Serhii Zakharov is CEO of PayDo.
In the early years of fintech, speed was everything. If you were making money, the thinking went, you weren’t spending aggressively enough on growth. Burn was a signal. Investors funded it, boards celebrated it and the companies that grew fastest, whatever it cost them, got the next round at a higher valuation.
I started building at the tail end of that era, and I remember how strange it felt to run a business that had to pay for itself. On paper, it was a disadvantage. Competitors with worse economics could outspend us on marketing, undercut us on price and still raise more money because the market was paying for a story about growth, not a business.
That market is gone, and I don’t think enough founders have absorbed what replaced it.
The new advantage is not simply profitability. It is control over the economics that produce it. In payments, that distinction is everything. A fintech can grow fast while outsourcing the critical parts of its economics to banks, processors and schemes, watching revenue rise while it captures surprisingly little of the value moving across its own platform. The next generation of leaders will compete on more than customer acquisition. They will compete on how much of the stack they control, how efficiently they run it and how much of that efficiency they can pass to customers while keeping enough margin to compound.
The Numbers Moved; So Did The Rules
The macro picture is not subtle. Venture funding into fintech peaked at around $97 billion a year in 2021 and 2022, then fell to roughly $34 billion across 2023 and 2024 before settling near $45 billion. That is not a dip. That is the floor being reset.
When capital was nearly free, growth-at-all-costs was rational. When it isn’t, the same strategy just burns money you can no longer easily replace. McKinsey found that around 80% of fintechs were already reworking their operating models by the time the correction set in, most of them citing profitability and a sustainable cost structure as the reason.
You can see the turn in the public companies. The F-Prime Fintech Index shows the majority of its listed fintechs as now profitable, with roughly $14 billion between them. The contrast is the whole story in one line: In 2021, they grew revenue at 68% a year while burning 21% of it; today, they grow at around 17% and actually make money. Slower on paper, far healthier underneath. BCG’s work with QED found sector EBITDA margins improving nine percentage points through that shift, though most top public fintechs still sit below the “rule of 40” bar investors now use to separate the disciplined from everyone else.
One caution, though, because “profitability” gets misheard as “cut everything.” I have watched companies slash indiscriminately, freeze hiring, kill product investment and confuse being lean with being timid. Real discipline is harder than that. It means spending more on what works, less on what doesn’t and redesigning the parts whose economics are structurally weak. In the growth era, many companies never knew their own unit economics because revenue covered for everything. When it stops covering everything, you find out fast which parts of the business were ever real.
What Actually Separates The Two Groups
The divide comes down to whether profitability was designed in or bolted on.
The companies for whom this is painful built a growth machine and are now retrofitting discipline into it. Every efficiency is a fight because the whole thing was architected to spend. The ones for whom it is almost a non-event treated sound economics as a constraint from the start and never built the habits they now have to unlearn. I’ll be honest that this is partly self-justifying because we were in the second group, and not because we were wise. We simply didn’t have the option to burn indefinitely, so we built a business that worked without it. For years, that felt like a limitation. It turned out to be what mattered.
In payments, the arithmetic is unforgiving, and revenue growth alone tells you almost nothing. The useful questions are granular. What does each transaction contribute after processing and scheme costs? What does a customer cost to onboard, support and keep compliant? How much infrastructure are you running but not monetizing? Where do fraud and chargebacks quietly eat margin? Which customers become more profitable as they scale, and which become less? A business that cannot answer those questions can still grow. It just cannot know whether it is getting better.
The market now prices that understanding directly. Fintech revenue multiples have compressed hard from the 2021 peak, and the companies earning a premium today are the ones clearing the rule of 40. Investors stopped paying for the story. They pay for the arithmetic now.
The Questions Worth Contemplating
If you run a fintech, here is an exercise worth the discomfort. Take the three largest lines of spending in your business and put five questions to each:
1. Does this create measurable value?
2. Can we prove the return with numbers, not a story?
3. Could the same outcome be reached more efficiently?
4. Are we paying someone else for a capability that is strategically important?
5. Does this cost shrink as we scale, or does it scale with us forever?
The first three are the ones most companies know they should ask, even while avoiding the honest answer. It is the last two that separate this era from the one before it. The biggest profitability gains rarely come from negotiating a supplier down a few points or cutting a team and calling it discipline. They come from changing the structure of the business so that the supplier, the integration, the process is no longer consuming the same economics in the first place. If a cost is strategically important and scales with you forever, the answer is rarely to haggle over it. The answer is to own it.
Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?