E-Financial
Billions in Nigeria’s Reserves, But Where is the Growth?
By Blaise Udunze
The moment the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Olayemi Cardoso, recently announced that Nigeria’s foreign reserves had inched to $49 billion as of February 5, 2026, the news was received with understandable enthusiasm.
He described the development as “a very important statistic” when speaking at the 2nd National Economic Council (NEC) Conference in Abuja, while noting a 4.93 per cent increase and emphasising that Nigeria had moved from being a net seller to a net buyer of foreign exchange. He cited improved remittance inflows, a narrowing gap between official and parallel market exchange rates, and greater confidence in the naira as evidence that reforms were working.
On the surface, the numbers are reassuring. The premium between official and parallel market rates has reportedly fallen to under 2 percent. Remittances have improved following deliberate engagement with the diaspora. Nigerians can increasingly rely on naira cards for international transactions. It can be said that investors are earning positive real returns, banks are recapitalising, equity markets are recovering, and macroeconomic indicators such as GDP growth of 3.98 per cent, a current account surplus of $3.42 billion in the third quarter of 2025, and a reported moderation in inflation to 15.15 percent are presented as signs of stabilisation.
So far, beyond the celebratory headlines lies a deeper and more consequential question, in the form of, what does the fixation on foreign reserves really tell us about the underlying strength of the Nigerian economy?
History and economic logic suggest that when a central bank repeatedly elevates foreign reserves as a central achievement, it often signals that the true engines of growth are either weak or underdeveloped. Strong reserves are not built through declarations, press conferences, or defensive monetary manoeuvres. They are built through systems that generate value, exports, productivity, and trust. Countries with durable reserve positions did not chase reserves; they built economies that produced them naturally.
This distinction matters greatly for Nigeria.
Foreign reserves are important, but they are not a development strategy. They are a buffer, not a foundation. They are an outcome of economic vitality, not a substitute for it. When reserves become the centrepiece of economic storytelling, there is a risk that policymakers mistake statistical comfort for structural strength.
Even Nigeria’s celebrated $49 billion reserve figure requires closer scrutiny, which appears to be more of sexing up the figures. Gross reserves make headlines, but net usable reserves are what protect a currency in moments of stress. A significant portion of reported reserves is often tied up in swaps, forward commitments, and external obligations. When these are stripped out, the net buffer available to defend the naira is far smaller than the headline figure suggests. The gap between gross and net reserves is too large to justify unqualified confidence about currency stability, especially in an economy that remains import-dependent and structurally fragile.
The danger of over-fixating on reserves is not unique to Nigeria, but it is particularly acute here because of the economy’s narrow production base, which subliminally calls for sexing up the figures. Despite decision-makers prematurely applauding the reserves’ growth, the apex bank must rethink its approach. The reserves are not generated through production-based or stronger export means but rather largely from borrowing (sales of Eurobonds) or through government loans, which come in as dollars to the CBN that temporarily boost dollar inflows. This points to the fact that Nigeria still exports little beyond crude oil, imports most manufactured goods, and relies heavily on volatile capital inflows. In such a context, reserves require constant defence rather than organic replenishment. Tight monetary policy, FX restrictions, and moral persuasion may buy time, but they do not solve the underlying problem of insufficient foreign exchange generation.
By contrast, countries with strong reserve positions followed a very different path. Unlike Nigeria, countries like Saudi Arabia, with foreign reserves of about $410 billion, paired subsidy reforms with visible reinvestment in infrastructure, social welfare, and alternative energy systems. Indonesia, with reserves of roughly $153 billion, combined fiscal reforms with expanded social assistance and a shift toward targeted household support, ensuring that reform pain was offset by tangible benefits. Reserves are mainly meant to grow from productive economic activities like Singapore, whose reserves stood at approximately $397 billion at the end of 2025, as it built its position through decades of disciplined industrial policy, export competitiveness, domestic savings, and institutional credibility. In all these cases, reserves were not the objective; they were the by-product of deliberate economic architecture.
In most successful developmental states, public expenditure plays a catalytic role in growth. Unlike Nigeria’s, most countries’ expenditures It crowds in private investment, expand infrastructure, lower transaction costs, and build productive capacity. Over time, this deepens domestic capital formation, drives industrial productivity, supports export diversification, and strengthens external balances. Nigeria’s recent experience, however, appears to diverge from this model.
Rather than deploying fiscal policy aggressively to stimulate productive capacity, government financing has increasingly leaned on the domestic capital market. While this approach has attracted foreign capital inflows, much of this capital has been short-term portfolio investment into treasury bills, government bonds, and money market instruments. A fact that is well established is that these inflows can temporarily stabilise liquidity and support the exchange rate, but their multiplier effects on the real economy are minimal. In the absence of strong productive investment for a country like Nigeria, the giant of Africa, this pattern resembles constructing a skyscraper on weak foundations, which is impressive in appearance, but structurally fragile.
This fragility is evident in the broader economy. Especially this kind of growth is associated with Nigeria in 2025, which portrays a country that is increasingly survival-led rather than productivity-driven. The underlying challenge today is that households, small businesses and even industrial firms are left with no option but to adapt to rising costs and shrinking real incomes by expanding low-productivity activities. Industrial depth remains shallow. Domestic capital accumulation is weak. Export capability outside oil is limited. Labour productivity continues to lag. These are not the conditions under which reserves become self-sustaining.
This is why the central bank’s strategic focus must extend far beyond reserve accumulation. If the CBN genuinely seeks to grow the economy and build reserves sustainably, it must prioritise the mechanisms that generate foreign exchange organically. The most important of these is productive credit expansion. Central banks around the world are expected to shape economies not only through interest rates but through the direction of credit. Prolonged monetary tightness may suppress inflation at the margins, but it also suppresses investment, output, and employment, as is the case in Nigeria. Contrary to Nigeria’s lived experience, countries that successfully built reserves deliberately channeled affordable, long-term credit to manufacturing, agro-processing, and export-oriented sectors, but the same cannot be said of Nigeria. Nigeria cannot tighten its way into prosperity.
Closely linked to this is the need for a serious export-led industrial strategy. Nigeria’s trade challenge is often framed as an import problem, but it is fundamentally an export deficiency. Banning imports or rationing foreign exchange does not create competitiveness. Export growth does. Sustainable reserves come from selling more to the world than one buys, particularly in manufactured goods and tradable services. Oil exports may still matter, but they are volatile and finite. Value-added exports are repeatable, scalable, and employment-intensive.
Exchange rate stability, too, must be approached through supply rather than fear. Currency pressure reflects insufficient FX supply more than excessive demand. Strengthening real economic fundamentals, which calls for expanding non-oil exports, formalising remittance channels, and attracting long-term productive capital, will do more to stabilise the naira than administrative controls mixed with sexing up figures. Predictability matters, and for this reason, investors may tolerate risk, but they may be forced to withdraw when policies are inconsistent.
Infrastructure financing is another critical missing link. No economy exports competitively without reliable power, efficient transport, and functional logistics. While infrastructure is often treated as a purely fiscal responsibility, central banks in many emerging economies have played catalytic roles in financing industrial infrastructure. Supporting industrial parks, logistics hubs, processing zones, and energy projects would address one of the root causes of Nigeria’s weak export performance and fragile reserves.
Equally important is the mobilisation of domestic savings. Strong reserves are easier to build when a country funds its development internally. One of its domestic savings that has been lying fallow is that Nigeria’s pension and insurance funds remain under-deployed in productive sectors. For a country that is truly angling for growth and with the right regulatory frameworks, these long-term pools of capital can support infrastructure, manufacturing, and export industries, reducing dependence on volatile foreign inflows.
Inflation control must also be re-examined. This is one grey area with Nigeria’s system as its inflation is largely cost-driven, fueled by energy costs, logistics bottlenecks, FX shortages and insecurity. It must be understood that addressing it solely through interest rate hikes risks shrinking output in terms of economic production and growth while prices remain elevated, as is the case today. The policy-makers in Nigeria must understand that supply-side interventions that reduce production costs and stabilise input availability are more likely to deliver durable price stability and stronger reserves than monetary tightening, especially in the case of raising interest rates alone.
The CBN has projected that GDP growth could reach 4.49 percent, inflation could moderate to 12.9 percent, and reserves could exceed $50 billion. These projections are presented as evidence of consolidation. Yet many economists caution that macroeconomic stability, while necessary, is not synonymous with sustainable growth. Even if the provided official statistics may suggest that the economy is improving, the reality is that the majority of the populace are not experiencing the benefits, as is the case in Nigeria, where the unemployment rate is high, wages aren’t keeping up with costs and many households are barely making ends meet.
To further drive the point, Gbenga Olawepo-Hashim has argued that the true measure of economic performance is not headline figures but the living conditions of citizens. This is to say that economic growth is meaningless if it doesn’t create jobs, purchasing power, and opportunity, cannot sustain political or social stability, nor can foreign reserves grow sustainably.
Going forward, it is advisable that the foreign reserves, therefore, should be read for what they are, as a reflection of deeper economic health. When production expands, exports diversify, infrastructure improves, capital deepens, and trust is restored, reserves grow quietly and sustainably. When these foundations are weak, reserves require constant defense and loud celebration.
Today, Nigeria is at a critical point where it must make a major decision, either the choice is between managing reserves endlessly or building an economy that earns them effortlessly. The former offers headlines and is unsustainable. The latter offers prosperity, and it is sustainable in the long term.
Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]
Access Holdings Plc has held its 4th Annual General Meeting (AGM), reaffirming its strategic transition towards long-term value creation, balance sheet resilience, and disciplined growth, even as it navigates a dynamic and evolving operating environment.
Speaking at the AGM, the Chairman, Aigboje Aig-Imoukhuede, CFR, emphasised that the defining test of a financial institution is not merely its capacity for growth, but its ability to grow profitably, sustainably, and with discipline over time.
He noted that Access Holdings’ performance in 2025 reflects a deliberate approach to strengthening the institution’s long-term fundamentals while maintaining strong financial performance.
The Group delivered Profit Before Tax of ₦1.007 trillion, underscoring the strength of its diversified platform and expanding earnings base across key markets. Total assets increased to ₦51.56 trillion, while customer deposits grew strongly, reflecting sustained franchise momentum and deepening customer trust.
The Chairman, however, stressed that these results must be viewed within the context of the Group’s prudent risk management actions during the year. Access Holdings accelerated provisions on legacy and regulatory forbearance credit exposures, resulting in elevated impairment charges.
He explained that the Group consciously prioritised balance sheet strength and long-term resilience over short-term earnings optimisation.
“Periods of economic uncertainty often reveal more about an institution than periods of uninterrupted growth. Our focus remains on building a business that is not only growing, but improving in the quality, resilience, and sustainability of its earnings,” he stated.
The AGM highlighted the Group’s continued evolution beyond traditional banking into a diversified financial services ecosystem, with growing contributions from investment management, insurance, pensions, consumer finance, and payments.
While banking remains the Group’s core earnings engine, emerging growth platforms, including Access ARM Pensions, Access Insurance Brokers, Oxygen X Finance, and Hydrogen Payments, are expanding its footprint across digital finance, consumer lending, retirement services, and payments, thereby strengthening the Group’s long-term earnings mix and scalability.
Looking ahead, the Chairman reiterated the strategic imperative underpinning the Group’s next phase of growth:
“Our strategy, From Scale to Value, reflects the natural evolution of our journey. Scale created opportunity; value creation is how we fully realise it.”
He noted that while the Group continues to generate strong returns, ensuring that earnings per share consistently exceed the cost of capital remains central to unlocking sustainable shareholder value. He also acknowledged the significant unrealised value embedded within the Group’s international subsidiaries and reiterated management’s focus on improving market recognition of that intrinsic value over time.
The Board also addressed shareholders’ concerns regarding dividend payments, clarifying that the temporary suspension of dividend distributions was a consequence of regulatory compliance requirements rather than any deterioration in the Group’s financial performance.
Aig-Imoukhuede reaffirmed that the Group’s earnings capacity remains strong and that the Board’s position reflects adherence to supervisory expectations and prudent capital management principles.
He assured shareholders of the Board’s commitment to resuming dividend payments as soon as the relevant regulatory conditions are satisfied.
“Our approach is clear: capital retained today must translate into greater value tomorrow and sustainable returns for our shareholders.”
Access Holdings further highlighted progress in strengthening governance and leadership continuity. During the year, Innocent C. Ike was appointed Group Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer, while the Board was reinforced through the appointment of Ibironke Adeyemi as an Independent Non-Executive Director.
Shareholders also expressed appreciation for the outstanding contributions of Bolaji Agbede, Executive Director, Business Development, who successfully led the management team as Acting Group Chief Executive Officer prior to the appointment of Mr. Ike.
The Chairman noted that the leadership transition was executed seamlessly, ensuring continuity of strategy, operational stability, and stakeholder confidence.
Despite continuing macroeconomic uncertainties across its operating markets, Access Holdings expressed confidence in its strategic positioning, underpinned by disciplined execution, a diversified business model, a strengthened capital base, and a clear focus on sustainable value creation.
Concluding his remarks, Aig-Imoukhuede reaffirmed the Group’s long-term commitment to shareholders: “Our responsibility is to justify the confidence of our shareholders by building an institution that endures, one defined by clarity of purpose, discipline of execution, and sustainable value creation over time.”
By Blaise Udunze
Findings show that the United States owes more than $36 trillion while Nigeria owes over N159.28 trillion, with external debt now standing at approximately $51.8 billion. At a first glance, when comparing the debt profiles of the world’s largest economy and Africa’s largest economy, it may though seem misplaced. America can borrow almost indefinitely because it issues the world’s reserve currency. Nigeria cannot. Yet both countries are confronting a similar worry. This has led to asking, when does debt cease to be a tool for development and become a permanent feature of national survival?
The difference is that while America may be testing the limits of how much debt a superpower can carry, Nigeria is testing how much debt a fragile developing economy can sustain before it begins to mortgage its future.
The latest proposal by the Federal Government to secure another $1.25 billion World Bank facility under the Nigeria Actions for Investment and Jobs Acceleration Programme has once again reignited a debate that refuses to disappear. What appears to be far from the daily lived experience of Nigerians over the years, is having government officials insisting that the loan will support investment, expand access to finance, improve electricity, enhance digital services, and create jobs. According to the claims, these are worthy objectives. But Nigerians have heard similar promises before.
The more important question is no longer whether Nigeria should borrow. Virtually every modern economy borrows. The real question which calls for critical concern, is what exactly Nigeria is borrowing for, and why the benefits of decades of borrowing remain largely invisible in the everyday lives of millions of citizens. This is where the national conversation becomes uncomfortable.
Funny enough over the years, successive governments have justified borrowing as a necessary response to development deficits. Yet despite rising debt levels, many Nigerians struggle to identify corresponding improvements in their lived experiences. This justification has kept many wondering as the roads remain dilapidated, public hospitals are overwhelmed, electricity supply also remains unreliable. Talk of the public education system, this has continued to deteriorate badly and unemployment remains stubbornly high. Inflation has eroded incomes with the cost of cooking gas hitting N2,400 per kg, while businesses struggle under the weight of high operating costs.
If borrowing is supposed to finance development, where is the development? The concern becomes even more urgent when and highly alarming when viewed against the backdrop of Nigeria’s worsening fiscal position. According to the Debt Management Office, public debt has climbed to over N159 trillion. With this outrageous figure, more troubling is the fact that debt servicing now consumes an alarming share of government revenue, which has continued to cripple economic growth and compromising the future. This development caught the attention of the Nigerian Economic Summit Group as it recently noted that Nigeria’s debt-service-to-revenue ratio remains among the highest in the world. In simple and practical terms, this implies that government is spending an increasingly large portion of what it earns paying creditors rather than investing in infrastructure, healthcare, education, security, or economic expansion.
This is the hallmark of a debt trap. The danger is not necessarily that Nigeria will default tomorrow. The danger is that the nation becomes trapped in a vicious cycle where governments borrow to finance deficits, then borrow again to service existing obligations, and then borrow even more to cover the consequences of previous borrowing. That cycle is already becoming visible.
Come to think of it, President Bola Tinubu’s administration has boldly defended borrowing as necessary to support reforms, cushion economic shocks, and stimulate growth. Yet critics have continued to point to the fact that since May 2023, borrowing has accelerated significantly.
According to economic analyst Dele Oye, the current administration has added approximately N65.9 trillion to Nigeria’s debt stock within just two years, a figure that exceeds several multiples of what Nigeria accumulated during its first five decades after independence.
Whether one agrees with the politics surrounding that claim is secondary. The underlying concern remains valid since debt is growing far faster than the visible capacity of the economy to generate sustainable revenue. This is why comparisons with the United States are useful.
America’s debt is enormous, but debt sustainability is not determined by the size of debt alone. It is determined by economic productivity. The United States supports its debt burden through a diversified economy, deep capital markets, technological innovation, globally competitive corporations, advanced research institutions, and an unmatched ability to attract global investment.
Debt is not what sustains America. Productivity does. Unlike Nigeria and by contrast, it continues to rely heavily on crude oil revenues, a narrow tax base, volatile foreign exchange earnings, and a fragile manufacturing sector. The critical difference is that every dollar borrowed by Nigeria therefore carries greater risks than every dollar borrowed by the United States.
When America borrows, it borrows largely in its own currency. When Nigeria borrows externally, it exposes itself to exchange-rate risks that can dramatically increase repayment costs whenever the naira weakens as this call for utmost caution. Every currency depreciation effectively inflates the burden of external obligations. What appears manageable today can become overwhelming tomorrow. This reality makes Nigeria’s current debt trajectory particularly concerning which is but the truth.
The World Bank itself has raised concerns about governance risks and structural weaknesses within Nigeria’s fiscal architecture. Even more troubling are recent revelations indicating that more than N34.5 trillion was reportedly deducted through pre-distribution mechanisms before revenues reached the Federation Account between 2023 and 2025. According to the findings, approximately 41 percent of government revenues were removed as first-line charges before distribution.
Whichever way it is viewed, perhaps as fiscal leakages, weak oversight, or institutional inefficiency, the implications are profound and of critical concern. If we must begin to tell ourselves the factual truth, a nation cannot continue borrowing aggressively while simultaneously failing to maximise the value of revenues it already generates.
This brings us to the central question confronting Nigeria today. The point is, are these loans building future productive capacity, or are they merely financing continuity?
Borrowing can be justified when it funds projects that expand economic output. Investments in power generation, transport infrastructure, agriculture, industrialisation, technology, and education can create long-term growth that eventually pays for the debt itself. In such cases, debt becomes a bridge to prosperity.
But it must be known that borrowing to fund recurrent expenditure, sustain bloated government structures, finance consumption, cover inefficiencies, or service previous debts transforms borrowing into a treadmill. The irony here is that the country runs harder every year but remains trapped in the same place. Unfortunately, much of Nigeria’s fiscal reality increasingly resembles the latter.
The tragedy is that this debt burden is not abstract. It is already affecting ordinary Nigerians. The adverse implication and critical point are that every naira directed toward debt servicing is a naira unavailable for schools, hospitals, security, electricity, or social protection. Every external loan increases future repayment obligations. Every missed opportunity to invest borrowed funds productively transfers today’s policy failures to future generations.
The consequences are visible everywhere. Businesses face prohibitively high borrowing costs. Today in Nigeria, it is no longer news that manufacturers struggle with energy expenses, which rob off adversely on the citizens. The same applies to youth unemployment, which remains widespread. Also, infrastructure deficits persist. Another, critical issue is that states remain heavily dependent on monthly allocations from federal level. With the developments, economic growth remains too weak to significantly improve living standards.
The result is a contradictory in which debt rises while prosperity stagnates. This is perhaps the greatest lesson Nigeria must learn from America’s debt experience.
The debate should not focus exclusively on how much debt a nation carries. The more important progressive question is whether the economy is productive enough to sustain that debt.
What every Nigerians should know is that Nigeria as a country cannot borrow its way to prosperity because it must first strengthen the foundations that generate sustainable growth. With the lingering challenging surrounding the borrowing and the mountain of debts, one key fact is that it cannot rely indefinitely on external creditors while neglecting domestic productivity. Also, it cannot continue to depend on oil revenues while failing to broaden its tax base. Another loosed end that has been a critical matter is that it cannot expect debt-financed development without strong institutions, transparency, accountability and effective project execution.
The solutions are neither mysterious nor impossible. This entails that Nigeria must aggressively expand domestic revenue mobilisation without suffocating businesses and ensure it must digitise tax administration, eliminate leakages, enforce fiscal responsibility laws. Also, it must reduce the cost of governance, strengthen public procurement systems while it ensures that every borrowed naira and kobo is linked to measurable economic outcomes.
Equally important, government must rebuild public trust. The truth is that citizens are more willing to support reforms when they can see tangible results. Some of the developments in the past that have continued to erode public trust are when subsidy savings are announced, people expect better roads, improved healthcare, reliable electricity, and enhanced security. When new loans are obtained, they expect visible projects and measurable returns but the reverse have been the case. Those at the helms of affairs of this country must understand that transparency is not merely good governance; it is an economic necessity. History offers a warning.
In 2006, under the leadership of Olusegun Obasanjo, Nigeria celebrated its exit from the Paris Club debt burden after securing one of Africa’s most significant debt relief achievements. Not too long but for a brief period, the country stood relatively free from the crushing obligations that had constrained development for decades. Two decades later, that achievement appears increasingly distant.
The danger is not simply that Nigeria is borrowing. The danger is that borrowing is becoming normalised as a substitute for difficult reforms.
A nation can borrow to build industries or borrow to pay bills. It can borrow to create future wealth or borrow to postpone present challenges. One path expands prosperity; the other compounds dependency.
America’s debt mountain demonstrates that even wealthy nations are not immune from the consequences of structural borrowing. Nigeria’s debt burden demonstrates how much more dangerous that reality becomes when economic productivity fails to keep pace. Borrowing can buy time. It cannot buy prosperity.
Sooner or later, every nation must generate the economic value necessary to justify the debts it accumulates. Nigeria’s future will depend not on how much it can borrow, but on how effectively it can produce, innovate, industrialise, and grow.
That is the lesson hidden underneath America’s debt mountain. It is also the lesson Nigeria ignores at its own peril.
Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]
Fidelity Bank Plc, leading financial institution, has reaffirmed its commitment to advancing the growth and sustainability of Micro, Small and Medium-scale Enterprises (MSMEs), positioning itself as a trusted partner beyond traditional banking and financing.
This commitment was reiterated by the bank’s management during a keynote address delivered by the Executive Director, South, Mrs. Pamela Shodipo, at the recently held SME Quarterly Business Forum in Port Harcourt, Rivers State.
The Forum, themed “Scaling Trade and Distribution of Businesses for Sustainable Growth,” brought together entrepreneurs, business owners, industry experts and customers for insightful discussions on strategies for expanding businesses, strengthening distribution networks and unlocking sustainable growth opportunities in Nigeria’s evolving marketplace.
In her address, Shodipo reiterated Fidelity Bank’s commitment to supporting SMEs beyond traditional banking and financing. She stated, “Our objective is clear: to help Nigerian enterprises grow, become more competitive and create sustainable value in their communities and the wider economy. We want to be more than a provider of funds; we want to be your trusted partner in growth,” she said.
Further emphasising the strategic importance of the host city, the bank’s Executive Director described Port Harcourt as a critical economic hub, with significant influence across trade, logistics, marine services, manufacturing, agriculture, and the energy sector.
“Port Harcourt occupies a strategic place in the economic life of Nigeria. It is a major commercial hub, a gateway to the South-South and a city whose influence extends across trade, logistics, marine services, manufacturing, agriculture and energy. Businesses here understand what it means to operate in a dynamic environment, respond to market demand quickly and keep commerce moving,” she said.
Shodipo maintained that, the Forum’s theme was particularly relevant given the vital role trade and distribution businesses play in connecting producers to consumers, supporting supply chains, creating jobs and sustaining livelihoods.
“Trade and distribution businesses play a critical role in the Nigerian economy. They connect producers to consumers, support supply chains, create jobs and sustain livelihoods. In the South-South, this role is even more significant because the region remains one of the vital arteries of commerce in Nigeria, with strong links to ports, industrial activity, wholesale trade and regional distribution networks,” she remarked.
The bank’s Executive Director also highlighted initiatives such as the Fidelity Nigeria International Trade and Creative Connect (FNITCC), which connects businesses to international markets like the UK and US, as well as partnerships with the Nigeria Export Promotion Council (NEPC) and Lagos Business School through the Export Management Programme, alongside the Fidelity SME Hub for advisory support.
In her remarks, Mrs. Ugochi Osinigwe, Divisional Head, Small and Medium-scale Enterprises, Fidelity Bank Plc, said the forum was designed to provide business owners with actionable insights and valuable networking opportunities that can accelerate growth.
“SMEs remain the backbone of Nigeria’s economy, and at Fidelity Bank, we are deliberate about creating platforms that expose entrepreneurs to knowledge, innovation and opportunities that help them build resilient and scalable businesses. This forum reflects our ongoing commitment to supporting SMEs beyond banking by equipping them with the tools and connections needed to thrive in today’s competitive environment,” Osinigwe said.
She encouraged participants to leverage the Bank’s various SME-focused initiatives, advisory services and digital solutions to strengthen their operations and position their businesses for long-term success.
Participants at the forum commended Fidelity Bank for creating a platform that addresses real business challenges and provided practical solutions.
One of the participants, Mr. Andy Macozi, praised the initiative, saying, “The forum was timely and informative. The discussions addressed challenges many business owners face daily, and I believe more entrepreneurs will benefit if Fidelity Bank continues to organize such seminars and knowledge-sharing sessions.”
Also speaking, Chief Uche Aham, an oil and marine services entrepreneur, described the forum as insightful and impactful.
“I commend Fidelity Bank for bringing together business owners to learn and exchange ideas. The sessions were practical and insightful. It would also be helpful if participants could receive comprehensive materials from the forum for future reference and implementation,” he noted.
The Fidelity Bank SME Quarterly Business Forum is the latest of the bank’s initiatives aimed at empowering entrepreneurs, fostering innovation and driving sustainable economic development across Nigeria.
Ranked among the best banks in Nigeria, Fidelity Bank Plc is a full-fledged Commercial Deposit Money Bank serving over 10 million customers through digital banking channels, its 255 business offices in Nigeria and United Kingdom subsidiary, FidBank UK Limited.
The Bank is a recipient of multiple local and international awards, including the 2025 Development Bank of Nigeria (DBN) Innovation Award for MSME support; Best Retail and SME Bank Award from Independent Newspapers; Best Bank for Export & Trade Finance and Most Innovative Bank of the Year at the 2025 BusinessDay Banks and Financial Institutions (BAFI) Awards; and Nigeria’s Best Private Bank at the 2025 Euromoney Awards. The Bank also received the inaugural Most Improved Commercial Bank of the Year award by Nairametrics, the SME Bank of the Year award by NewsDirect, and the Straight-Through Processing (STP) Excellence Award by Citi Group, in addition to recognition by Global Brands Magazine for Excellence in Community Empowerment
UK, Nigeria Launch £15m Growth Programme to Accelerate Economic Transformation
Haleon Introduces New Corporate Identity in Nigeria
Elon Musk Makes History as the World’s First Trillionaire
NITDA Unveils Ambitious Strategy to Turn Southwest into Nigeria’s Next Innovation Powerhouse
Airtel Africa Foundation Publishes Inaugural Annual Report
CBN Extends PoS Geo-Fencing Enforcement Deadline to August 2026
Jumia Nigeria Records Strong Q1 2026 Growth as Technology-Led Strategy Drives Market Expansion
NCC Drafts New Rules for Virtual Mobile Operators
TD Africa, HPE Drive Conversations on the Future of Intelligent Networking
Anthropic Raises $65 Bn to Expand AI Research, Innovation
E-Business3 days agoFirm Discovered a New Corporate Phishing Technique using a Popular AI Web Development Platform
Telecom3 days agoNo More Deleting and Reposting: Instagram Unveils Long-Awaited Profile Update
Telecom3 days agoAirtel Nigeria Launches Web Data Calculator to Give Customers Greater Visibility into Data Usage
Telecom3 days agoNCC Board Reviews Telecom Sector, Notes Progress in Network Expansion, Consumer Compensation
Telecom3 days agoAll Set for 2026 Nigeria DigitalSENSE Forum and Awards: NLNG, IHS, and others rally support
Telecom3 days agoFG’s $10m Hello.cv Deal Sparks Outrage as Experts Question Snub of .ng Domain
E-Financial3 days agoAmerica Borrows Power, Nigeria Borrows Survival
Telecom2 days agoAirtel Africa Foundation Publishes Inaugural Annual Report