Airwallex has exposed the truth about global payments.

This article is machine translated

Show original

Author: Gang Ge

After the previous article was published, many people sent me private messages, and the questions mainly fell into the following categories:

"This platform looks similar, is it reliable?"

"Wouldn't digital currency payments be less complicated?"

"Is it necessary for Airwallex to make its payment system so complex?"

To answer these questions, you can take a look at the popular article " The Most Difficult Road is the Way Out: A Panoramic View of Global Payment Infrastructure " published by Airwallex founder Jack Zhang on the official Weibo account and X.com (formerly Twitter).

Figure 1. Jack Zhang's original tweet.

This article not only explains why Airwallex chose the "asset-heavy" path, but also exposes a long-standing, unspoken problem in the global payments industry.

So what exactly did he say? Let me tell you.

[2966 words in total, estimated reading time: 10 minutes]

01. Homogeneous surface, differentiated underlying structure

When choosing a payment platform, corporate clients are often confused by one question: several payment companies they consult seem to have similar capabilities.

For example, hundreds of payment companies around the world use similar rhetoric to introduce their products: instant payment, global coverage, and service to modern enterprises. Even their functions and interfaces are becoming increasingly similar.

Everyone has global acquiring: by connecting to a packaged Visa/MasterCard channel, you can claim to "support 200+ countries and regions worldwide";

Everyone has a global account: by partnering with several banks, you can say "one account for global payments, covering 20+ mainstream currencies".

The problem is that while their surface functions are becoming increasingly similar, their underlying capabilities are vastly different.

Figure 2. Surface homogeneity cannot conceal the huge differences in the underlying layers.

Users cannot see the real differences between platforms in the product introduction, which is why they repeatedly nitpick with payment institutions about costs, backgrounds, licenses, and risks.

Ultimately, what enterprise clients really care about is not just the access experience, but the stability of their funding channels, the robustness of their compliance system, and their ability to successfully expand their business after entering a new market.

Therefore, to determine whether a payment platform is reliable, you cannot just look at what the front end looks like. You should also see whether the platform keeps the complexity to itself or passes it on to the customer.

02 Three Paths to Global Payments

Now that the front-end team has a clear understanding of the core capabilities, it is necessary to go back to the bottom layer and break down the common paths in this industry.

If you break down the mainstream players in the industry, there are roughly three paths.

Figure 3. Three diverging paths in the evolution of global payments

2.1 The first path: bypassing traditional links

The first option: Web3 digital currency payments

The common narrative along this path is the same: stablecoins, on-chain settlement, programmable payments, and peer-to-peer payments. Compared to traditional payments, these offer shorter paths, faster speeds, and lower costs; and they aim to penetrate the consumer retail market through a story of small, high-frequency transactions.

However, you'll find that very few players have emerged from this path of digital currency payments.

The core reason is not that this approach is inefficient, but rather that new players have no competitive advantage in the face of mainstream payment platforms, and too many compliance issues are difficult to resolve in the short term .

Figure 4. First Path: On-chain Settlement Bypassing Traditional Links

Today, mainstream global payment platforms not only possess global payment networks, but also deeply integrate into the local ecosystems of various countries, building operational teams and forming comprehensive advantages over digital currency payments in terms of technology, service, compliance, and products.

Technical aspects: Global payments arrive instantly; merchant settlement to card D1/D0 options available;
Service aspect: The payment cost is not high due to intense competition, and the mature local operation team provides services to customers to the last mile;
From a compliance perspective: various jurisdictions have consistently questioned its compliance, resulting in significant compliance friction.
At the product level: mainstream payment platforms also focus on stablecoin payments. As long as compliance policies are implemented, products can be integrated and replaced at any time.

Therefore, new players who take this path will find that the only options left are fragmented markets that mainstream payment institutions are unwilling to serve, and gray and black market clients that they dare not serve .

This is also why many people who dreamed of starting a business with Web3 payments ultimately had to give up in disappointment.

2.2 The Second Path: Repackaging Traditional Infrastructure

This is the most common path in the industry: relying on partners and intermediaries to repackage the complex and outdated underlying architecture, and then using better product experiences and faster marketing to drive market expansion.

The advantages of this path are also obvious: it is quick to produce results, quick to expand business, and quick to cover and expand coverage, so it will naturally become the choice of most players.

The problem is that it focuses more on optimizing the front end than rewriting the underlying layer.

Jack Zhang's assessment of this point is straightforward: the core issues have not changed; the agency chain, bilateral cooperation relationships, and compliance dependence risks are all still there.

He also believes that "good-looking interfaces are already standard, but they cannot shake the underlying operating logic of global payments."

Figure 5. Second Path: Aggregator Gateway Packaged Infrastructure

In fact, Stripe, the company with the fastest market capitalization growth in the world, had its acquisition of Airwallex rejected in 2019, and was rumored to be acquiring PayPal in 2026 (which was also ultimately rejected).

This at least illustrates one point: even international payment giants that have grown rapidly by relying on "technology + asset-light connectivity" will eventually have to go back and learn about infrastructure.

Often, a road that appears to be lighter doesn't mean it doesn't require infrastructure; it simply means that infrastructure construction has been postponed .

2.3 The Third Path: Building Our Own Global Financial Infrastructure

This is also the path chosen by companies like Airwallex, Ant International, Pingpong, and Lianlian International : obtain licenses in the jurisdictions where their business covers, conduct localized operations locally, maintain regular communication with regulators, and keep compliance, technology, and underlying networks in their own hands as much as possible.

This path is the most difficult because there are almost no shortcuts. It requires sustained high investment, a longer timeframe, and also means heavier responsibilities.

However, Airwallex is more resolute in this regard , developing its own full-stack infrastructure and never using agents or intermediaries for transfers.

This means that it is necessary to spend a lot of money to obtain licenses around the world, and as a licensed entity, maintain in-depth communication with local regulators, continuously connect with local compliance agencies, build local teams, and serve customers to the last mile.

Figure 6. The Third Path: Building Global Infrastructure Independently

This kind of heavy asset investment will obviously make many people think it's "not smart enough." But who wouldn't want to take a shortcut? It's just a matter of what value you want to provide to your clients. If the underlying capabilities are still in the hands of others, ultimately, it's the clients who bear the uncertainty.

03 The platform's "heavy" nature is exchanged for the customer's "light" nature.

For companies going global, the most expensive thing is never a payment processing fee, but the financial risks that are invisible in normal times but are the most fatal when problems arise.

For example, a market that has already been successfully established may suddenly have its bank account frozen; a customer may have already paid for the goods, but the funds are stuck halfway by the agent and cannot be credited to the account for a long time; when regulatory rules are upgraded, additional materials, additional deposits, and additional procedures must be completed.

These problems may not occur every day, but just one occurrence is enough to disrupt a company's rhythm.

Figure 7: The platform's "heavy" approach replaces the customer's "light" approach.

Therefore, building a solid infrastructure is essentially about keeping as much of the complexity as possible within your own system as possible, so as to exchange your own "heavy" infrastructure for your customers' "light" infrastructure.

04 What did the customer really get?

Corporate clients are very pragmatic; they don't buy concepts, but rather the value they can gain. In the cross-border payment field, this value boils down to three things: greater stability, lower costs, and greater certainty.

Figure 8. The real value that enterprise customers need

It is more stable because companies do not need to adapt to a new set of partnerships every time they enter a new market.
It saves more than just transaction fees; it eliminates a significant amount of redundant system construction costs, communication costs, and compliance costs.
This is because when the market environment changes and regulations tighten, customers rely not on a temporary, cobbled-together channel, but on a more complete, durable, and sustainable underlying capability.

This is why Airwallex's growth logic is more like compound interest than explosive growth.

Figure 9. Compound growth brought about by infrastructure investment

According to publicly available information, it took Airwallex nine years to achieve $500 million in annualized revenue (ARR), but only one year to go from $500 million to $1 billion. The initial "slowness" was not inefficiency, but rather the accumulation of underlying potential energy for the subsequent acceleration.

05. In conclusion

Returning to the initial question, why did Airwallex build its own global financial infrastructure?

Because the most difficult part is precisely the part that cannot be outsourced, is most worthy of long-term investment, and can create the most value for clients .

Figure 10. Underlying capabilities are the real watershed.

For corporate clients, choosing a global payment platform is essentially choosing a long-term partner who can help them manage complexity and provide a more stable foundation for their business.

For the global payments industry, shortcuts can help you run faster, but only by making the most difficult parts your own capabilities can you go further.

[Reference Materials]

[1] Airwallex's official Weibo post: The difficult road is the only way out.

https://www.airwallex.com/cn/blog/the-path-of-max-resistance-the-spectrum-of-global-payments-infrastructure

[2] Airwallex official Weibo post: The last mile of global payments

https://www.airwallex.com/cn/blog/the-last-mile-of-global-payments

[3] Sina: Reshaping the Future of the Financial Industry

https://finance.sina.com.cn/cj/2025-10-11/doc-inftnpwr8889861.shtml

Source

Disclaimer: The content above is only the author's opinion which does not represent any position of Followin, and is not intended as, and shall not be understood or construed as, investment advice from Followin.

Add to Favorites

Comments

Relevant content