The sandbox era is over
In March 2026, SAMA (Saudi Central Bank) issued its first formal open banking licences, with Lean Technologies becoming the first company to receive a major payment institution licence specifically for open banking in the Kingdom. This is a significant moment — not just for the companies that received licences, but for the entire Saudi fintech ecosystem.
For the past several years, open banking in Saudi Arabia operated within SAMA's regulatory sandbox. The sandbox was genuinely useful — it gave fintech companies like Malaa Technologies the space to build, test, and iterate on open banking products under SAMA's supervision without the full weight of a licensed regulatory regime. But sandboxes are, by design, temporary. They are the proof of concept phase, not the production environment.
The March 2026 licences signal that SAMA believes the framework is mature enough, and the technology proven enough, to move into full regulatory accountability. That is both good news and a significant operational challenge.
I have been building and running operations at Malaa Technologies through the sandbox period and into the licensing transition. The shift is real, and the operational implications are substantial. Here's what it actually changes.
A brief timeline of Saudi open banking
What changes operationally: sandbox vs. licensed
The differences between operating in a regulatory sandbox and operating as a licensed entity are not just legal technicalities — they have direct operational consequences.
- Lighter-touch compliance requirements
- SAMA oversight but no formal licence conditions
- More flexibility to iterate and change direction
- Lower capital requirements
- Informal incident reporting
- Process documentation encouraged but not mandated
- Full SAMA compliance obligations
- Formal licence conditions with ongoing audit
- Material changes require SAMA notification or approval
- Defined capital adequacy requirements
- Mandatory incident reporting to SAMA
- Formal process documentation and evidence required
The three biggest operational shifts
1. Compliance infrastructure is now load-bearing
In the sandbox, compliance was important but had some flexibility. In a licensed environment, compliance infrastructure is load-bearing — it is what keeps your licence. Operations teams need to invest in formal process documentation, internal audit functions, and systems that generate the evidence SAMA requires on an ongoing basis.
This means building the kind of operational rigour that can survive an audit at any time. It means processes cannot live in one person's head. It means every exception, every incident, every data anomaly needs to be captured, classified, and resolved through a documented workflow.
2. Incident management becomes regulated
Under the SAMA sandbox, incidents were managed primarily as a product and engineering concern. Under a full licence, incidents that meet certain thresholds must be reported to SAMA within defined timeframes. This requires building a formal incident management capability — detection, classification, escalation, resolution, and regulatory reporting — that did not necessarily exist in the sandbox phase.
For operations teams, this is significant. It is not just about fixing the problem; it is about documenting what happened, why it happened, what the user impact was, and what you did to prevent recurrence — all in a format that satisfies SAMA's requirements.
3. Capital and governance requirements tighten
A SAMA open banking licence comes with capital adequacy requirements and governance obligations. This means fintech companies need to demonstrate that they have the financial stability and governance structures to operate as regulated entities — not just as innovative startups. For operations leaders, this means contributing to board reporting, being able to speak to risk frameworks, and ensuring that operational processes meet the bar set by SAMA's expectations for licensed firms.
A critical distinction: SAMA licences open banking, CMA licences investment
It is worth being precise about something that is frequently misunderstood: SAMA does not regulate investment products. SAMA's open banking licensing covers the connectivity layer — accessing bank account data, initiating payments, sharing financial information between banks and licensed fintechs.
Investment products — ETF portfolios, fund management, wealth management tools, securities — are regulated by the CMA (Capital Market Authority), Saudi Arabia's capital markets regulator. Any platform that wants to offer investment products to Saudi users needs CMA authorisation, separately from any SAMA open banking licence.
At Malaa Technologies, this means operating across two regulatory frameworks simultaneously. The open banking layer — connecting users' Saudi bank accounts to the platform — is under SAMA. The investment products we build on top of that infrastructure are under CMA. The operational complexity of maintaining compliance with both regulators, meeting their separate audit requirements, and building processes that satisfy both frameworks, is one of the defining challenges of running operations at a platform like Malaa.
When people ask "is Malaa a SAMA-regulated company?" — the answer is yes, for the open banking side. And "is Malaa CMA-regulated?" — also yes, for the investment side. Both are required. Neither is optional.
What Phase 2 means for investment platforms
SAMA's open banking framework is being rolled out in phases. Phase 1 focused on account information services (AIS) — the ability to connect accounts and view data. Phase 2 prioritises payment initiation services (PIS) — the ability to initiate payments directly from bank accounts.
For investment platforms, Phase 2 is potentially transformative. It enables seamless investment funding — users could invest directly from their bank account without any manual transfer steps. It enables automated savings — platforms could move money into investment products automatically, with consent. And it enables real-time portfolio rebalancing triggered by user-defined rules.
The operational work to support Phase 2 is substantial. Payment initiation is higher-stakes than account information — errors in investment funding flows have direct financial consequences for users. The reconciliation requirements, error handling, and user communication processes are all more demanding than in the AIS phase.
The broader significance for Saudi fintech
The move from sandbox to licensing is a maturity signal for the entire Saudi fintech ecosystem. It tells international investors, strategic partners, and talent that Saudi Arabia's open banking market is real — not a regulatory experiment, but a licensed industry. That changes the conversation significantly.
It also raises the bar for all operators. The fintech companies that invested in building serious operational infrastructure during the sandbox phase are better positioned. Those that treated the sandbox as a reason to defer operational rigor will find the licensing transition more difficult.
Saudi Arabia is building one of the most intentional open banking ecosystems in the world. SAMA's approach — sandbox first, licensing second, international standards throughout — is a model other markets are watching. Being here, building here, during this moment, is what makes this work genuinely exciting.
Frequently asked questions
When did SAMA issue open banking licences in Saudi Arabia?
What does a SAMA open banking licence allow fintech companies to do?
What changed operationally when SAMA moved from sandbox to full licensing?
What is Phase 2 of Saudi Arabia's open banking framework?
How does SAMA's open banking licensing affect investment platforms?
Building or operating in Saudi fintech?
I'm always open to conversations about open banking, licensing, and operations in Saudi Arabia's fintech ecosystem.
Send me an email → View my profile