According to Fortune, Asian companies that traditionally flocked to US exchanges like NYSE and NASDAQ are now exploring regional alternatives, with Morgan Stanley’s Vikram Lokur calling this shift “the re-globalization of regional hubs.” Hong Kong has seen a surge in dual listings from both mainland Chinese companies seeking international capital and US-listed Chinese firms wanting mainland investor access. Meanwhile, Singapore’s Monetary Authority is investing SG$5 billion ($3.8 billion) into local markets, and Southeast Asia’s IPO market is recovering with total proceeds up 53% this year, driven by real estate, financial services, and consumer sectors. Japan’s corporate governance reforms have proven successful with the Nikkei 225 hitting record highs, inspiring similar programs in South Korea, Singapore, and Malaysia.
The financial nationalism trend
Here’s what’s really interesting: we’re seeing what amounts to financial nationalism taking root across Asia. Governments are actively encouraging local investment rather than sending capital overseas. Malaysia’s massive pension funds are keeping money domestic, Singapore’s putting billions into its own market, and suddenly these regional hubs don’t need Wall Street as desperately as they once did. But is this sustainable? I’m skeptical about whether these protectionist policies can create the deep, liquid markets that truly global companies need. There’s a reason everyone went to New York in the first place—the capital pools are just enormous compared to what any single Asian market can offer.
Governance reforms meet reality
Japan’s success with corporate governance reforms looks impressive on paper—the Nikkei’s performance speaks for itself. But Yuelin Yang from the Asian Corporate Governance Association warns about the “nitty-gritty differences” that remain huge obstacles. Cross-shareholdings and tunneling practices are deeply embedded in many Asian business cultures. Basically, when companies own chunks of each other and majority shareholders can secretly funnel business to themselves, you’ve got structural problems that won’t disappear with a few regulatory tweaks. These aren’t quick fixes—they’re generational shifts in how business gets done.
The ASEAN connectivity dream
CGS International’s Jason Saw makes an intriguing point about ASEAN potentially competing as a unified bloc. “If we’re able to narrow that pool of capital together to say that we’re one bloc, that’s going to be something really powerful,” he says. But let’s be real—ASEAN integration has been a talking point for decades with limited practical success. The regulatory differences, currency issues, and political tensions between member countries make true financial integration incredibly challenging. Still, the 53% IPO growth across Southeast Asia suggests something is working. Maybe it’s not about replacing US markets entirely, but creating viable regional alternatives.
Future finance reimagined
Morgan Stanley’s Lokur might be onto the most important shift here: “The key question for many companies in the last century was where to list. But for the next century it would be about how to connect.” As investment tools make global market access easier, the physical location of a listing becomes less critical. We’re already seeing this with companies pursuing dual listings and cross-border investment flows. The real question is whether Asian markets can compete on transparency, liquidity, and governance rather than just patriotism. That’s where the corporate governance reforms become crucial—and where the real battle for global capital will be fought.
