Mark Wee, head of equity capital markets at UOB, called the GLB a “positive initiative” for introducing a streamlined process, framework, and documentation for simultaneous dual listings.
Ho Cheun Hon, head of equity capital markets, Southeast Asia, at UBS, adds that the measures were a “positive step towards attracting more high-quality issuers to consider listing on SGX”.
David Cheng, head of corporate finance, global investment banking at OCBC, describes the initiative as a “pragmatic and well-calibrated step towards reducing friction for SGX-Nasdaq dual listings, and signals a clear intent to position SGX as a credible capital market for high-growth companies in the region”.
Martin Siah, Singapore country executive of Bank of America (BofA), sees the initiatives as an “important step” in strengthening Singapore’s equity markets and enhancing its attractiveness as a listing venue.
See also: Indonesian stocks slide, credit default swaps widen after Moody’s downgrade
Timothy Pitrelli, a partner at Cooley SG LLP, notes that the initiative is “groundbreaking” and will involve four regulatory bodies: SGX, MAS, Nasdaq, and the US Securities and Exchange Commission.
While Pitrelli is optimistic about the framework’s potential, he acknowledges that tweaks may be required. “Being the first implementation, the framework will inevitably have issues and wrinkles that’ll need to be smoothed out and addressed. It’s impossible to think through all the angles up front.”
Still, he believes a workable framework will be put in place because “the MAS and SGX appear willing to follow the US approach — both in terms of disclosure and timetable.”
See also: Market revival is underway and Singapore will continue to 'raise the game'
The $2-bil dollar question
Under the proposed framework, companies tapping the GLB must have a minimum market capitalisation of $2 billion. They will also have to allocate at least $50 million or 5% of their offering to Singapore retail investors. In addition, they must be listed on Nasdaq’s Global Select Market and maintain either a Singapore-based independent director or compliance advisor.
David Gerald, president and CEO of the Securities Investors Association Singapore, says the $2-billion market cap serves as a “strategic filter targeting mature, globally relevant companies while mitigating the risks associated with ‘young’ unicorns”.
“At the same time, the higher market cap bar differentiates the GLB from the SGX Mainboard in terms of issuer profile and risk characteristics,” he adds, noting that market participants will also need to “clearly understand” how the GLB differs from the SGX Mainboard and Catalist board in terms of admission standards, regulatory philosophy, investor protections and value propositions.
Lock Yin Mei, managing director at Venture Law, agrees: “At $2 billion, the company will be sizeable and will have a larger number of shares that are available for trading, which will enhance the stock’s liquidity.”
Clifford Lee, global head of investment banking at DBS, believes the figure is a “starting point” and that the size must be “meaningful,” especially when the companies are considering a US listing. At the same time, making the figure too large would be somewhat restrictive.
Pitrelli notes that the threshold may have been chosen because “both the SGX and Nasdaq want this bridge to be successful and result in sufficient liquidity in both markets”.
To stay ahead of Singapore and the region’s corporate and economic trends, click here for Latest Section
According to a market insider, the $2-billion threshold was deemed the right size for some of the larger regional tech companies SGX was hoping to attract, while excluding smaller companies the local bourse would prefer to retain within its ecosystem. Ultimately, regulators may be flexible on the figure, since it really depends on the book-building process.
Who will the GLB benefit?
Perhaps the most critical question is whether credible Nasdaq-bound companies will actually choose this route.
OCBC’s Cheng, Pitrelli and Foo Siang Sheng, CGS International Securities’ Singapore head of investment banking, all agree that companies seeking to maintain a connection with Asian markets will find the option “very attractive”, particularly for companies with a “strong Asian business base and global expansion ambitions”.
“For such issuers, the GLB offers a listing venue in a neutral, stable, and well-regulated Asian financial hub where their business models can be easily understood by regional investors. Also, a dual listing can also be considered a hedge against geopolitical risks of purely listing in the US,” says Gerald.
Pitrelli, drawing on his experience advising Nasdaq-listed AvePoint on its SGX secondary listing last year, points out that AvePoint already has a significant business presence in Singapore, the company’s CEO lives here, and Temasek unit 65 Equity Partners is a substantial investor. “That kind of company is clearly an example of an issuer that this framework would find interesting.”
Reports strong client interest, Lock says: “There has been a real buzz among our clients about this. The ability to tap two major stock markets under a harmonised framework means lower costs, faster time-to-market, and the real possibility of a broad investor base and a company profile across two different time zones. We have been working with clients who have been seeking a dual listing, but now are eagerly waiting for these rules to come into law.”
At BofA, Siah also notes positive interest from prospective clients, who are particularly attracted to the GLB’s streamlined process and access to a wider global investor base.
The compliance challenge
Not everyone is convinced the framework adequately addresses all complexities. Robson Lee, director of Kennedys Law, raises several concerns.
“Issuers who qualify for listing on Nasdaq may not be attracted to list on the GLB primarily due to the need to adhere to two sets of statutory and regulatory compliance requirements (at the time of the initial public offering and post-listing continuing legal/regulatory requirements), different time-zones and trading hours, disparate investors’ cultures and mindsets, and having to bear two sets of listing costs and expenses,” says Lee.
He is not sure whether there are enough issue managers, underwriters, and placement agents who are knowledgeable about capital market requirements and practices in both the US and Singapore securities markets, as well as the divergent appetites of investors. These IPO managers also need to have the “requisite” distribution and selling networks to “competently” conduct road shows.
Lee also flags potential complications with the regulatory harmonisation, noting that the proposed safe harbour provisions currently drafted are “not congruent with the US requirements”. This is “likely to manifest as a legal and regulatory problem in compliance and could be a source of confusion and uncertainty.”
Technical issues aside, Lee points out that the Singapore market will have to “maintain and sustain the upswing momentum that started in the second half of 2025 to attract new large issuers to seek a listing on the GLB”.
On the GLB’s criteria for allowing only new issuers to tap the new listing bridge, Lee suggests expanding the list to include existing Singapore-listed issuers that meet the GLB criteria.
However, Lock argues that regulators have done extensive homework, noting that the consultation paper was “very detailed”.
“It is clear a lot of work has been put in by the MAS and SGX to review the voluminous set of US and Singapore rules and regulations, to identify the areas which would need to be harmonised. Speaking as a lawyer, having to look through statutes and documents on a daily basis, this is a phenomenal and very commendable effort.”
Risks and realities
Amid enthusiasm, there are also potential challenges.
Gerald of Sias warns about liquidity risks, adding that it is “crucial” to have measures in place to ensure sufficient trading depth. “Even high-quality issuers rely on a vibrant and deep market to facilitate fair price discovery and foster investor confidence.”
He also highlights execution risks. “Launching a new board with a novel and differentiated regulatory approach requires coordination and alignment across regulators, exchanges, intermediaries, and the legal ecosystem,” he says.
He adds that enforcement should be an area market watchers should pay attention to. “While the dual-enforcement framework is conceptually sound, its practical operation has yet to be tested. Questions may arise over jurisdiction, coordination with foreign regulators, and whether enforcement actions would take place in Singapore or the US.”
Cheng identifies another potential issue: “There could be risks around liquidity fragmentation between Nasdaq and SGX, which could influence aftermarket liquidity and market support on the SGX.”
A market insider, who prefers to remain anonymous, says the GLB could lead investors to trade shares on one exchange. If there is no clear benefit, issuers may question the purpose of having a dual-listing status.
While Lee of DBS sees no downsides, investors could invest directly in Nasdaq-listed counters. It really comes down to the company’s positioning and whether it wants to benefit from the dual trading time zones. Another advantage: specific funds set up to invest in companies listed on the SGX.
The road ahead
Pitrelli expects that details will still need refinement. However, he advises patience: “I think it’s still probably a little early to make a final decision that this is what you’re going to do because it’s just the consultation at this stage and could change.”
However, he sees potential for expansion, noting that the proposals were just a start. “If it’s successful, and if the SGX and the MAS get comfortable with other markets/exchanges, they could look to expand it.”
Lee believes it won’t be easy for other jurisdictions to imitate the GLB if it is successful. “It’s not easy to get regulators to come in and agree on a common set of regulations and approach. This initiative among SGX, MAS, and Nasdaq has been many, many, many months in the works, if not years. You have to have the right timing and meeting of minds and trust to get that going.”
He concludes: “This is a good next step to add flesh to something that has drawn a lot of interest.” He adds: “This complements the slew of initiatives that’ve come up to add more products onto the stock exchange and with that to drive more participation, more liquidity, which will then, in turn, drive more activity on the SGX itself.”
Summing up the broader impact, Lock says: “This further globalises our stock market; it will attract more companies, bankers, lawyers and other practitioners to Singapore. Not a bad thing at all.”
