3 post-COVID-19 fintech trends you should know about

Iwo Hachulski

29 Jun 2020
3 post-COVID-19 fintech trends you should know about

It is no doubt that fintech has been gradually implementing successive stages of the revolution in the banking services sector. The main beneficiaries of this state of affairs are, apart from fintech itself, consumers. Traditional banking adopts various strategies regarding the existing status quo, some banks, including Santander, are constantly investing heavily in the most promising fintech startups in order to then implement their solutions for their customers. Others - try to create their own unique products, which are then implemented by other players in the market. One of the best examples here is Bank PKO BP and the contactless payment system BLIK developed by the bank's IT department. The constantly ongoing time of the epidemic has changed many behaviors and habits. What mark has COVID-19 left on the modern financial services sector, a popular fintech? What prospects should we expect from a full opening of economies in a global context?

Extraordinary times require extraordinary solutions

Revaluation of priorities - this is probably the simplest and most rational way to describe the changes introduced by the coronavirus in our lives. Sanitary restrictions have forced the financial sector, like many others, to a new opening - and a look into the future from a completely different perspective. The need for full mobility introduced along with the full compatibility of the solutions used became, within a few weeks, a determinant of the effectiveness of the adaptation of both traditional banking and the fintech giants. 

However, it would be unfair to put them next to each other in this context - mainly due to the fact that it was not so much an unimaginable challenge for fintech to move almost 100 percent of their business into the digital world. This state of affairs is primarily due to the fact that the vast majority (and very often 100%) of fintech services offered within the framework of retail banking, for example, are available only online. The vast majority of them have decided on such a business model from the very beginning - on the one hand, they have focused on reducing the costs of running branches together with minimizing fixed costs and, as a result, full mobility, and on the other hand, they have often closed themselves off to clients currently almost exclusively connected with traditional banking. However, such a strategy has brought the expected results. Fintechs, although also often forced to make cuts - among others, Revolut announced the introduction of restrictions in the cheapest plan offered to customers and numerous layoffs in the Polish branch of the company - usually did not have to face the complicated task of transferring several thousand employees into remote operation almost overnight. Thus, they were able to focus on introducing specific solutions offered to their clients instead of dealing with their internal problems in the first place. For example, Starling Bank launched the "combined card" function, which enables the transfer of a second, "back-up" debit card linked to the customer's account to someone who can spend on their behalf. A team of developers from Fronted, Credit Kudos and 11:FS created Covid Credit for the self-employed, allowing access to financial aid for the most vulnerable people who are not covered by government support. A significant role is also slowly being played by fintech software houses, which offer IT services using the latest Fintech solutions such as Blockchain or AI.

Mobility and security above all

Due to health restrictions and recommendations, the volume of both card and phone payments increased slightly, for instance, in India it was about 5%. According to many experts in banking and social psychology, such a trend may last longer. According to the Mordor Intelligence report "Mobile Payments Market - Growth, Trends, and Forecast" (2020-2025) The use of m-payments will continue to grow strongly with an annual cumulative growth rate of as much as 26.93%. In Central Europe, this is mainly due to the still very young banking system, often developed from scratch only in the 1990s. For this reason, many behaviors are not so deeply rooted in society, which is thus much more susceptible to all kinds of innovation.

Another element that is hard not to mention is budgeting apps, i.e. applications for planning and controlling the budget. Although their popularity in Poland and other Central European countries is not as impressive as in the United States, this may gradually change due to the inevitable economic crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic. Full control over one's own budget due to the difficult social and economic situation will undoubtedly become one of the priorities - thus bringing the possibility of a structured review of one's own spending to the fore. The applications differ in many ways, so that everyone can find something for themselves. Mint automatically categorizes transactions from credit and debit cards connected to the system and tracks them against a budget that can be adjusted and adapted to user's needs. Goodbudget, on the other hand, is mainly dedicated to couples - it is possible to share and fully synchronize the budget with another person in both iOS and Android.

Tandem and natural competition

Despite all the turmoil, the post-pandemic outlook for the coming months seems stable, although not as promising as previously expected. According to Ron Shevlin, Managing Director of Fintech Research at Cornerstone Advisors, the era of fintech experimentation is slowly coming to an end. The indicators that will gain in importance are primarily the number of accounts funded and their percentage in relation to the total number of application downloads. In his opinion, in the case of mainly B2B-oriented fintechs, the crucial benchmarks will be more operational, such as improved speed, cycle time and lower costs.

Moreover, there is a large disparity within the banking sector environment itself. There is continued optimism among the largest fintechs. By February 2020, Revolut already had less than 11 million users. According to the owners' forecasts, the number of users is expected to reach 13.07 million by the end of June, and then increase by about 20%, to reach 16.45 million by December 2020. The second largest player, N26, has already exceeded 5 million users in January, thus maintaining almost exponential growth and significantly exceeding the company's forecasts.

The situation is different for traditional banks, whose financial situation has often deteriorated. According to analyses of the International Monetary Fund, in addition to the immediate challenges posed by the COVID-19 outbreak, the relentless period of low interest rates may put further pressure on bank profitability in the forthcoming years. This may be a cause for concern, mainly due to the fact that it is the constant development of both traditional and modern banking that may be the key to recover from the crisis. A unique banking tandem also guarantees a greater choice of available services for the customer, and thus more competition and increased innovation in the fight for each costumer. 

What is more, smaller fintechs also face considerable problems. According to the latest CB Insights report, the value of contracts signed by fintech in Q1 2020 decreased by as much as 35% compared to Q4 2019. Better-invested and profitable fintechs are in a much better position, especially in the context of depletion of investment funds and hence increased competition in the fight for any funds for further development. The problems of some may paradoxically become a pain for others, thus worsening the situation of the sector and, consequently, often of the entire economy. 

Most viewed


Never miss a story

Stay updated about Nextrope news as it happens.

You are subscribed

What is Berachain? 🐻 ⛓️ + Proof-of-Liquidity Explained

Karolina

18 Mar 2024
What is Berachain? 🐻 ⛓️ + Proof-of-Liquidity Explained

Enter Berachain: a high-performance, EVM-compatible blockchain that is set to redefine the landscape of decentralized applications (dApps) and blockchain services. Built on the innovative Proof-of-Liquidity consensus and leveraging the robust Polaris framework alongside the CometBFT consensus engine, Berachain is poised to offer an unprecedented blend of efficiency, security, and user-centric benefits. Let's dive into what makes it a groundbreaking development in the blockchain ecosystem.

What is Berachain?

Overview

Berachain is an EVM-compatible Layer 1 (L1) blockchain that stands out through its adoption of the Proof-of-Liquidity (PoL) consensus mechanism. Designed to address the critical challenges faced by decentralized networks. It introduces a cutting-edge approach to blockchain governance and operations.

Key Features

  • High-performance Capabilities. Berachain is engineered for speed and scalability, catering to the growing demand for efficient blockchain solutions.
  • EVM Compatibility. It supports all Ethereum tooling, operations, and smart contract languages, making it a seamless transition for developers and projects from the Ethereum ecosystem.
  • Proof-of-Liquidity.This novel consensus mechanism focuses on building liquidity, decentralizing stake, and aligning the interests of validators and protocol developers.

MUST READ: Docs

EVM-Compatible vs EVM-Equivalent

EVM-Compatible

EVM compatibility means a blockchain can interact with Ethereum's ecosystem to some extent. It can interact supporting its smart contracts and tools but not replicating the entire EVM environment.

EVM-Equivalent

An EVM-equivalent blockchain, on the other hand, aims to fully replicate Ethereum's environment. It ensures complete compatibility and a smooth transition for developers and users alike.

Berachain's Position

Berachain can be considered an "EVM-equivalent-plus" blockchain. It supports all Ethereum operations, tooling, and additional functionalities that optimize for its unique Proof-of-Liquidity and abstracted use cases.

Berachain Modular First Approach

At the heart of Berachain's development philosophy is the Polaris EVM framework. It's a testament to the blockchain's commitment to modularity and flexibility. This approach allows for the easy separation of the EVM runtime layer, ensuring that Berachain can adapt and evolve without compromising on performance or security.

Proof Of Liquidity Overview

High-Level Model Objectives

  • Systemically Build Liquidity. By enhancing trading efficiency, price stability, and network growth, Berachain aims to foster a thriving ecosystem of decentralized applications.
  • Solve Stake Centralization. The PoL consensus works to distribute stake more evenly across the network, preventing monopolization and ensuring a decentralized, secure blockchain.
  • Align Protocols and Validators. Berachain encourages a symbiotic relationship between validators and the broader protocol ecosystem.

Proof-of-Liquidity vs Proof-of-Stake

Unlike traditional Proof of Stake (PoS), which often leads to stake centralization and reduced liquidity, Proof of Liquidity (PoL) introduces mechanisms to incentivize liquidity provision and ensure a fairer, more decentralized network. Berachain separates the governance token (BGT) from the chain's gas token (BERA) and incentives liquidity through BEX pools. Berachain's PoL aims to overcome the limitations of PoS, fostering a more secure and user-centric blockchain.

Berachain EVM and Modular Approach

Polaris EVM

Polaris EVM is the cornerstone of Berachain's EVM compatibility, offering developers an enhanced environment for smart contract execution that includes stateful precompiles and custom modules. This framework ensures that Berachain not only meets but exceeds the capabilities of the traditional Ethereum Virtual Machine.

CometBFT

The CometBFT consensus engine underpins Berachain's network, providing a secure and efficient mechanism for transaction verification and block production. By leveraging the principles of Byzantine fault tolerance (BFT), CometBFT ensures the integrity and resilience of the Berachain blockchain.

Conclusion

Berachain represents a significant leap forward in blockchain technology, combining the best of Ethereum's ecosystem with innovative consensus mechanisms and a modular development approach. As the blockchain landscape continues to evolve, Berachain stands out as a promising platform for developers, users, and validators alike, offering a scalable, efficient, and inclusive environment for decentralized applications and services.

Resources

For those interested in exploring further, a wealth of resources is available, including the Berachain documentation, GitHub repository, and community forums. It offers a compelling vision for the future of blockchain technology, marked by efficiency, security, and community-driven innovation.

FAQ

How is Berachain different?

  • It integrates Proof-of-Liquidity to address stake centralization and enhance liquidity, setting it apart from other blockchains.

Is Berachain EVM-compatible?

  • Yes, it supports Ethereum's tooling and smart contract languages, facilitating easy migration of dApps.

Can it handle high transaction volumes?

  • Yes, thanks to the Polaris framework and CometBFT consensus engine, it's built for scalability and high throughput.

Different Token Release Schedules

Kajetan Olas

15 Mar 2024
Different Token Release Schedules

As simple as it may sound, the decision on the release schedule of tokens is anything but that. It's a strategic choice that can have significant consequences. A well-thought-out token release schedule can prevent market flooding, encourage steady growth, and foster trust in the project. Conversely, a poorly designed schedule may lead to rapid devaluation or loss of investor confidence.

In this article, we will explore the various token release schedules that blockchain projects may adopt. Each type comes with its own set of characteristics, challenges, and strategic benefits. From the straightforwardness of linear schedules to the incentive-driven dynamic releases, understanding these mechanisms is crucial for all crypto founders.

Linear Token Release Schedule

The linear token release schedule is perhaps the most straightforward approach to token distribution. As the name suggests, tokens are released at a constant rate over a specified period until all tokens are fully vested. This approach is favored for its simplicity and ease of understanding, which can be an attractive feature for investors and project teams alike.

Characteristics

  • Predictability: The linear model provides a clear and predictable schedule that stakeholders can rely on. This transparency is often appreciated as it removes any uncertainty regarding when tokens will be available.
  • Implementation Simplicity: With no complex rules or conditions, a linear release schedule is relatively easy to implement and manage. It avoids the need for intricate smart contract programming or ongoing adjustments.
  • Neutral Incentives: There is no explicit incentive for early investment or late participation. Each stakeholder is treated equally, regardless of when they enter the project. This can be perceived as a fair distribution method, as it does not disproportionately reward any particular group.

Implications

  • Capital Dilution Risk: Since tokens are released continuously at the same rate, there's a potential risk that the influx of new tokens into the market could dilute the value, particularly if demand doesn't keep pace with the supply.
  • Attracting Continuous Capital Inflow: A linear schedule may face challenges in attracting new investors over time. Without the incentive of increasing rewards or scarcity over time, sustaining investor interest solely based on project performance can be a test of the project's inherent value and market demand.
  • Neutral Impact on Project Commitment: The lack of timing-based incentives means that commitment to the project may not be influenced by the release schedule. The focus is instead placed on the project's progress and delivery on its roadmap.

In summary, a linear token release schedule offers a no-frills, equal-footing approach to token distribution. While its simplicity is a strength, it can also be a limitation, lacking the strategic incentives that other models offer. In the next sections, we will compare this to other, more dynamic schedules that aim to provide additional strategic advantages.

Growing Token Release Schedule

A growing token release schedule turns the dial up on token distribution as time progresses. This schedule is designed to increase the number of tokens released to the market or to stakeholders with each passing period. This approach can often be associated with incentivizing the sustained growth of the project by rewarding long-term holders.

Characteristics

  • Incentivized Patience: A growing token release schedule encourages stakeholders to remain invested in the project for longer periods, as the reward increases over time. This can be particularly appealing to long-term investors who are looking to maximize their gains.
  • Community Reaction: Such a schedule may draw criticism from those who prefer immediate, high rewards and may be viewed as unfairly penalizing early adopters who receive fewer tokens compared to those who join later. The challenge is to balance the narrative to maintain community support.
  • Delayed Advantage: There is a delayed gratification aspect to this schedule. Early investors might not see an immediate substantial benefit, but they are part of a strategy that aims to increase value over time, aligning with the project’s growth.

Implications

  • Sustained Capital Inflow: By offering higher rewards later, a project can potentially sustain and even increase its capital inflow as the project matures. This can be especially useful in supporting long-term development and operational goals.
  • Potential for Late-Stage Interest: As the reward for holding tokens grows over time, it may attract new investors down the line, drawn by the prospect of higher yields. This can help to maintain a steady interest in the project throughout its lifecycle.
  • Balancing Perception and Reality: Managing the community's expectations is vital. The notion that early participants are at a disadvantage must be addressed through clear communication about the long-term vision and benefits.

In contrast to a linear schedule, a growing token release schedule adds a strategic twist that favors the longevity of stakeholder engagement. It's a model that can create a solid foundation for future growth but requires careful communication and management to keep stakeholders satisfied. Up next, we will look at the shrinking token release schedule, which applies an opposite approach to distribution.

Shrinking Token Release Schedule

The shrinking token release schedule is characterized by a decrease in the number of tokens released as time goes on. This type of schedule is intended to create a sense of urgency and reward early participants with higher initial payouts.

Characteristics

  • Early Bird Incentives: The shrinking schedule is crafted to reward the earliest adopters the most, offering them a larger share of tokens initially. This creates a compelling case for getting involved early in the project's lifecycle.
  • Fear of Missing Out (FOMO): This approach capitalizes on the FOMO effect, incentivizing potential investors to buy in early to maximize their rewards before the release rate decreases.
  • Decreased Inflation Over Time: As fewer tokens are released into circulation later on, the potential inflationary pressure on the token's value is reduced. This can be an attractive feature for investors concerned about long-term value erosion.

Implications

  • Stimulating Early Adoption: By offering more tokens earlier, projects may see a surge in initial capital inflow, providing the necessary funds to kickstart development and fuel early-stage growth.
  • Risk of Decreased Late-Stage Incentives: As the reward diminishes over time, there's a risk that new investors may be less inclined to participate, potentially impacting the project's ability to attract capital in its later stages.
  • Market Perception and Price Dynamics: The market must understand that the shrinking release rate is a deliberate strategy to encourage early investment and sustain the token's value over time. However, this can lead to challenges in maintaining interest as the release rate slows, requiring additional value propositions.

A shrinking token release schedule offers an interesting dynamic for projects seeking to capitalize on early market excitement. While it can generate significant early support, the challenge lies in maintaining momentum as the reward potential decreases. This necessitates a robust project foundation and continued delivery of milestones to retain stakeholder interest.

Dynamic Token Release Schedule

A dynamic token release schedule represents a flexible and adaptive approach to token distribution. Unlike static models, this schedule can adjust the rate of token release based on specific criteria. Example criteria are: project’s milestones, market conditions, or the behavior of token holders. This responsiveness is designed to offer a balanced strategy that can react to the project's needs in real-time.

Characteristics

  • Adaptability: The most significant advantage of a dynamic schedule is its ability to adapt to changing circumstances. This can include varying the release rate to match market demand, project development stages, or other critical factors.
  • Risk Management: By adjusting the flow of tokens in response to market conditions, a dynamic schedule can help mitigate certain risks. For example: inflation, token price volatility, and the impact of market manipulation.
  • Stakeholder Alignment: This schedule can be structured to align incentives with the project's goals. This means rewarding behaviors that contribute to project's longevity, such as holding tokens for certain periods or participating in governance.

Implications

  • Balancing Supply and Demand: A dynamic token release can fine-tune the supply to match demand, aiming to stabilize the token price. This can be particularly effective in avoiding the boom-and-bust cycles that plague many cryptocurrency projects.
  • Investor Engagement: The flexibility of a dynamic schedule keeps investors engaged, as the potential for reward can change in line with project milestones and success markers, maintaining a sense of involvement and investment in the project’s progression.
  • Complexity and Communication: The intricate nature of a dynamic schedule requires clear and transparent communication with stakeholders to ensure understanding of the system. The complexity also demands robust technical implementation to execute the varying release strategies effectively.

Dynamic token release schedule is a sophisticated tool that, when used judiciously, offers great flexibility in navigating unpredictable crypto markets. It requires a careful balance of anticipation, reaction, and communication but also gives opportunity to foster project’s growth.

Conclusion

A linear token release schedule is the epitome of simplicity and fairness, offering a steady and predictable path. The growing schedule promotes long-term investment and project loyalty, potentially leading to sustained growth. In contrast, the shrinking schedule seeks to capitalize on the enthusiasm of early adopters, fostering a vibrant initial ecosystem. Lastly, the dynamic schedule stands out for its intelligent adaptability, aiming to strike a balance between various stakeholder interests and market forces.

The choice of token release schedule should not be made in isolation; it must consider the project's goals, the nature of its community, the volatility of the market, and the overarching vision of the creators.

FAQ

What are the different token release schedules?

  • Linear, growing, shrinking, and dynamic schedules.

How does a linear token release schedule work?

  • Releases tokens at a constant rate over a specified period.

What is the goal of a shrinking token release schedule?

  • Rewards early adopters with more tokens and decreases over time.