The startup funding scene in Southeast Asia is showing signs of volatility in 2026. Companies in the region raised US$4.22 billion across 41 equity deals in June, reaching a four-year high. Funding dropped to US$697.9 million through 30 equity deals in July, down 83.5 per cent from the previous month. Notably, five megadeals made up 93 per cent of disclosed June funding, suggesting that the headline rebound was mainly due to a handful of exceptional transactions rather than a broad-based recovery in venture funding.
That distinction matters for founders entering their next phase of growth. As equity funding becomes more selective, startups with lending portfolios, receivables, assets or relatively predictable cash flows have another option to consider: debt. Across Southeast Asia, companies are using syndicated facilities, structured credit and growth debt alongside equity to finance expansion without relying entirely on another share sale.
We explore how Thailand’s scam epidemic is becoming a technology problem and what comes next.
Atome: Scaling a loan book without relying solely on equity
The Singapore-based fintech firm Atome provides perhaps one of the most illustrative examples of this trend. It refreshed and increased its syndicated debt facility to US$345 million in January 2026 from the US$200 million secured in 2024. The facility supports its ‘buy now, pay later’ services, lending products and Pay Later Anywhere card in Singapore, Malaysia and the Philippines.
Unlike a pure software company primarily funding product development and customer acquisition, Atome operates a lending business with a growing loan portfolio. Debt can therefore be more closely aligned with the capital requirements of its lending operations. Atome said the expanded facility would support its loan book and the growth of its credit products. Debt can therefore serve as a growth tool for businesses with lending portfolios and identifiable repayment cash flows, rather than functioning solely as defensive financing.
Funding Societies: Institutional capital for SME lending
Funding Societies shows how the model operates differently. In August 2026, the Southeast Asian digital finance platform obtained a fresh multi-year working capital financing facility from Malaysia Debt Ventures to expand its lending operations to tech-oriented and underserved Malaysian SMEs. Funding Societies’ platform distributes financing across a large base of businesses, while institutional capital can provide the funding base needed to scale those operations.
The new facility builds on Funding Societies’ partnership with Malaysia Debt Ventures dating back to 2022. This illustrates an important difference from traditional venture capital. Instead of relying solely on equity investments for all phases of platform development, business financing platforms can utilise both shareholder capital and institutional funding directed towards lending operations.
Lhoopa: Blended capital for an asset-intensive business
Philippine proptech startup Lhoopa is an example of how blended financing could be especially important for companies operating in asset-intensive physical markets. In June 2026, the company received US$6 million in debt and equity funding from Integra Partners. Lhoopa leverages technology in order to provide affordable housing solutions and relies on networks of brokers, contractors and other partners to deliver housing solutions. In contrast to pure software firms, Lhoopa’s growth involves properties, housing delivery and working with multiple stakeholders. That creates capital requirements that are not always consistent with traditional venture financing models.
The debt-and-equity arrangement enables a company such as Lhoopa to finance different growth activities according to their risk and cash-flow characteristics. While equity funding supports long-term expansion and product development, debt financing can be directed towards activities with clearer cash flows and assets.
Pintarnya: Using credit to scale after a Series A
Indonesian jobs and financial services platform Pintarnya offers another example of how debt can complement venture capital. In January 2026, it secured a US$14 million credit facility from January Capital’s Growth Credit Fund, following a US$16.7 million Series A announced in 2025.
The sequence is notable. Pintarnya had already raised equity funds to finance its overall growth strategy, but the subsequent credit facility provided another source of capital without the need for raising more equity immediately. By the time it secured the facility, Pintarnya had already raised institutional equity and built a platform serving millions of users, giving a credit investor more operating history against which to assess the business. The sequence shows why growth credit need not replace venture capital. Instead, for companies with greater operational visibility, it can provide complementary capital between equity rounds while limiting dilution.
UangCermat: Structured credit for financial expansion
UangCermat, a fintech firm that offers payroll-backed loans to blue-collar employees in Indonesia, is possibly the clearest example of equity and credit serving different purposes. In January 2026, it announced US$26 million in total financing, comprising a US$6.4 million Series A equity round and a US$20 million structured credit facility from SixPoint Capital Management. The financing structure enables the equity portion to support the firm’s broader corporate needs, while the structured credit facility can be used to expand its loan portfolio.
For lending-focused fintech companies, such a distinction can be especially important. Using equity capital to finance every dollar extended to borrowers can be an inefficient way for such businesses to scale. Structured credit may serve as a means of financing the underlying receivables, provided the firm possesses the capacity to properly manage risk, collections and cash flows to support repayment.
Why this matters for Southeast Asia’s next funding cycle
These five companies represent a wider shift in terms of how startup growth may be financed across Southeast Asia. This does not mean that the region will suddenly move away from venture capital. Rather, founders and investors are becoming more conscious of matching the type of capital to the business model and stage of growth. For firms whose business models involve loan portfolios, receivables or relatively predictable cash flows, debt can offer a way to finance growth while preserving ownership. It can also make sense for businesses with assets or contractual revenues that lenders can assess more readily than traditional venture investors.
But debt is not “better VC”. It creates repayment obligations regardless of whether growth meets expectations. Interest costs, covenants and refinancing risk can become significant burdens for companies whose revenues remain uncertain. Equity may indeed be far more appropriate for a startup trying to prove product-market fit, in which investors carry a greater portion of the downside risk. The opportunity thus lies not in opting for debt over equity but in matching capital to the economics of the business.
As the startup ecosystems in Southeast Asia mature, entrepreneurs may opt for financing solutions involving a combination of equity, venture debt, structured credit, working capital facilities and other forms of private capital. The companies best positioned to take advantage of this shift will be those that understand what each instrument is designed to finance, what it costs and which risks it places on the business.