Nubank went from launching in Mexico in 2020 to 12 million customers by mid-2025. Now they're applying for a US bank charter.
Can they repeat the trick?
Most people see Nubank as a Brazil story.
But Mexico is the untold story—and it reveals how they actually win.
---
Here's what matters:
- Monthly ARPAC: ~$11 (more mature cohorts at $25)
- Cost to serve: $0.80 per customer
- Customer acquisition cost: ~$5-6 (80% organic through word-of-mouth)
- Activity rate: 83%+
- Efficiency ratio: sub-30% (vs 50%+ for traditional banks)
Mexico specifically:
- 10M customers as of Jan 2025 (12M by July)
- Doubled customer base in 12 months
- Now serving 25% of Mexico's banked population
- 3rd largest in credit cards issued
~50% of customers got their first credit card from Nubank
Full banking license approved April 2025
---
The US expansion is real:
- Applied for OCC national charter Sept 2025
- Cristina Junqueira (co-founder) relocated full-time to lead it
- 122M+ customers across Brazil, Mexico, Colombia as the foundation for remittances
---
What traditional bank CEOs miss:
They see Nubank's "single global platform" and "single data platform" and try to copy it.
They get the what.
They miss the how.
- It's not abstracting mainframes and calling it "global."
- It's not forcing one data model on every market.
It's:
- 100% cloud-native from day one
- Custom data pipelines for credit models and personalization
- Product-market fit first, scale second
- Credit cards before checking accounts (the hardest vertical first)
- 80-90% customers acquired through referrals, not paid marketing
- 60% of customers use Nubank as primary bank
- Capital discipline — <5% of revenue on marketing, 4x that on R&D
---
The US market is brutally competitive.
But Nubank's Mexico playbook shows something rare: unit economics that improve in new markets.
Mexico's customer engagement and revenue curves grew faster than Brazil at the same maturity stage.
That's what happens when you arrive with battle-tested tech, proven risk models, and a decade of learning compressed into the launch.
The real question isn't whether Nubank can compete in the US.
It's whether US incumbents are ready for a competitor that knows how to build a bank for 122 million customers while spending $0.80 to serve each one.
Ac
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
EMVCo (the technical body behind Visa, Mastercard, Amex) is creating global standards for "agentic payments."
This is the biggest change in card payments since "tap to pay"
Here's how it works 🧵
Right now, AI agents are phenomenal at finding things to buy.
- Power users are starting to default to their research
- Can compare complex options and summarize
- And when people click through conversion is 2x to 5x higher
But...
There's no agreed way for payment to happen
- There's countless protocols
- x402 for agents accessing other tools
- ACP and A2P from Open AI and Google
- Visa and Mastercard have their own approaches
JPMorgan clients can now swap JPMD for USDC on Base.
That sentence should break the internet.
JP Morgan payments moves $ trillions PER DAY
It dwarfs the entire stablecoin industry.
This is how 1000x more dollars go onchain 🧵
Picture the actual flow:
- A JPMorgan institutional client holds JPMD (bank deposit token).
- They need to transact with a Coinbase customer holding USDC (stablecoin).
A corporation could
1. Move JPM Coin from JPM closed loop to Base 2. Swap JPM Coin for USDC 3. Receive USDC in their base wallet 4. Send that USDC to a 3rd party, or swap it for another bank deposit token
This is the baby step towards going open loop.
Banks have tokenized deposits in closed loop
- Citi
- HSBC
- Deutsche
- JP Morgan
But now those walls have doors that open onto public blockchain rails.
Base becomes the trading floor where closed systems meet open ones.
Stablecoins solve a bottleneck in the internet economy.
20th-century money is too slow, expensive, and infrequent for the demand of internet-scale payments.
This is a pattern that repeats in history.
🧵
1. The Industrial Revolution
- The Royal Mint couldn't create coins fast enough
- The shortage led to widespread counterfeits
- The new wage economy demanded more coins
- So factories with high quality machinery made their own
The Royal Mint accepted this before eventually USING that technology themselves 50 years later
2. The Railroad Boom
- The centralized banking system couldn't provide local capital
- Delaying western expansion and railroad build out
- States passed "free banking" laws
- Local banks set up with reserves at the state
This was tolerated until the 1860s where national charters and centralized money printing and control
The bank lobby is furious about stablecoin yield under the GENIUS Act. They're calling it a "loophole" that needs closing.
But here's what they're missing: We've seen this movie before. And it built an entire generation of fintech companies.
🧵
The GENIUS Act prohibits stablecoin issuers from paying interest directly to holders. Banks claim issuers are skirting this by paying third parties (like exchanges), who then offer rewards or yield to users.
Treasury estimates this could drain $6.6 trillion from bank deposits.
But let's reframe what's actually happening here.
Stablecoin issuers earn yield on reserves (mostly T-bills at 4%+). They keep some, pass most to distributors. Distributors use some for operations, spend some on customer acquisition through rewards.
The world's first 50% stablecoin IPO just happened. Crypto exchange Bullish received $1.15bn in USDC.
This quietly changes everything about how public companies can raise capital.
What actually happened:
• Bullish (NYSE: BLSH) closed their IPO on August 14th
• 50%+ of proceeds came as stablecoins ($1.15bn total)
• Settlement across 8 different stablecoin types
• Majority minted on Solana, custodied by Coinbase
Why this matters - IPO's become more global:
- Traditional IPO is single currency, single jurisdiction
- This IPO had USD + EUR stablecoins from US, Europe, Asia
- The stablecoins also settle instantly (not T+2)