVC) models in particular, governance and transparency are essential to maintaining credibility. This matters because interactions between founders, corporate partners, investors, and vendors often move at speed and with high intensity, leaving little room for ambiguity or misalignment.

When governance frameworks and transparent processes are in place, trust becomes less dependent on individuals and more anchored in systems. This allows collaborations to scale, reduces friction in execution, and increases confidence among ecosystem participants that partnerships can be repeated and expanded over time.

In this sense, trust functions much like economic infrastructure: it supports digital participation, enables long-term collaboration, and underpins sustainable growth. Without it, even the most advanced technologies struggle to deliver lasting impact at scale.

—

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

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

The post How cybersecurity is becoming the trust layer that underpins Southeast Asia’s digital economy in 2026 appeared first on e27.

Deliveroo’s decision to exit Singapore after an 11-year run is being read across the industry as a brutal referendum on food delivery economics.

In this interview, Varun Saraf and Rishabh Singhvi (co-founders of WhyQ, a leading workplace F&B platform in Singapore and a partner of Deliveroo), explain why the model breaks: the average basket is about SGD20, platforms may take 25-30 per cent (roughly SGD7 to SGD9), and last-mile delivery alone can swallow SGD7 to SGD9 before marketing, tech, or overhead even enters the chat.

The duo also revisits WhyQ’s 2021 partnership with Deliveroo to bring Mix & Match to hawker centres, and why WhyQ ultimately pivoted in 2023 to corporate B2B: scheduled, high-volume drops where food safety, invoicing, and reliability become “infrastructure”, not “convenience”.

Also Read: Deliveroo’s exit is a profitability warning shot

Interview excerpts:

In a social media post, you called Singapore B2C delivery “extremely tough” with “razor-thin margins.” What, specifically, breaks the unit economics here (last-mile costs, discounts, basket sizes, or merchant commissions) and which lever is the hardest to fix without damaging demand?

Saraf: The math for B2C delivery in Singapore is a zero-sum game. If you look at the breakdown for an average SGD20 basket size:

A merchant typically pays ~25-30 per cent commission, leaving the platform with a take of about SGD7 to SGD9.

In the current landscape, last-mile delivery costs — even with significant optimisation and aggregation — regularly fall within the SGD7 to SGD9 range.
When your entire gross margin is consumed by the rider’s fee before you even account for marketing, tech, or overhead, the model is broken. The most challenging lever to fix is consumer price sensitivity. If you pass that US$9 delivery cost directly to the customer, demand craters. If you squeeze the merchant further, they leave.

Most platforms like Grab and Foodpanda have used B2C food delivery to generate consumer demand and drive revenue through ads (featured merchants) and to support ancillary services like payments, taxi, and mart.

If a premium-led player couldn’t make Singapore work long-term, what does that say about the ceiling for differentiated, higher-quality delivery models in Southeast Asia? Does “premium” need a fundamentally different business model (not just branding)?

Saraf: In Southeast Asia, food is a passion, but delivery is treated as a utility, and the “on-demand” model is too expensive for a utility service.

For premium meals, a model in which the consumer bears a larger share of the delivery fee makes more sense. While this will impact demand, if a consumer wants a premium product, they are usually willing to pay a higher delivery fee. This can be seen in models like the one run by players like Oddle.

You said EBITDA positive is the 2026 survival metric. What are the three non-negotiable operating metrics you think delivery and food platforms should publish internally (and perhaps externally) to prove sustainability — contribution margin per order, retention without promos, rider utilisation, or something else?

Saraf: Food delivery platforms survive on a few simple yet powerful economic principles.

1. The batching rate. It is the number of orders a rider delivers on a single trip. Since profits are very thin, riders need to provide multiple orders on the same route. When one trip covers two or three deliveries instead of one, the cost per order goes down, and margins improve.
2. Purchase frequency. It refers to how often a customer orders each month. The more frequently users order, the less the company has to spend on discounts and marketing to bring them back. Subscription models exist mainly to increase this habit and make customer demand more predictable.
3. The average order value (AOV). It is critical because it costs almost the same to deliver a small order as a large one. Delivering $10 meal costs nearly as much as providing a $50 meal. So platforms need customers to spend more per order to spread out the delivery cost. That’s why they set minimum order amounts or promote combo deals.

Also Read: How mobile marketing is powering the next phase of food delivery growth in Southeast Asia

You wrote that for Deliveroo for Work users, this is “not just a vendor change… it’s an infrastructure decision.” In practical terms, what breaks first during a transition — billing/invoicing, dietary coverage, delivery service-level agreements, or merchant continuity — and how should companies stress-test a replacement provider before switching?

Singhvi: In a corporate environment, the first thing that breaks isn’t a line item on an invoice — it’s food safety. When you transition between providers, you are essentially trusting a new entity with the health of your entire workforce. Most platforms treat food as a commodity, but at the corporate level, it is a liability. If a provider hasn’t institutionalised regular kitchen audits, temperature monitoring, or strict protocols to prevent food from being cooked too early and left sitting, the system is fundamentally fragile.

How to stress-test a replacement: A one-week pilot is essential, but companies shouldn’t just look at the menu. They should stress-test for:

• Operational accountability: Is the delivery team in-house, or is it outsourced to the gig economy? Are the founders and support team available on WhatsApp for real-time updates?
• The “intelligence” layer: Does the provider meet complex dietary, budget, and packaging requirements? We use WhyQ Intelligence to ensure every meal is labelled with allergens and nutritional data—this is no longer “nice to have,” it’s a requirement for a modern workplace.
• Variety and reliability: Can they maintain merchant variety while consistently meeting delivery SLAs (no food safety incidents, no missing items, no incorrect items, no missing allergens or ingredients, sufficient portion size, no spillage, on-time delivery, and issue resolution) throughout the trial?

WhyQ positions itself around resilience: “2,000+ merchants”, “structured monthly invoicing”, and “operational discipline across food safety and delivery.” Which part is the hardest to build and maintain at scale in Singapore: merchant supply, logistics reliability, or enterprise-grade finance ops—and what do most consumer delivery platforms underestimate about that work?

Singhvi: Without question, the hardest pillar to build and maintain—and the one most underestimated by consumer platforms—is end-to-end food safety. When serving consumers, food safety is often treated as a merchant-level responsibility. At the enterprise level, that’s a massive risk. At WhyQ, we’ve built a proprietary safety infrastructure that starts long before a meal is even ordered. This is the hardest part to scale because it requires physical, boots-on-the-ground discipline.

What most corporate delivery platforms underestimate, and what makes our model unique, is the depth of our compliance:

• Expert audits: Every merchant undergoes a rigorous kitchen audit by food safety experts before they are even onboarded.
• Continuous monitoring: We don’t just audit once; we conduct quarterly site visits and maintain dynamic “merchant safety scores.”
• Chain of custody: We require merchants to retain daily food samples and to adhere to strict temperature-monitoring protocols. We ensure food is never cooked too early before dispatch—a common “hidden” risk in high-volume delivery.
• Full accountability: We maintain a database of all staff licenses and outlet certificates for our partners. In the rare event of an issue, we provide complete, transparent incident reports.

Deliveroo partnered with WhyQ in 2021 to bring Mix & Match to hawker centres. What did you learn from trying to productise hawker food for delivery—packaging, prep-time variance, peak-hour batching, pricing sensitivity—and what should platforms do differently if they want hawker economics to work?

Singhvi: We started this journey a decade ago. Our deep understanding of the Singaporean consumer is that there is a massive appetite for “Mix & Match” hawker dining. Still, it also showed why the B2C delivery model is fundamentally incompatible with hawker economics.

In the B2C world, the “on-demand” nature of the business is the enemy of the hawker. If you send a rider for a single SGD5 to SGD$7 order at 12:30 PM, the economics collapse. The platform’s take from a 30 per cent commission (SGD1.50 to SGD2.10) doesn’t even come close to covering the SGD7 to SGD9 last-mile delivery cost. To make it work, platforms have to charge high delivery fees that the mass-market consumer simply won’t pay for a “budget” meal.

Also Read: The future of food tech lies in building digitally autonomous restaurants

We realised that the only way to make hawker economics sustainable is to pivot to corporate B2B, which we did in 2023. Today, we work with leading tech giants and firms with over 50 pax daily orders across Singapore, in pockets like the Central Business District (CBD) and areas with limited access to good food, like Pasir Panjang, Science Park, and Paya Lebar Quarter. This moves hawkers from a “survival” model to a “growth” model through three key levers:

• High-volume predictability: Instead of the uncertainty of “on-demand” clicks, we provide hawkers with high-volume, 50-pax+ orders backed by fixed minimum order quantities (MOQs). This allows a solo operator to plan, prep, and batch with 100 per cent certainty.
• Off-peak utilisation: Corporate orders are scheduled. This allows hawkers to fulfil large-scale orders before their own peak walk-in lunch rush. We are effectively creating a “pre-lunch revenue shift” during hours that were previously underutilised.
• Segment access and sustainability: In a B2B model, we aggregate demand into a single “drop,” turning fragmented delivery into high-AOV infrastructure. This gives merchants access to a premium corporate segment they never had. Merchants are happy to offer sustainable commissions because the volume is incremental, efficient, and requires zero additional marketing spend from them.

The post Premium isn’t a moat: What Deliveroo’s exit says about Southeast Asia’s delivery ceiling appeared first on e27.

Global markets absorbed a sharp technology sell-off that began in the US session, triggered by what traders now call a Nvidia hangover. The artificial intelligence leader’s latest earnings, while technically in line with forecasts, failed to feed the market’s insatiable appetite for perfection.

Investors reacted by rotating capital out of high-flying tech names and into more cyclical sectors like financials, a move that left the Nasdaq and S&P 500 in the red while the Dow Jones Industrial Average eked out a nominal gain. This session underscores a fragile truth. When expectations run too far ahead of reality, even solid results can spark a retreat.

The numbers tell a clear story. The Nasdaq Composite fell 1.18 per cent to 22,878.38, with technology and communication services bearing the brunt of the selling. The S&P 500 dropped 0.54 per cent to 6,908.86, pulled lower by a 5.5 per cent slump in Nvidia, its worst single-day performance since April 2025.

Meanwhile, the Dow Jones Industrial Average inched up 0.03 per cent to 49,499.20, supported by gains in major banks such as JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index dropped 3.2 per cent, threatening an impressive 11-week winning streak. This rotation reveals how tightly markets now tie AI enthusiasm to semiconductor valuations, and how quickly sentiment can shift when growth narratives face even minor scrutiny.

Broader macro signals added to the cautious tone. The 10-year US Treasury yield fell to 4.01 per cent, with analysts noting a bull flattening of the yield curve that often signals concerns about moderating global growth. At the same time, spot gold rose to approximately US$5,193.20 per ounce, an increase of over US$21 from the previous session, as investors weighed geopolitical progress in US-Iran nuclear talks. These moves suggest capital is seeking both safety and optionality, a pattern that typically emerges when equity momentum stalls and uncertainty about the growth path intensifies.

Also Read: Why Bitcoin dropped to US$64,100: Trump tariffs, US$2.6B ETF outflows, and extreme fear grip crypto

Asian markets reflected the risk-off mood at the open. The Nikkei 225 dropped 0.25 per cent, and South Korea’s Kospi fell 1.74 per cent. Yet despite the daily dip, Asian stocks remain on track for their best February on record, with the MSCI Asia Pacific Index up 6.3 per cent for the month. In Singapore, the STI opened down 0.19 per cent at 4,954.87, but the local market has seen a strong recovery overall in 2026, with the STI rising 22.7 per cent year to date.

Corporate news added another layer. Block Inc shares surged over 20 per cent in after-hours trading following a surprise announcement of plans to cut 4,000 roles, nearly half its workforce, in a strategic pivot toward AI. This stark move highlights how companies are reshaping their cost structures to chase the next wave of technological investment, even at high human cost.

The crypto market mirrored this macro-driven risk-off move, falling 1.22 per cent to US$2.32T in 24 hours. Critically, the 24-hour correlation with the S&P 500 stood at 89 per cent, a level that leaves little room for the decoupling narrative some enthusiasts still promote. This tight linkage shows crypto now behaves as a high-beta risk asset, moving in lockstep with traditional equity sentiment and liquidity expectations.

For those who view speculative financial activities as forms of gambling with better odds, this correlation is not surprising but rather a confirmation that crypto’s price discovery remains deeply embedded in the broader financial system’s risk appetite.

Under the surface, crypto-specific dynamics amplified the move. The Fear and Greed Index held at Extreme Fear with a reading of 16, reflecting deep-seated caution among participants. Simultaneously, total derivatives open interest fell 6.83 per cent in 24 hours, signalling a rapid deleveraging of speculative positions.

When traders exit leveraged bets amid uncertainty, downward pressure intensifies, creating feedback loops that can overshoot fundamental values. This environment rewards those who monitor liquidity signals and derivatives flows more closely than headline narratives, a practice aligned with a disciplined, independent approach to market analysis.

Also Read: 5 crypto events that will make or break 2026: What investors must know before April

From a technical perspective, the market now tests the US$2.32T level, which aligns with the 78.6 per cent Fibonacci retracement. The next major support sits at the yearly low of US$2.17T. A break below that level could trigger a test of the 200-day moving average near US$3.05T, while a rebound above US$2.44T, the 38.2 per cent retracement, would suggest the selloff is losing momentum.

Resistance also builds at the 50 per cent retracement near US$2.52T. Yet these traditional technical tools must be applied with caution. Decentralised crypto systems do not conform to legacy regulatory tests like the Howey test, and their valuation frameworks must evolve beyond equity-market analogies to account for network effects, token utility, and on-chain activity.

This moment reveals the tension between AI-driven hype cycles and the underlying mechanics of market structure. When a single company’s earnings can ripple across equities, bonds, commodities, and crypto, it signals both the centrality of technology to modern growth narratives and the fragility of sentiment-driven valuations.

Independent analysis becomes essential here. Rather than chasing the latest headline, investors benefit from watching liquidity indicators, derivatives positioning, and cross-asset correlations. These metrics offer clearer signals about where capital truly flows when fear replaces greed, and they help separate structural shifts from temporary noise.

In conclusion, the near-term path for crypto likely hinges on whether the US$2.17T support holds. If it does, a relief bounce toward US$2.44T remains possible as short-term oversold conditions ease. If it breaks, the test of the 200-day moving average near US$3.05T could invite deeper recalibration.

For traditional markets, the question is whether AI expectations can stabilise without further violent repricing. The bull flattening in yields, the rotation into financials, and the sharp move in gold all point to a market searching for a new equilibrium. In this environment, those who combine technical awareness with a critical view of narrative-driven investing will be best positioned to navigate the next phase.

—

The post Nvidia stumbles, crypto shivers, markets wobble: The AI reckoning begins appeared first on e27.

Deliveroo’s exit from Singapore is less a corporate retreat than a referendum on the arithmetic of food delivery. In this candid conversation, WhyQ co-founders Varun Saraf and Rishabh Singhvi strip the model down to its uncomfortable basics: on a typical SGD20 order, platforms collect roughly 25-30% in commission — about SGD7 to SGD9 — which is often entirely consumed by last-mile delivery costs alone. Before marketing, technology, customer support, or overhead are factored in, the margin is effectively gone.

The deeper issue, they argue, is behavioural. In Southeast Asia, delivery is treated as a utility, not a luxury. Consumers resist absorbing the true cost of logistics, while merchants cannot sustain higher commissions. That leaves platforms trapped in a zero-sum game, subsidising demand in pursuit of scale.

WhyQ’s response was not incremental optimisation but structural change. After experimenting with hawker-focused B2C delivery, the company pivoted in 2023 toward corporate B2B — scheduled, high-volume drops where batching improves economics and food safety becomes institutional infrastructure rather than an afterthought.

If 2026 is indeed the EBITDA reckoning for the sector, WhyQ’s thesis is clear: survival will depend less on branding and more on disciplined unit economics, operational control, and predictable demand.

REGIONAL

Deliveroo’s exit is a profitability warning shot: Deliveroo will exit Singapore by March 2026 as DoorDash retrenches across four markets, signalling Southeast Asia’s shift from growth-first expansion to profitability discipline amid punishing delivery economics and fragile margins.

Malaysia’s Zetrix AI raises US$40M from IFC, to list AI unit on Nasdaq: The funding aims to support the expansion of digital infra in Malaysia, Southeast Asia, and other emerging markets. The company’s projects include supporting Malaysia’s national digital identity system and blockchain service network.

Grab expects AI, new services to triple profit by 2028: The ride-hailing and delivery firm aims to triple its EBITDA to US$1.5B by 2028 from last year’s level. It plans to grow revenue by over 20% annually for the next three years. It has taken toeholds outside Southeast Asia, including an investment in US wealth platform Stash.

SG fintech startup Lyte raises US$4.2M: US$3.9M was contributed by Soilbuild Group’s Lim Chap Huat. The remaining amount came from Ho Hin Wah, CIO of Genedant Capital, and Great Noble International II Limited. Lyte offers financial tools aimed at freelancers, solopreneurs, and sales workers.

Singapore Quantum Hub launches with SoftBank and HorizonX backing, led by QAI Ventures: Quantum Hub will accelerate QuantumAI commercialisation, linking capital, talent and industry clusters across communications, finance, manufacturing and life sciences.

Veremark acquires RMI to double down on Southeast Asia’s trust economy: The UK firm aims to deepen APAC background screening, strengthening institutional ties and compliance capabilities as cross-border hiring rises and workplace trust becomes a competitive differentiator.

Singapore’s UltraGreen.ai posts 24% revenue rise in FY2025: The surgical imaging firm’s revenue rose to US$142.4M, driven by a 13% increase in vial volumes and higher prices, especially in the US and Europe. The gross margin stayed at 85%, with operating profit rising to US$84.2M.

Ant, CIMB partner on cross-border payments in Malaysia: It involves collaboration across Ant’s key businesses, including Alipay+, Antom, and Bettr Treasury, spanning cash management, treasury and markets solutions, credit and financing facilities, capital markets activities, and sustainability-related initiatives.

RedDoorz adds 100 ‘company-operated’ hotels in Indonesia: The hospitality platform plans for another 100 to 150 by 2027. It currently manages about 100 such properties and operates 4,300 partner properties across Indonesia and the Philippines.

FEATURES & INTERVIEWS

Premium isn’t a moat: What Deliveroo’s exit says about Southeast Asia’s delivery ceiling: WhyQ’s founders dissect Deliveroo’s Singapore exit, exposing broken B2C delivery economics and arguing sustainable growth lies in batching, higher order values, and disciplined corporate B2B infrastructure.

Space Faculty CEO Lynette Tan: Talent, not rockets, will define Singapore’s space play: Human capital is the island’s most enduring asset in space development. While technologies evolve, talent is key to navigating space challenges. Successful missions should be measured by their impact on uplifting and empowering people and talent in both the short and long term.

INTERNATIONAL

Thrive Capital reportedly invests US$1B in OpenAI: This deal was separate from a larger funding round that could total over US$100B and boost OpenAI’s valuation to US$800B. Thrive has been a long-term investor in OpenAI and is likely to join the ongoing funding round, which is closing in phases.

Jack Dorsey’s Block to cut nearly half staff citing AI impact: Dorsey wrote that AI tools are enabling a new way of working with smaller teams. The company, which owns Square, Cash App, and Tidal, has had multiple layoffs since 2024, but this is the first time it cited AI as a reason.

Coupang swings to loss as data breach weighs on Q4 results: Revenue for Q4 was US$8.8B, below the US$8.9B forecast from LSEG, and the company swung to a US$26M loss from a profit a year earlier. Active customers in Coupang’s product commerce segment rose 8% YoY to 24.6M in Q4 but fell from 24.7M the prior quarter.

Netflix pulls out of Warner Bros acquisition bid: Netflix has decided not to increase its US$82.7B all-cash bid for Warner Bros, ending its pursuit of the company. Warner Bros said Paramount made a US$31% offer, which it called a “superior proposal.”

Hong Kong to issue first stablecoin licenses in March: The government has established a licensing regime for stablecoin issuers, with regulators expected to approve initial licenses for fiat-backed stablecoins next month. It also intends to introduce legislation this year to regulate digital asset dealers and custodians.

200,000 Taiwanese accounts affected in Coupang data breach: The company commissioned external cybersecurity firms to investigate the incident, which occurred in November 2025. Coupang attributed the breach to a former employee, stating that the individual accessed the accounts without authorisation.

CYBERSECURITY

Cybersecurity is becoming the trust layer that underpins SEA’s digital economy in 2026: As Southeast Asia’s digital payments surge toward US$789 billion, cybersecurity and governance are emerging as core infrastructure, embedding trust into scalable, enterprise-ready digital ecosystems.

The trust layer: How cybersecurity became hospitality’s most valuable asset: RedDoorz argues cybersecurity is hospitality’s new trust layer, using AI responsibly, strict data controls, and security-by-design to protect guests, combat AI-driven threats, and turn safety into a competitive growth advantage.

AI as a question of national security and independence: AI security is shifting from sci-fi fears to sovereignty concerns, as Southeast Asia weighs dependence on dominant platforms against resilience, independence, and control over critical digital infrastructure and assets.

SEMICONDUCTOR

Singtel launches CoE for Applied AI with NVIDIA to accelerate enterprise adoption: Singtel and NVIDIA launch an Applied AI Centre of Excellence to accelerate enterprise deployment, combining sovereign cloud, advanced GPUs, ecosystem partners and talent development to move organisations from pilots to production securely.

Meta reportedly to lease Google AI chips in multibillion-dollar deal: The chips would be used to develop new AI models amid increased industry investment in AI infra. In December, Google reportedly pushed its Tensor Processing Units as an alternative to Nvidia’s GPUs, with TPU sales becoming a key driver of its cloud revenue.

Nvidia shares rise after Q4 revenue beats estimates: Its stock rose about 1.3% in pre-market trading on February 26 after reporting fiscal Q4 revenue of US$68.1B, surpassing analyst estimates of US$66.2B from LSEG, with a 73% YoY increase. Its data centre unit, which accounted for 91% of sales, generated US$62.3B.

AI

Responsible AI won’t scale on good intentions alone: Southeast Asia aims to scale AI responsibly through ASEAN’s voluntary governance model, but fragmented regulations, cross-border data barriers, and inclusion gaps will determine whether regional coordination delivers true, interoperable scale.

AI is now a budget line. It’s still not a profit line: Southeast Asian firms are heavily investing in AI, yet most see minimal EBIT impact, as talent gaps, integration hurdles and weak data foundations stall value capture despite rising budgets.

Everyone wants AI agents, but few have the plumbing: Nearly nine in ten Southeast Asian firms plan AI agents in 2026, but scaling remains technical, governance gaps persist, and weak operational foundations risk turning productivity ambitions into costly chaos.

Why trust is the only currency that matters in the AI era: As AI accelerates innovation, trust becomes the real growth metric. Cybersecurity, embedded by design, now determines enterprise adoption, resilience and competitive advantage in a high-speed digital economy.

Key to AI financial assistance: Removing friction: AI Financial Assistance removes friction in money decisions by delivering trusted insights, clear education, and seamless in-app guidance, empowering Southeast Asia’s mobile-first investors to act confidently and build long-term financial literacy.

The unspoken contract: Why AI can’t win our hearts until it earns our trust: Southeast Asia’s AI race is shifting from speed and convenience to trust, as startups prioritise transparency, localisation and human oversight to build culturally grounded, trustworthy systems beyond mere technical reliability.

THOUGHT LEADERSHIP

Bitcoin short squeeze wipes out US$400M in 24 hours: What comes next: Bitcoin’s rebound sparked a US$400M short squeeze, driven by crowded bearish positioning and thin liquidity, resetting leverage as traders eye resistance near US$70K and upcoming options expiry.

Architecting cyber defence: Transforming the global talent deficit into a strategic business advantage: Cybersecurity talent shortages threaten business resilience and shareholder value, demanding strategic investment, modern training, regional collaboration, and adaptive workforce development to secure long-term digital competitiveness.

Why most tokenised real estate startups in SEA fail: Tokenised real estate in Southeast Asia is faltering due to opaque listings, overpriced assets, weak governance, illiquidity, and regulatory uncertainty, undermining investor trust and long-term viability.

Fortitude for hire: Botticelli, history’s first Fractional Executive: Using Renaissance Florence as allegory, the article argues corporations hire fractional executives as high-impact specialists during crises, blending reliable core teams with visionary talent to deliver strategic resilience.

Small habits, big wins: Why reduction beats intensity in the AI era: Founders mistake inconsistency for weak discipline, but the real constraint is structural friction. AI compresses cognitive workflows, reducing switching costs and turning small idea-capture habits into compounding visibility and authority.

Why community building has replaced lean startup approach to lurk investors?: Community building has shifted from marketing afterthought to strategic core, driving product development, investor confidence, and smarter go-to-market execution through engaged users, real-time feedback, and authentic influencer participation.

Streaming the dream: How live streaming tech can increase access to brands: With billions of smartphone users globally and SEA’s surging internet penetration, live streaming commerce is transforming e-commerce through immediacy, interactivity, personalisation, and retention-driven digital engagement.

Elevating your e-commerce strategies with livestreaming and hero products: Mobile-first consumers are reshaping Asia Pacific e-commerce, favouring convenience, authenticity and value-driven content. Brands can win by building Hero SKUs, leveraging livestream commerce, and tailoring strategies to distinct shopper personas.

The post Ecosystem Roundup: From delivery’s ceiling to AI’s profit gap – Deliveroo exits, premium falters, Zetrix secures US$40M appeared first on e27.

The latest US tariff move is sending ripples through global trade flows, with Singapore’s tech ecosystem watching closely.

Under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, the US has imposed a new 10 per cent global tariff effective February 24 at 12:01 AM EST, replacing earlier IEEPA tariffs ruled illegal by the Supreme Court. On February 21, President Donald Trump announced a further increase to 15 per cent for certain countries, including Singapore, the only Southeast Asian nation facing the higher rate.

In 2025, the US recorded a US$3.6 billion trade surplus with Singapore, underscoring the complexity of bilateral flows. This means the policy shift has reintroduced uncertainty for exporters and tech companies that rely on cross-border supply chains. For a highly open economy such as Singapore, the implications of the US tariff extend beyond headline rates.

Singapore’s Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) has said it is monitoring developments closely and engaging US counterparts to clarify issues such as refunds and implementation details. Analysts have described the overall impact as “manageable,” noting that key exports such as semiconductors and pharmaceuticals remain exempt.

Still, as a global trade and re-export hub, Singapore is inherently sensitive to abrupt policy changes.

Also Read: Nvidia stumbles, crypto shivers, markets wobble: The AI reckoning begins

“Singapore’s economy can be naturally sensitive to disruptions in global trade policy, particularly when major markets introduce sudden shifts that affect cross-border flows,” said Shafiqah Abdul Samat, Principal Advisor, Trade & Customs, KPMG in Singapore.

In an email interview with e27, she added that evolving trade rules have led companies to become more cautious about making long-term investment or routing decisions.

Yet, Singapore’s structural advantages remain intact. “Its long-standing advantages–such as reliability, governance standards, logistics expertise and its established role within broader supply networks–continue to anchor its relevance,” Abdul Samat said.

In other words, while the US tariff may alter cost calculations, it does not fundamentally weaken Singapore’s position in global value chains.

Sectoral fault lines

Within Singapore’s startup ecosystem, the impact of the US tariff will likely vary by sector.

Industries that depend on intricate supply chains or specialised production — including advanced electronics, deep-tech hardware, and life sciences — could face additional cost pressures or demand fluctuations if global trade rules become less predictable.

“The effects of global trade realignment vary across sectors,” Abdul Samat noted. “Industries that depend heavily on intricate supply chains or specialised production–such as advanced electronics and life sciences–may experience added cost pressures or varying demand conditions when global policy environments become less predictable.”

Technology-intensive manufacturing and biomedical activities may need to reassess operating models, especially where US market access is central to revenue growth. Even where semiconductor tariffs are assessed as negligible for now, the 150-day window of new measures introduces short-term flux.

Also Read: Nvidia stumbles, crypto shivers, markets wobble: The AI reckoning begins

At the same time, some sectors could benefit from supply chain re-routing or from reallocation of investment. As companies diversify production bases to manage tariff exposure, Singapore’s role in high-value coordination, R&D, and regional headquarters functions could strengthen.

What founders must now factor in

For Singaporean startups expanding into the US, the US tariffs add another layer of regulatory and cost complexity.

“Startups entering large advanced markets now face a more intricate landscape shaped by evolving regulatory, administrative, and sourcing requirements,” Abdul Samat said.

Recent developments illustrate how tariff changes can influence market entry strategies, requiring adjustments to production planning, supply origin and documentation workflows. Founders will need to anticipate potential cost increases and embed tariff exposure into their financial modelling.

A key first step, she advised, is conducting “a comprehensive tariff exposure audit to identify vulnerabilities and prioritise adjustments.”

Beyond compliance, startups should look to innovate and diversify. Leveraging Singapore’s extensive network of free trade agreements can help optimise trade routes and reduce duties. Investing in digital supply chain resilience — including real-time visibility tools and AI-driven risk analytics — will also be crucial for navigating policy volatility.

Localisation and Singapore’s evolving role

Sustained tariff regimes could accelerate localisation strategies, including reshoring and the formation of regional manufacturing clusters. Trade frictions in recent years have already prompted companies to re-examine how they structure production and decision-making across geographies.

As localisation gains momentum, Singapore’s function may evolve rather than diminish.

Also Read: The trust layer: How cybersecurity became hospitality’s most valuable asset

“As companies recalibrate their global footprints, they increasingly require hubs that offer stable governance, trusted regulatory environments and highly developed service ecosystems to coordinate regionally distributed operations,” Abdul Samat said.

Singapore’s strengths in governance, compliance, digitalisation and responsible AI adoption position it as what she described as a “critical nerve centre” in more fragmented global systems.

In that sense, the US tariff may not simply be a cost shock. It could accelerate Singapore’s transition from a pure trade conduit to a high-value innovation and command centre — one that supports transparency, resilience and operational intelligence across increasingly localised networks.

For the city-state’s tech ecosystem, adaptability will be the ultimate competitive edge.

The post How the US tariff shift could reshape Singapore’s tech ecosystem appeared first on e27.

In the fast-paced world of startups, founders are trained to think lean, move fast, and scale big. But what if we told you that embedding Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) principles early on could actually accelerate your growth rather than slow you down?

The outdated notion that ESG is only for large corporations with sprawling teams and big budgets is fading fast. Today’s startups operate in a world shaped by climate risk, social inequity, shifting investor expectations, and increasingly conscious consumers. ESG isn’t a distraction—it’s a strategic lever for relevance, resilience, and revenue.

Why ESG matters more than ever

Startups are uniquely positioned to lead on ESG. Free from legacy systems and rigid hierarchies, early-stage ventures have the agility to bake ESG into their core from day one. The benefits are tangible:

• Climate risk and reputational damage don’t discriminate by company size. Startups, like giants, face mounting scrutiny over their supply chains, data privacy practices, and carbon footprints.
• Investors are watching. Even at the seed stage, venture capitalists and angel investors are increasingly screening for ESG alignment. Funds are flowing toward businesses that build for long-term impact.
• Consumers are choosing values over price. Gen Z and millennial buyers want to support brands that reflect their ethics — from how a product is made to who’s behind it.
• Efficiency is ESG’s best-kept secret. Strong ESG practices often lead to leaner operations, smarter resource use, and better risk management.

Put simply, ESG isn’t a cost centre — it’s a foundation for sustainable growth.

ESG governance: Building stronger companies from the inside out

Done right, ESG governance doesn’t just protect your business — it strengthens it from within. It prompts leadership to take the long view: to weigh impact and accountability alongside profitability.

Startups that embed ESG principles early find it easier to attract capital. Many VCs now include ESG criteria in their due diligence processes. Institutional investors are already demanding ESG metrics and so are limited partners funding those VCs.

Internally, ESG fosters culture. Younger talent wants to work at companies that walk the talk. By integrating ESG into your hiring, operations, and leadership development, you build a workplace that attracts and retains top talent.

Also Read: Are Southeast Asia’s emerging economies resilient enough to resist trade uncertainty?

And ESG inspires innovation. Some of today’s most promising startups are designing new business models altogether — from circular platforms to carbon-tracking technologies and ethical AI systems.

Research backs this up. According to the World Economic Forum, companies that prioritise ESG can increase brand value by up to 30 per cent and grow revenues by up to 20 per cent. In short: ESG is a growth strategy, not a side quest.

Materiality: Focus where it matters most

One of the biggest misconceptions about ESG is that you have to tackle everything at once. The smarter move? Focus on materiality — what’s most relevant to your business model, your stakeholders, and your long-term viability.

Materiality assessments help you zoom in on the environmental and social issues that truly matter to your context. For a fintech startup, that might mean data privacy and financial inclusion. For a food delivery app, it could be emissions, food waste, or rider well-being.

Think about your stakeholders — team, customers, investors, suppliers — and how your operations affect them. What risks might arise from ignoring environmental, social, or ethical concerns? And what opportunities exist if you lean into them?

Materiality is not a one-time exercise — it’s a strategic lens. The insights you gather should shape real decisions, from product design to supply chain partnerships and branding. A focused ESG strategy is a powerful competitive advantage.

Making ESG practical for startups

Yes, you can start ESG with limited resources — and no, it doesn’t need to be complicated.

The key is to act with intention and scale your ESG practices alongside your business. Begin with a simplified framework. Resources like the Simplified ESG Disclosure Guide for SMEs (Capital Markets Malaysia) offer step-by-step pathways for early-stage companies.

Set a few measurable goals. These could include reducing packaging waste, adopting inclusive hiring practices, or introducing a supplier code of conduct. Don’t chase perfection—aim for progress.

Use simple tracking tools. A quarterly ESG dashboard can help align your team and signal to investors that you’re taking sustainability seriously. You don’t need a full-time ESG officer — just clear ownership, consistent updates, and accountability.

Build ESG into your culture. This means embedding values like equity, transparency, and impact into everything from onboarding to marketing. When everyone in your team understands the “why” behind ESG, it becomes a shared responsibility — not a siloed function.

Also Read: Cultivating an honest culture: Why leaders should be transparent

Incentivise alignment. Consider tying ESG milestones to employee rewards or OKRs. This reinforces the idea that sustainability is how you do business, not just what you say you believe in.

Technology can amplify your ESG performance. AI can optimise logistics for emissions reductions. Blockchain can ensure traceability in supply chains. Climate data APIs and energy-monitoring tools are now accessible to even micro-startups.

The role of innovation ecosystems

Startups don’t operate in a vacuum. Accelerators, incubators, VC firms, and innovation hubs play a critical role in ESG readiness. These ecosystem actors have a unique opportunity to make sustainability mainstream.

They can integrate ESG into training, mentorship, and funding criteria. They can provide founders with access to ESG experts, reporting templates, and peer learning opportunities. And they can guide startups toward purpose-aligned capital.

Globally, networks like the UN Global Compact are offering platforms where early-stage founders can build capabilities, gain visibility, and share lessons. Being part of these communities helps demystify ESG and turn it into an asset, not an obstacle.

Overcoming common challenges

Yes, startups face constraints. Budget, bandwidth, and burn rate are constant concerns. But ESG isn’t about doing everything — it’s about doing the right things, consistently.

Pick 2–3 priorities that fit your sector, market, and maturity stage. Build ESG into your growth roadmap the same way you’d build in product iteration or customer acquisition. Make use of partnerships — with universities, NGOs, accelerators, or ESG consultants — to fill expertise gaps.

And perhaps most importantly: start now. ESG maturity is a journey. The earlier you begin, the easier it becomes to scale impact alongside profit.

Also Read: ESG empowerment: Fueling Malaysia’s SMEs for a sustainable future

ESG as a launchpad for innovation

Sustainability doesn’t limit creativity — it fuels it. ESG forces entrepreneurs to ask better questions: What if our product was zero waste? What if our platform helped underserved communities? What if we could scale impact without scaling harm?

Across industries, we’re seeing startups disrupt markets through ESG-driven models. Think plant-based alternatives in food tech, clean energy in logistics, or decentralised finance for inclusion. ESG is where global problems meet entrepreneurial imagination.

Investors are paying attention. Consumers are voting with their wallets. And the next wave of unicorns will be those that solve not only for demand, but for dignity, equity, and regeneration.

Conclusion: ESG is not a sideshow, it’s the strategy

For today’s startups, ESG isn’t a marketing gimmick or a compliance burden. It’s a mindset and model for building companies that last.

The businesses that will thrive tomorrow are those that align purpose with performance, embed responsibility into their growth DNA, and lead with values that match the world’s urgent needs.

You don’t need to have it all figured out. But you do need to start — early, intentionally, and strategically.

Because in the startup world, ESG isn’t a luxury — it’s your edge.

—

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

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

Image courtesy: Canva Pro

The post Why investors and customers are betting on ESG-aligned startups appeared first on e27.

Last week’s Science editorial warned that “>80 per cent of voluntary carbon credits may be junk” — a claim that instantly reignited calls for tougher third-party audits.

Pinning the offset-integrity crisis on conflicted auditors, however, risks repeating an old mistake. The deeper problem is a maze of sprawling methodologies that even the sharpest audit cannot untangle—tightening the screws could simply price developing-country projects out of the market while leaving root-cause “baseline bloat” intact.

2008 déjà vu: When “clean” audits masked a crisis

Even the most reputable audit firms can miss systemic red flags. By April 2010, 73 per cent of the mortgage-backed securities Moody’s had stamped triple-A in 2006 had been downgraded to junk.

Lehman Brothers is the cautionary emblem. Ernst & Young issued an unqualified opinion on Lehman’s 2007 accounts, yet a court-appointed examiner later showed the bank used “Repo 105” manoeuvres to park roughly US$50 billion off its balance-sheet.

Polished audit reports can therefore coexist with colossal mis-measurement. Doubling down on checklist-heavy carbon audits—without fixing the rules that invite gamesmanship—risks replaying that movie in the climate market.

Also Read: How to scale voluntary carbon markets with DeFi and Web3

Methodology bloat: Too many rulebooks, too much wiggle room

Carbon markets don’t suffer from a shortage of auditors; they suffer from a proliferation of rulebooks.

• The Integrity Council has grouped 100 + methodologies into 29 categories for assessment under its Core Carbon Principles.
• Independent rater BeZero says its analysts have reviewed 70 + different methodologies across 300 projects.
• Verra’s digital-transition push added two more digitalised methodologies in June 2025, bringing the total to 20.

This sprawl invites baseline-shopping. A 2024 Nature Communications study found that uncertainty in common deforestation baselines routinely exceeds the 15 per cent margin allowed by registries, letting developers cherry-pick scenarios that maximise credits.

When every cook-stove or forestry project comes with its own bespoke spreadsheet, even an honest auditor can mis-size the carbon pie. The cure is not an army of pricier verifiers—it’s a lean, satellite-anchored set of baselines that leaves less room for creative accounting.

Tolerance bands and developing-country access

High integrity now carries a steep entry fee. Tier-1 credits sold at a 65 per cent premium to Tier-3 units in H1 2025.

Verra’s revised schedule front-loads US$5 000 in verification-review fees (US$2 500 non-refundable) and levies US$0.23 per credit on issuance, plus US$0.02 on every transfer.

Those costs bite hardest in developing countries, like Kenya’s cook-stove roll-outs, REDD+ corridors in Brazil, and peatland projects in Indonesia. An LSE Grantham report shows MRV alone can swallow 50–73 per cent of total project costs for some carbon-removal methods. Abatable’s latest field analysis finds high-quality cook-stove offsets need US$15–39 / tCO₂e just to break even—well above many spot bids for avoidance credits.

Insisting every issuer clear a “Tier-1-or-bust” bar could drain the pipeline that channels climate finance into rural cook-stoves, agro-forestry, and peatland restoration across the developing world. A calibrated tolerance band—allowing transparently disclosed, lower-rated credits within clear limits—keeps liquidity alive while the rulebook is slimmed.

Also Read: How a data-driven approach can optimise decarbonisation in the built environment

Re-Engineering oversight: Lean rules, tech MRV, smarter audits

• Slim the rulebook: When financial disclosure got unwieldy, the IASB issued IFRS 19 Subsidiaries without Public Accountability: Disclosures to cut the clutter. Carbon registries should likewise merge today’s 100-plus methodologies into a handful of satellite-anchored baselines.
• Swap clipboards for constellations: Norway’s NICFI programme now provides free 4-m monthly imagery of the entire tropical belt, making tamper-proof baselines possible at zero licensing cost. In Vietnam, an IRRI-led low-emission rice pilot couples that imagery with drone sampling to cut methane-MRV costs by roughly twenty-fold versus field surveys.
• Break the pay-to-play audit model: EU rules already force audit-firm rotation for public-interest entities after ten years. A registry-run, lottery-assigned auditor pool funded by a <1 per cent levy on issuances would sever fee ties even in the voluntary market—an approach inspired by a randomised audit experiment in India that cut mis-reporting by up to 80 per cent.

Conclusion

Carbon finance doesn’t need more paperwork; it needs simpler rules, cheaper truth-telling, and incentives that travel. The IASB’s IFRS 19 shows how lean disclosure can still satisfy investors; satellite MRV and open imagery have already slashed monitoring costs; and a lottery-funded auditor pool can end pay-to-play conflicts without waiting for a UN treaty.

What buyers and registries can do next:

• Demand lean baselines. Make satellite-anchored defaults the norm and retire duplicative methodologies. This might not work for every project, but should be used as a standard.
• Fund the auditor pool. Earmark ≤ 1 per cent of every issuance to pay independent, randomly assigned auditors.
• Keep a tolerance band. Cap mid-grade credits of any portfolio to keep liquidity flowing to developing-country projects while rules are streamlined.
• Publish open MRV data. Require registries to release geospatial layers and audit outcomes for crowd-sourced oversight.

Do this, and hopefully the voluntary carbon market can deliver both integrity and inclusion—funding cook-stoves in Kenya, peatlands in Indonesia, and mangroves in Brazil—without repeating the blind-spot audit culture that helped sink Wall Street in 2008.

You can also find me on my podcast and newsletter, where I share regular insights on geopolitics and leadership.

—

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

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

Image courtesy: Canva Pro

The post Why perfect carbon audits could cripple climate finance — and what to fix instead appeared first on e27.