VIFC Posts 38 Members in First Institutional Scoreboard

Vietnam's International Financial Centre has its first official scoreboard. On 25 May 2026, MoF Deputy Minister Nguyen Thi Bich Ngoc disclosed that 38 organisations have formally registered to become VIFC members — across both the Ho Chi Minh City and Da Nang nodes combined. The figure was revealed during a working session with approximately 80 delegates from roughly 50 Chinese and Hong Kong enterprises, led by Sunwah Group chairman Jonathan Choi. It is the first aggregate membership count the government has made public, and it tells a story that is neither alarming nor obviously on track.

A Count That Rewards Careful Reading#

The 38 figure needs context before it becomes useful. The VIFC's official website reported on 4 May that HCMC had granted commitment certificates to 15 investors. Three weeks later, the MoF announced 38 across both nodes. That jump could mean genuine rapid growth in the intervening period — or it could mean the two figures measure different things, with the May 4 count capturing only one registration category in one city and the May 25 count aggregating a broader set across both nodes.

The MoF has not clarified which. The HCMC–Da Nang split within the 38 remains undisclosed, which itself is a signal: the two-node architecture was a deliberate design choice under Decree 323, and which node is attracting more institutional interest is a legitimate health metric that practitioners cannot yet assess.

What is clear is the composition. The 38 members span four categories — foreign banks, investment funds, securities firms, and payment technology companies — that map almost exactly onto the VIFC's four declared sector pillars: banking and FX, asset management and capital markets, securities trading, and digital finance. If that four-way spread holds, the VIFC is not developing as a single-sector experiment. It is accumulating breadth, even if not yet depth.

The Conversion Gap#

The MoF has received hundreds of expressions of interest from institutions considering establishment in the VIFC. Thirty-eight have registered. The conversion rate is low, and the reasons are not mysterious.

The most significant barrier for foreign banks is the AA credit rating floor established under Decree No. 329/2025/ND-CP. As our analysis of that threshold shows, that requirement screens out the majority of internationally active banks. The current 120-day licensing window for banks compounds the problem: even institutions that clear the rating bar face a timeline that makes planning difficult. The VIFC has signalled it wants to compress that window to 30 days, but no formal amendment has been issued.

The broader framework is also still being assembled. The National Assembly-level resolution that will govern key aspects of VIFC operations — including treatment of edge cases and dispute resolution norms — has not been finalised. Institutions conducting due diligence cannot yet model their full operating environment. That uncertainty does not kill appetite, but it does defer commitment.

For practical guidance on the registration process itself, see Getting Started: How to Register and Enter Vietnam's VIFC.

How 38 Compares#

DIFC launched in 2004 and reportedly reached roughly 100 registered entities within its first 18 months. AIFC launched in 2018 and hit a similar threshold at approximately the same interval. These comparisons are frequently cited in VIFC coverage and worth treating with appropriate caution: neither figure is independently verified in the research materials available, and both centres operated in different regulatory environments with different incentive structures and anchor tenant strategies.

For a structured comparison of the VIFC against DIFC, AIFC, and GIFT City across licensing, tax, and governance dimensions, see VIFC vs DIFC, AIFC, and GIFT City.

What the comparison does usefully establish is a rough benchmark of pace. Vietnam's 38 at four to five months post-launch ceremony is below the DIFC and AIFC trajectories, assuming those figures are directionally accurate. But the VIFC launched without a complete regulatory framework in place — the eight implementing decrees were issued in phases, and several operational questions remain open. DIFC launched with its full legal and institutional architecture already built. That distinction matters for any pace comparison.

The China and Hong Kong Signal#

The 38-member disclosure was not made in a press release. It was made in a room containing 80 delegates from 50 Chinese and Hong Kong enterprises. That is a deliberate framing choice by the MoF.

According to MPI data, China ranks approximately sixth among Vietnam's cumulative FDI sources at around $35.87 billion, and Hong Kong ranks approximately fifth at around $40.76 billion. Both corridors have significant capital pools and financial infrastructure that the VIFC needs. Neither appears prominently in the current membership base, based on the absence of Chinese or Hong Kong institution names in any public registration disclosures to date.

Deputy Minister Ngoc explicitly called on Sunwah Group — a Hong Kong conglomerate with established Vietnam relationships — to act as a bridge to Hong Kong's financial ecosystem. That is the kind of ask that only makes sense if the current pipeline from that corridor is thin. The outreach is an acknowledgment that converting expressions of interest from Chinese and Hong Kong institutions into registrations requires active facilitation, not just an open framework.

What Comes Next#

Three developments will determine whether the 38 figure grows meaningfully in the second half of 2026.

First, the National Assembly-level resolution. If passed in the June 2026 session, it will resolve the framework uncertainties that are holding back the most cautious institutional reviewers — particularly around dispute resolution and capital account treatment. A delay into the late-2026 or 2027 legislative cycle extends the conversion gap.

Second, the licensing window compression. A formal reduction of the bank licensing timeline from 120 to 30 days would remove one of the most operationally cited barriers for foreign banks already meeting the credit rating requirement under Decree 329. Watch for a draft circular or decree amendment from the SBV.

Third, the HCMC–Da Nang split. When the MoF publishes a node-by-node breakdown — if it does — that figure will tell practitioners which centre is developing genuine institutional density and which is accumulating paper commitments. For now, the aggregate 38 is the only number available, and it is best read as a baseline rather than a verdict.

Frequently Asked Questions#

How many organisations have registered to join Vietnam's VIFC?

38 organisations had formally registered across both the HCMC and Da Nang nodes as of 25 May 2026, according to MoF Deputy Minister Nguyen Thi Bich Ngoc.

What types of firms have joined the VIFC so far?

The 38 registered members span four categories: foreign banks, investment funds, securities firms, and payment technology companies. No individual institution names have been publicly disclosed.

How does VIFC membership compare to DIFC and AIFC at a similar stage?

DIFC reportedly reached roughly 100 registered entities within 18 months of its 2004 launch, and AIFC reportedly hit a similar mark around 18 months after its 2018 launch. Neither figure is independently verified in the research materials available, and both should be treated as directional rather than precise. Vietnam's 38 at approximately four to five months post-launch is below that reported pace, though the VIFC's regulatory framework remains incomplete, which complicates direct comparison.

Why is the conversion rate from VIFC interest to formal registration so low?

Several barriers remain: the AA credit rating floor for foreign banks under Decree 329, a 120-day bank licensing window that the VIFC is seeking to compress to 30 days, and ongoing finalisation of the broader licensing and entity establishment framework.

How many VIFC members does the HCMC node have compared to Da Nang?

The HCMC node had issued commitment certificates to 15 investors as of 4 May 2026. The breakdown of the total 38 between HCMC and Da Nang has not been publicly disclosed.