State-owned Oschadbank issued 3.3 billion UAH in loans to microbusinesses from January through June 2026, which is 37% more than during the same period last year, the financial institution reported on its website.
It is noted that the number of loans issued rose by 27% to 2,596.
Oschadbank’s microbusiness loan portfolio has grown by nearly 20% since the beginning of the year and exceeded 7.6 billion hryvnias.
During the first half of the year, the bank processed 2,799 applications from microbusiness representatives.
As part of its cooperation with the Fund for Partial Guarantees of Agricultural Loans, Oschadbank issued 313 microloans to agricultural producers during this period under portfolio guarantees totaling 459.8 million UAH.
According to the National Bank, as of July 1, 2026, Oschadbank, with total assets of 518.87 billion hryvnias, ranked second among Ukraine’s 59 banks. The bank’s total loan portfolio grew by 6.7% in the first half of the year, reaching 136.83 billion hryvnias.
agricultural producer, BANK, LOAN, microbusiness, OSCHADBANK
According to Fixygen, the standoff between traditional banks and cryptocurrencies is gradually changing in nature: the largest financial institutions are no longer trying to prove that they don’t need blockchain; instead, they are beginning to migrate bank deposits and payments to the very same technological infrastructure on which stablecoins operate.
One of the most significant developments in August was the creation of the BankChain Alliance in the U.S., which brought together banking associations from 39 states. The project aims to create a banking blockchain network by 2027 that will be capable of supporting tokenized deposits, stablecoins, automated settlements, and programmable payments.
In effect, small and regional U.S. banks are trying to develop their own alternative to cryptocurrency payment infrastructure, rather than ceding this market to Circle, Coinbase, and tech companies.
Major banks are moving in the same direction.
On August 4, Wells Fargo announced the launch of tokenized deposits for corporate clients. These funds are bank money recorded on the blockchain and enable round-the-clock settlements, including on weekends. The first phase involves transactions between the U.S. dollar and the British pound, and by 2027, the bank intends to expand its geographic reach and list of currencies.
The fundamental difference between a tokenized deposit and USDC or USDT lies in who the issuer is.
In the case of a traditional stablecoin, the customer holds a digital claim against a specialized issuer. In the case of a tokenized deposit, the customer still holds a bank deposit, but the infrastructure for managing it is blockchain-based.
Therefore, banks are essentially telling the crypto industry: we accept the technology, but we want to keep the money within the banking system.
Payment systems have gone even further.
Visa reported that its annual volume of transactions in stablecoins reached approximately $7 billion, and in the Central and Eastern Europe, Middle East, and Africa (CEE) region, the volume of such transactions increased nearly 60-fold over the year. The company is already developing more than 160 card programs linked to stablecoins.
In July, Visa launched a dedicated platform, the Visa Stablecoin Platform, through which banks, fintech companies, and payment providers will be able to work with stablecoins within a unified infrastructure. In August, the company also expanded Visa Direct to include the ability to make payments and provide pre-funding using stablecoins.
At the same time, the use of stablecoins directly by consumers is growing rapidly.
According to an estimate by the payment company RedotPay, cited by Reuters, spending via cards linked to stablecoins could rise to approximately $50 billion per year by 2028. As early as July 2026, the monthly volume of such card payments exceeded $1 billion for the first time.
The most important factor driving changes in the market is regulation in the U.S.
On August 17, the U.S. Department of the Treasury published a new draft rule for implementing the GENIUS Act. Starting January 18, 2027, the issuance of payment stablecoins in the U.S. will generally be permitted only to licensed issuers. Starting in July 2028, U.S. service providers will also face restrictions on offering users stablecoins issued without the appropriate license.
As a result, the market is entering a completely new phase.
Just a few years ago, the question went something like this: Will cryptocurrencies replace banks?
Now the question has changed: Who will control the digital dollar—crypto companies, banks, or payment systems?
This is precisely where one of the major financial competitive battles of the next few years may unfold.
Circle and Tether have created a model of dollar-backed money that can be transferred around the clock and almost instantly. Banks have realized that customers truly want this functionality, but they are unwilling to hand over the deposits—on which the traditional banking model is based—to tech companies.
As a result, the market is gradually moving toward the coexistence of three forms of the digital dollar.
The first is traditional bank money.
The second is tokenized bank deposits, which Wells Fargo and other banks are transferring to the blockchain.
The third is stablecoins, which exist outside the traditional deposit account system but are becoming increasingly integrated into the financial system under new regulatory conditions.
The winner here has not yet been determined. But one conclusion is already clear: the blockchain infrastructure itself is no longer just an experiment in the cryptocurrency sector.
If the largest banks and Visa begin to process payments 24/7 via blockchain, the major technological debate of the past decade will effectively come to an end.
Blockchain hasn’t destroyed banks—banks have begun to embrace blockchain.
Sources: U.S. Treasury, Wells Fargo, Visa, Reuters, publications from August 4–26, 2026.
According to Fixygen, the Central Bank of Uzbekistan is exploring the possibility of introducing a wholesale central bank digital currency (CBDC), while also testing stablecoins and intending to continue reducing the state’s share in the banking sector.
Representatives of the regulator made these statements at the Silk Road Finance & Technology Forum 2026, which is taking place in Tashkent from August 24–26. The forum was organized by the Central Bank of Uzbekistan and the Global Finance & Technology Network (GFTN). More than 6,000 representatives from 74 countries are participating.
Nodirbek Achilov, Deputy Chairman and Member of the Board of the Central Bank, stated that the regulator is analyzing international experience with wholesale CBDCs, including both successful and unsuccessful projects.
Unlike a retail digital currency, which could potentially be used by the general public for everyday payments, a wholesale CBDC is intended primarily for settlements between banks and other financial institutions. Among the potential benefits of such an instrument, Achilov cited increased security and efficiency in interbank settlements.
The central bank is also testing a stablecoin system in a special regulatory regime in collaboration with Uzbekistan’s National Agency for Prospective Projects. A decision on further scaling up the project is planned to be made after the completion of research and an assessment of the financial market’s reaction. The topic of stablecoins, central bank digital currencies, and the tokenization of real assets is one of the distinct themes of the forum’s program.
At the same time, the Central Bank plans to continue privatization and reduce the state’s presence in the banking system. Central Bank Governor Timur Ishmetov stated that over the past few years, the state’s share in the sector has decreased from approximately 85% to 60%. “We will continue this trend,” Ishmetov said.
Official Central Bank statistics show that as of June 1, 2026, banks with state participation accounted for about 63% of the banking system’s assets, 66% of the loan portfolio, and 59% of capital. Total assets of commercial banks amounted to 984.4 trillion sum.
The regulator is also preparing to publish a strategy for foreign exchange interventions. According to Ishmetov, the Central Bank’s operations in the foreign exchange market are not aimed at keeping the sum exchange rate at a specific fixed level. Interventions, in particular, are related to gold purchases and the regulation of the money supply.
The Central Bank intends to continue maintaining a flexible, market-oriented exchange rate and to present plans for further liberalization of capital account transactions. “We are ready to be more open and transparent,” Ishmetov noted.
In addition, the Central Bank has prepared a three-year roadmap for reforming banking regulation following the Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) conducted by the IMF and the World Bank. The regulator plans to align requirements with the international Basel III standards and transition banks to reporting under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The Silk Road Finance & Technology Forum is being held in Uzbekistan for the first time. The organizers cite positioning the country as a regional hub for financial technology in Central Asia as one of the forum’s goals. Specific sessions of the forum are dedicated to digital assets, payment infrastructure, artificial intelligence, cross-border payments, tokenization, and CBDCs.
Ukraine’s ten most profitable banks accounted for 47.68 billion hryvnias, or 88 per cent of the entire banking system’s net profit, in the first half of 2026, according to the Experts Club information and analysis centre, based on data from Opendatabot and NBU statistics published on 19 August.
The total net profit of 59 Ukrainian banks amounted to UAH 54.07 billion. The top 10 included three state-owned banks, five banks with foreign capital, and two banks with Ukrainian private capital.
The ranking was topped by PrivatBank with UAH 24.56 billion in net profit. Universal Bank, on whose platform monobank operates, ranked second with UAH 3.85 billion, while Raiffeisen Bank placed third with UAH 3.57 billion. They were followed by Oschadbank with UAH 3.38 billion, FUIB with UAH 3.12 billion, Ukreximbank with UAH 2.24 billion, OTP Bank with UAH 1.91 billion, Ukrsibbank with UAH 1.85 billion, Citibank with UAH 1.68 billion, and Credit Agricole Bank with UAH 1.53 billion.
At the same time, Universal Bank became one of the few leaders to significantly improve its result: its profit increased from UAH 2.41 billion in the first half of 2025 to UAH 3.85 billion in 2026. PrivatBank, Oschadbank, Raiffeisen Bank, FUIB, Ukreximbank, and most other top-10 banks posted lower net results, largely due to the increased tax burden.
Thus, the Ukrainian banking market remains highly concentrated in terms of profit: nearly nine out of every ten hryvnias of the sector’s net financial result were earned by just ten institutions.
The primary source is Opendatabot, dated August 19, 2026, with calculations based on data from the National Bank of Ukraine.
Ukrainian banks earned UAH 54.07 billion in net profit in the first half of 2026, while their pre-tax profit reached UAH 108.57 billion, the Experts Club information and analytical center reports, based on Opendatabot calculations and data from the National Bank of Ukraine. The material was published on August 19, 2026.
Banks’ income tax expenses amounted to UAH 54.5 billion, thereby exceeding half of the financial result earned before taxation. During the same period last year, banks accrued UAH 21.99 billion in tax.
In its review of the results of solvent banks, the National Bank also reported that the sector’s net profit in the first half of the year amounted to about UAH 54 billion and was 32% lower year-on-year. One of the main reasons was the application of an increased 50% corporate income tax rate for banks in 2026.
At the same time, the banking sector’s operating profitability remains high. According to the NBU, the pre-tax profit of solvent banks in the first half of the year increased by 6.5% compared with the corresponding period of 2025.
In 2025, banks paid corporate income tax at the standard sector rate of 25%, but in 2026 the rate was raised again to 50%. The NBU has repeatedly warned that increased taxation reduces banks’ ability to build up capital and expand lending to the economy.
The primary sources are NBU data and the Opendatabot study dated August 19, 2026.
Banks with Ukrainian private capital earned 9.7 billion UAH in net profit during the first half of 2026, with just two banks—Universal Bank and PUMB—accounting for approximately 72% of this group’s total profit, according to data released on August 19 by Opendatabot.
Universal Bank, under whose banking license monobank operates, earned 3.85 billion UAH, while PUMB earned 3.12 billion UAH. Both institutions ranked among the top five most profitable banks in Ukraine for the first six months of the year.
Universal Bank significantly improved its performance compared to the same period in 2025, when its net profit was 2.41 billion UAH. The bank rose from ninth to second place in the all-Ukrainian profitability ranking.
In total, 30 profitable privately owned banks earned 9.86 billion UAH, while nine unprofitable institutions in this group posted a combined net loss of 161.78 million UAH. Privately owned banks’ income tax expenses totaled 9.87 billion UAH.
By comparison, 15 banks with foreign capital generated 11.91 billion UAH in net profit, or 22% of the entire banking system’s total profit. Among them, Raiffeisen Bank posted the highest profit in the first half of the year—3.57 billion UAH—followed by OTP Bank with 1.91 billion UAH, UkrSibbank with 1.85 billion UAH, Citibank with 1.68 billion UAH, and Credit Agricole Bank with 1.53 billion UAH. All five made it into the overall top 10.
Of the 15 banks with foreign capital, 13 ended the first half of the year with a profit. Pravex Bank and the transitional bank UTE Bank posted a combined loss of about 43 million UAH.
