Interview with Alona Shevtsova, Venture Investor and CEO of Sends

Question: Alona, when people talk about microcredit in Asia, they most often mention developing markets. Why is Hong Kong important in this discussion?

Answer: Because Hong Kong shows a different side of microcredit. It is not a classic example of a market where a microloan is needed only to provide basic access to money. Hong Kong is a financial hub through which trade, capital, international payments, investments, small and medium-sized businesses, and cross-border operations pass.

That is why the Hong Kong experience is interesting not so much because of the fact that small loans are issued, but because of the infrastructure around them. The question is not only how to give an entrepreneur money. The question is how to properly identify the client, assess their turnover, understand the risks, ensure payment transparency, protect both parties, and make financing part of a normal financial system.

For me, Hong Kong is an example of how microcredit can evolve from a simple product into an element of a complex financial architecture.

Question: So, in Hong Kong, microcredit is more about small businesses than social support?

Answer: Yes, I would put it exactly that way. In Hong Kong, microcredit should primarily be viewed through the lens of small and medium-sized businesses, individual entrepreneurs, e-commerce, service companies, trading operations, suppliers, small exporters, and companies working between markets.

For such clients, a small loan is not necessarily “money until payday.” More often, it is working capital: paying for a shipment, closing a temporary cash-flow gap, fulfilling an order, buying goods, financing logistics, expanding online sales, or testing a new market.

This is a more mature model of microfinance. It is not built on the idea of “giving a small amount to any client,” but on understanding how money moves within a small business.

Question: How does the Hong Kong model differ, for example, from the Vietnamese or Indonesian experience?

Answer: The main difference is the density of the financial infrastructure. In developing economies, microcredit often solves the problem of basic access to finance. In Hong Kong, access to the financial system is generally higher, but small businesses still face another problem: traditional banks do not always finance small companies quickly and flexibly.

A bank may be reliable, but its processes are often designed for larger clients, clear reporting, collateral, and a long operating history. Meanwhile, a modern small business can be digital, young, fast-growing, international, and still not have a classic banking profile.

Hong Kong’s specificity is that microcredit has to work alongside the banking system, payment services, trade finance, digital platforms, and compliance. It is not a replacement for a bank, but a more flexible layer of financial access.

Question: What role does payment infrastructure play in this?

Answer: A key role. Microcredit cannot be high-quality if the lender does not understand the client’s financial behavior. And financial behavior is visible through payments: income flows, turnover regularity, relationships with counterparties, transaction frequency, seasonality, currencies, and the geography of operations.

If a small business has a transparent payment history, it can be assessed more accurately. Even if it does not have large collateral or a long credit history, it may have a clear cash flow. For a lender, this is the most important signal.

That is why payment companies and fintech infrastructure are becoming part of the future of microcredit. Not because every payment company must issue loans, but because payment data helps make lending more responsible.

Question: How is Sends connected to this topic?

Answer: Sends operates in the field of payment and financial infrastructure, so our view of microcredit begins not with the loan itself, but with the movement of money. For me, this is fundamental. To provide a person or a business with a financial product, you first need to understand who the client is, how they receive money, how they pay, how transparent their operations are, and how risks can be managed.

Payment infrastructure is the language of the modern financial system. If a company can read this language, it understands the client better. In microcredit, this is especially important because many small entrepreneurs do not fit into a traditional banking questionnaire, but they still have real businesses and stable turnover.

That is why I see the connection between Sends and microcredit at the infrastructure level: payments, identification, compliance, transparency of operations, service speed, and trust.

Question: Can Hong Kong be called a laboratory for a new approach to microfinance?

Answer: Yes, but I would use the word “platform” rather than “laboratory.” Hong Kong is a place where traditional banks, international financial institutions, fintech companies, digital payments, trade finance, investment platforms, and new data-driven models coexist.

In such an environment, microcredit can develop not as a separate niche, but as part of a broader financial ecosystem. For example, an entrepreneur sells goods online, accepts international payments, pays suppliers, has a digital transaction history, receives short-term financing based on turnover, and then gradually gains access to more complex financial products.

This is no longer microcredit in the old sense. This is embedded finance — when financing appears exactly where a business already has real data and a real need.

Question: What is most important for an investor in such a model?

Answer: For an investor, it is important not just to see growth in loan issuance. In lending, rapid growth alone proves nothing. It may indicate strong demand, but it may also indicate the accumulation of future problems.

I look at the quality of the model. How does the company assess the client? What data does it use? How does it control overdue payments? Is the product economics transparent? How is compliance structured? Can the model scale without reducing the quality of the portfolio? Does the client become stronger after receiving the loan, or more dependent?

A good microfinance product must create long-term value. If a client returns because the product helped them develop their business, that is a healthy signal. If a client returns because they need to cover previous debt, that is already a warning sign.

Question: Hong Kong is an expensive market. Can microcredit be widespread there?

Answer: Yes, it can be widespread, but not necessarily in the traditional format. In Hong Kong, microcredit may be less “social” in form and more entrepreneurial in substance. It may include small credit lines for merchants, invoice financing, working-capital products for e-commerce, short-term supply financing, and products for self-employed professionals and digital teams.

Here, the amount is not the only important factor. Speed and accuracy are also essential. A small business does not always need a large loan for several years. Sometimes it needs quick access to a small amount for a specific transaction. If a company can evaluate that transaction using data, the risk becomes more manageable.

Therefore, in Hong Kong, microcredit may not be a separate “poor” segment, but part of smart SME finance.

Question: Which clients especially need such products?

Answer: I would highlight several groups.

The first group is small trading companies working with supplies, imports, exports, or local distribution. They often face cash-flow gaps between paying suppliers and receiving money from clients.

The second group is e-commerce businesses and online sellers. They may have good turnover, but their money is constantly in motion: goods, advertising, logistics, returns, marketplaces, and commissions.

The third group is service entrepreneurs and independent professionals: consultants, designers, IT specialists, marketing agencies, and small teams. They may work internationally, but they do not always look like classic banking clients.

The fourth group is companies operating across several markets. For them, payments, currencies, settlement periods, and transparency of money movement are especially important.

Question: How are technologies changing microcredit specifically in Hong Kong?

Answer: Technologies make it possible to move from a rough assessment of the client to a more precise one. Previously, lenders often looked at formal documents: reporting, collateral, and banking history. Now it is possible to analyze payment flows, transaction behavior, platform turnover, income regularity, cost structure, counterparties, and seasonality.

This does not mean that documents are no longer needed. It means that the financial system is becoming capable of seeing more reality. Small businesses do not always look perfect on paper, but they may be stable according to data.

For Hong Kong, where many operations are international, this is especially important. Fintech here must be able to work not only with local clients, but also with cross-border behavior.

Question: Where is the line between innovation and risk?

Answer: In finance, this line runs through responsibility. If technology helps to better understand the client, reduce risk, make terms more transparent, and protect the market, then it is innovation. If technology simply makes it possible to issue more money faster without proper assessment, then it is risk.

Microcredit is especially sensitive to this issue. A small amount does not mean a small risk. For a small business, the wrong loan can become a serious problem if the repayment schedule does not match turnover or if the client does not understand the full cost of the product.

That is why I believe fintech should not only speed up access to money, but also improve the quality of financial decisions.

Question: What role does compliance play in such a market?

Answer: A huge role. Hong Kong is an international financial center, and it is impossible to build a long-term fintech business here without strong compliance. KYC, AML, transaction monitoring, data protection, sanctions screening, and understanding the source of funds are not bureaucracy. They are the foundation of trust.

In microcredit, compliance is especially important because the product can scale quickly. If a company serves thousands of clients remotely, it must be confident that it understands the risks.

I often say that compliance is not a brake on fintech. It is its foundation. The better it is embedded into the product, the easier it is for a company to grow without damaging its reputation.

Question: What mistakes can companies make when trying to develop microcredit through Hong Kong?

Answer: The first mistake is to see Hong Kong simply as an “entry point into Asia.” It is not just a showcase. It is a complex market with strong competition, high regulatory expectations, and demanding clients.

The second mistake is underestimating the cost of trust. In Hong Kong, clients and partners will look not only at the convenience of the product, but also at how transparent, stable, and professional the company is.

The third mistake is using universal scoring. What works in one market will not necessarily work here. Hong Kong requires fine-tuning: trade cycles, currency flows, cross-border payments, and connections with mainland China, Southeast Asia, and international partners.

The fourth mistake is confusing microcredit with fast money. In a mature market, this approach quickly leads to problems.

Question: What can Hong Kong offer other Asian markets as an example?

Answer: Hong Kong shows that microcredit must rely on infrastructure. Not on emotion, not on aggressive marketing, and not on the promise of “money in five minutes,” but on a system: payments, data, compliance, risk management, transparency, partnerships, and long-term relationships with the client.

For other Asian markets, this is a very important lesson. Many countries have already gone through the stage of mass digitalization. The next stage is quality. Those who can issue money quickly may win in the short term. Those who can lend responsibly build the market.

Question: What role can alternative data play?

Answer: A very large one, but with the right limits. Alternative data helps identify clients that the traditional banking model does not understand well. This can include payment history, turnover on a trading platform, income regularity, behavior in an app, order structure, returns, logistics, and repeat customers.

But data must be used ethically and transparently. The client should understand which data affects their financial profile. The company must protect this data and not use it against the client’s interests.

I believe the future of microcredit will be built on a combination of data and trust. One does not work without the other.

Question: Can artificial intelligence become a key tool in microcredit?

Answer: It can, but only if it is used as an analytical tool, not as an irresponsible automatic mechanism. AI can help assess risk, detect anomalies, forecast the likelihood of overdue payments, analyze seasonality, determine an appropriate limit, and warn the client about possible overextension.

But in lending, responsibility cannot be fully transferred to an algorithm. If a model makes a mistake, the consequences are borne by a person or a business. That is why explainability, control, audit, human expertise, and clear rules are important.

AI should make microcredit more accurate and safer, not simply faster.

Question: What distinguishes a high-quality microcredit product in the Hong Kong context?

Answer: A high-quality product must be connected to real cash flow. If a loan is issued to a small business, it is necessary to understand from which income it will be repaid. If it is e-commerce, sales cycles, platform commissions, returns, and logistics must be taken into account. If it is trade, delivery times and payments from clients must be considered.

The second criterion is transparency. The client must immediately understand the full cost of the product, the payment schedule, fees, and the consequences of late payment.

The third criterion is flexibility. Small businesses do not always live according to a linear schedule. They face seasonal peaks, delays from counterparties, and currency fluctuations. A good product must reflect the reality of business.

The fourth criterion is the possibility of growth. If a client successfully uses a small product, they should gradually gain access to more mature financial solutions.

Question: What contribution can payment companies make to the development of responsible lending?

Answer: Payment companies can give the market transparency and speed. They see the movement of money, help clients operate in a digital environment, create transaction histories, and simplify international settlements.

But it is important to understand the limits. A payment company does not have to become a lender. It can be an infrastructure partner: helping identify the client, confirm financial activity, ensure convenient repayment, and reduce operational risks.

In my opinion, the future of the financial market will be partnership-based. Some companies are strong in payments, others in lending, others in compliance, and others in analytics. What matters to the client is that all of this works as one system.

Question: Why can microcredit in Hong Kong be interesting for venture capital?

Answer: Venture capital is interested in scalable models. In Hong Kong, such models can be built around SME finance, e-commerce finance, embedded lending, payment analytics, trade finance, and infrastructure fintech solutions.

But investors must be careful. A credit business cannot be evaluated like a regular software product. Here, growth is connected with risk. The faster a company scales, the more important data quality, underwriting, compliance, and collections become.

I would put it this way: investment should not go into “fast loans,” but into financial platforms that know how to provide capital responsibly and based on real client behavior.

Question: How do you see the development of microcredit in Asia through the lens of Hong Kong?

Answer: I think Hong Kong will strengthen its role as an infrastructure center. Products for small businesses, trade, cross-border payments, e-commerce, supply chains, and financial platforms operating across several markets can develop through it.

Microcredit in Asia will become more technological, but also more regulated. This is a normal process. The market is maturing. It is no longer enough for clients to simply get money quickly. They want to understand the terms, see transparency, trust the platform, and have the opportunity to grow.

Hong Kong can become an example of how to combine the speed of fintech with the discipline of a financial center.

Question: What is the main conclusion you would draw from the Hong Kong experience?

Answer: The main conclusion is that the microcredit of the future is not just a small loan by itself. It is the financial infrastructure around the client.

Hong Kong shows that small businesses need not just money, but access to a system: payments, data, compliance, trade finance, digital identification, partner services, and long-term financial relationships.

For me, as the CEO of a fintech company and an investor, this is fundamental. Fintech should not accelerate debt. It should accelerate development. If microcredit helps an entrepreneur become stronger, more transparent, and more resilient, then it is the right product. If it simply creates short-term liquidity without understanding the consequences, then it is a dangerous model.

The future of microcredit in Asia will not belong to those who issue money the fastest. It will belong to those who understand the client better, manage risks more honestly, and build trust for years ahead.