Part I: The Evolution of International Payment Systems
1. The Early Days of Cross-Border Payments
Historically, cross-border payments were facilitated through:
Gold and Silver Settlements: Merchants exchanged precious metals, which were universally recognized as stores of value.
Bills of Exchange: Used in medieval trade, these paper instruments allowed merchants to settle accounts without moving physical assets.
Correspondent Banking: In the 19th and 20th centuries, banks built networks of correspondent relationships to settle payments across borders.
These methods were slow, costly, and prone to risks such as fraud, counterparty default, and political instability.
2. The Bretton Woods System and Beyond
After World War II, the Bretton Woods Agreement (1944) created the U.S. dollar–centric system, where the dollar was convertible into gold and became the dominant reserve currency. This system enhanced cross-border payments but still relied heavily on correspondent banks.
Following the collapse of Bretton Woods in 1971, fiat currencies began floating freely, further complicating international payments as exchange rate volatility increased.
3. The Rise of Electronic Payment Systems
The digital era of the late 20th century transformed payments:
CHIPS (Clearing House Interbank Payments System) in the U.S.
TARGET2 in Europe.
Fedwire for domestic U.S. transfers.
SWIFT, which emerged as the global financial messaging system connecting thousands of banks.
Part II: SWIFT – The Backbone of Global Financial Messaging
1. What is SWIFT?
Founded in 1973 and headquartered in Belgium, SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) is not a payment system itself but a secure messaging network that enables banks and financial institutions worldwide to exchange standardized financial messages.
Key functions include:
Transmitting payment instructions (wire transfers, securities transactions, trade finance documents).
Enabling standardization through message formats (MT/MX messages).
Providing security with encrypted and authenticated communication channels.
2. How SWIFT Works
Participants: Over 11,000 institutions in 200+ countries.
Message Types: SWIFT MT (Message Type) and newer ISO 20022 MX formats.
Process:
A bank initiates a payment request via SWIFT.
The message is sent securely to the counterparty bank.
Actual fund settlement occurs separately through correspondent banking or clearing systems.
3. Why SWIFT Became Dominant
Global Reach: No other network connected as many banks worldwide.
Security: High encryption standards and authentication.
Neutrality: As a cooperative owned by member institutions, SWIFT is not tied to any single nation-state (though geopolitics complicates this claim).
Efficiency: Faster than telex, fax, or older systems.
4. SWIFT’s Economic and Political Significance
Handles millions of messages daily, representing trillions of dollars in transactions.
Acts as a gatekeeper of the international financial system.
Has been used as a tool of geopolitical leverage, with nations being excluded (e.g., Iran, Russia).
5. Limitations of SWIFT
Not instant: Settlement still depends on correspondent banking, which can take 2–5 days.
Expensive: Multiple intermediaries add costs (correspondent bank fees, FX spreads).
Opaque: Hard for individuals and small businesses to track payments in real time.
Geopolitical risk: Heavy influence from the U.S. and EU raises questions of neutrality.
Part III: Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and the Future of Payments
1. What are CBDCs?
Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) are digital forms of sovereign money issued directly by central banks. Unlike cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin, Ethereum) or stablecoins (USDT, USDC), CBDCs are:
Legal tender, backed by the state.
Centralized, controlled by the central bank.
Stable in value, tied to fiat currencies.
CBDCs can be classified into:
Retail CBDCs: For use by the general public (e.g., digital yuan wallet).
Wholesale CBDCs: For interbank and institutional settlements.
2. Motivations for CBDC Development
Central banks globally are exploring CBDCs for reasons including:
Faster and cheaper payments (especially cross-border).
Financial inclusion for unbanked populations.
Reduced reliance on private intermediaries (Visa, Mastercard, SWIFT).
Geopolitical sovereignty (reducing dollar dependency).
Improved monetary policy tools (programmable money, negative rates).
3. CBDCs in Cross-Border Payments
CBDCs offer potential solutions to SWIFT’s limitations:
Instant settlement: Peer-to-peer transfers between central banks.
Lower cost: Eliminates correspondent banking layers.
Transparency: Real-time tracking of payments.
Programmability: Smart contracts for automated compliance.
4. Leading CBDC Projects Worldwide
China: Digital Yuan (e-CNY) already in pilot across multiple cities and tested for cross-border use.
Europe: The European Central Bank is developing a Digital Euro.
India: The Reserve Bank of India launched pilot programs for the Digital Rupee in 2022.
USA: The Federal Reserve is researching a Digital Dollar, though progress is slower.
Multi-CBDC Platforms: Projects like mBridge (BIS, China, UAE, Thailand, Hong Kong) aim to build interoperable cross-border CBDC networks.
Part IV: SWIFT vs. CBDCs – Collaboration or Competition?
1. Will CBDCs Replace SWIFT?
Possibility: If central banks interconnect CBDCs directly, the need for SWIFT messages may decline.
Reality: Transition will be slow; SWIFT’s vast network is difficult to replicate overnight.
2. SWIFT’s Response
SWIFT is experimenting with CBDC interoperability solutions, connecting multiple digital currencies through its network.
Focus on ISO 20022 standardization to ensure compatibility with CBDC systems.
Partnerships with central banks to ensure relevance in the digital era.
3. Coexistence Scenario
In the short to medium term, SWIFT and CBDCs may coexist:
SWIFT remains dominant for traditional bank-to-bank messaging.
CBDCs gain traction for specific corridors, especially in Asia and emerging markets.Part I: The Evolution of International Payment Systems
1. The Early Days of Cross-Border Payments
Historically, cross-border payments were facilitated through:
Gold and Silver Settlements: Merchants exchanged precious metals, which were universally recognized as stores of value.
Bills of Exchange: Used in medieval trade, these paper instruments allowed merchants to settle accounts without moving physical assets.
Correspondent Banking: In the 19th and 20th centuries, banks built networks of correspondent relationships to settle payments across borders.
These methods were slow, costly, and prone to risks such as fraud, counterparty default, and political instability.
2. The Bretton Woods System and Beyond
After World War II, the Bretton Woods Agreement (1944) created the U.S. dollar–centric system, where the dollar was convertible into gold and became the dominant reserve currency. This system enhanced cross-border payments but still relied heavily on correspondent banks.
Following the collapse of Bretton Woods in 1971, fiat currencies began floating freely, further complicating international payments as exchange rate volatility increased.
3. The Rise of Electronic Payment Systems
The digital era of the late 20th century transformed payments:
CHIPS (Clearing House Interbank Payments System) in the U.S.
TARGET2 in Europe.
Fedwire for domestic U.S. transfers.
SWIFT, which emerged as the global financial messaging system connecting thousands of banks.
Part II: SWIFT – The Backbone of Global Financial Messaging
1. What is SWIFT?
Founded in 1973 and headquartered in Belgium, SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) is not a payment system itself but a secure messaging network that enables banks and financial institutions worldwide to exchange standardized financial messages.
Key functions include:
Transmitting payment instructions (wire transfers, securities transactions, trade finance documents).
Enabling standardization through message formats (MT/MX messages).
Providing security with encrypted and authenticated communication channels.
2. How SWIFT Works
Participants: Over 11,000 institutions in 200+ countries.
Message Types: SWIFT MT (Message Type) and newer ISO 20022 MX formats.
Process:
A bank initiates a payment request via SWIFT.
The message is sent securely to the counterparty bank.
Actual fund settlement occurs separately through correspondent banking or clearing systems.
3. Why SWIFT Became Dominant
Global Reach: No other network connected as many banks worldwide.
Security: High encryption standards and authentication.
Neutrality: As a cooperative owned by member institutions, SWIFT is not tied to any single nation-state (though geopolitics complicates this claim).
Efficiency: Faster than telex, fax, or older systems.
4. SWIFT’s Economic and Political Significance
Handles millions of messages daily, representing trillions of dollars in transactions.
Acts as a gatekeeper of the international financial system.
Has been used as a tool of geopolitical leverage, with nations being excluded (e.g., Iran, Russia).
5. Limitations of SWIFT
Not instant: Settlement still depends on correspondent banking, which can take 2–5 days.
Expensive: Multiple intermediaries add costs (correspondent bank fees, FX spreads).
Opaque: Hard for individuals and small businesses to track payments in real time.
Geopolitical risk: Heavy influence from the U.S. and EU raises questions of neutrality.
Part III: Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and the Future of Payments
1. What are CBDCs?
Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) are digital forms of sovereign money issued directly by central banks. Unlike cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin, Ethereum) or stablecoins (USDT, USDC), CBDCs are:
Legal tender, backed by the state.
Centralized, controlled by the central bank.
Stable in value, tied to fiat currencies.
CBDCs can be classified into:
Retail CBDCs: For use by the general public (e.g., digital yuan wallet).
Wholesale CBDCs: For interbank and institutional settlements.
2. Motivations for CBDC Development
Central banks globally are exploring CBDCs for reasons including:
Faster and cheaper payments (especially cross-border).
Financial inclusion for unbanked populations.
Reduced reliance on private intermediaries (Visa, Mastercard, SWIFT).
Geopolitical sovereignty (reducing dollar dependency).
Improved monetary policy tools (programmable money, negative rates).
3. CBDCs in Cross-Border Payments
CBDCs offer potential solutions to SWIFT’s limitations:
Instant settlement: Peer-to-peer transfers between central banks.
Lower cost: Eliminates correspondent banking layers.
Transparency: Real-time tracking of payments.
Programmability: Smart contracts for automated compliance.
4. Leading CBDC Projects Worldwide
China: Digital Yuan (e-CNY) already in pilot across multiple cities and tested for cross-border use.
Europe: The European Central Bank is developing a Digital Euro.
India: The Reserve Bank of India launched pilot programs for the Digital Rupee in 2022.
USA: The Federal Reserve is researching a Digital Dollar, though progress is slower.
Multi-CBDC Platforms: Projects like mBridge (BIS, China, UAE, Thailand, Hong Kong) aim to build interoperable cross-border CBDC networks.
Part IV: SWIFT vs. CBDCs – Collaboration or Competition?
1. Will CBDCs Replace SWIFT?
Possibility: If central banks interconnect CBDCs directly, the need for SWIFT messages may decline.
Reality: Transition will be slow; SWIFT’s vast network is difficult to replicate overnight.
2. SWIFT’s Response
SWIFT is experimenting with CBDC interoperability solutions, connecting multiple digital currencies through its network.
Focus on ISO 20022 standardization to ensure compatibility with CBDC systems.
Partnerships with central banks to ensure relevance in the digital era.
3. Coexistence Scenario
In the short to medium term, SWIFT and CBDCs may coexist:
SWIFT remains dominant for traditional bank-to-bank messaging.
CBDCs gain traction for specific corridors, especially in Asia and emerging markets.
Part V: Risks, Challenges, and Opportunities
1. Risks of CBDCs
Privacy concerns: Central banks could track every transaction.
Cybersecurity threats: Centralized systems are high-value hacking targets.
Financial disintermediation: Banks may lose deposits if individuals prefer CBDCs.
Geopolitical fragmentation: Competing CBDC blocs (U.S.-led vs China-led) could split the financial system.
2. Risks of SWIFT
Sanctions weaponization undermines neutrality.
Inefficiency relative to new technologies.
Exposure to cyberattacks (e.g., Bangladesh Bank heist in 2016).
3. Opportunities
For SWIFT: Remain the global connector by facilitating CBDC interoperability.
For CBDCs: Create a more inclusive, efficient, and sovereign financial system.
For Businesses and Consumers: Faster remittances, lower costs, better transparency.
Conclusion
International payment systems are undergoing one of the most profound transformations since the Bretton Woods era. SWIFT, the dominant global financial messaging system for decades, remains crucial but faces challenges from new technologies and shifting geopolitics. Meanwhile, CBDCs represent both an opportunity and a threat—promising faster, cheaper, and more sovereign payment infrastructures but also raising risks of fragmentation, surveillance, and competition.
The likely future is not a complete replacement of SWIFT by CBDCs, but rather a hybrid system where SWIFT evolves to act as an interoperability layer while CBDCs gain prominence in specific cross-border corridors.
Ultimately, the future of international payments will depend not only on technological innovation but also on political will, global cooperation, and the balance of power among major economies. The contest between SWIFT and CBDCs is not just about efficiency—it is about who controls the financial arteries of the 21st-century global economy.
1. The Early Days of Cross-Border Payments
Historically, cross-border payments were facilitated through:
Gold and Silver Settlements: Merchants exchanged precious metals, which were universally recognized as stores of value.
Bills of Exchange: Used in medieval trade, these paper instruments allowed merchants to settle accounts without moving physical assets.
Correspondent Banking: In the 19th and 20th centuries, banks built networks of correspondent relationships to settle payments across borders.
These methods were slow, costly, and prone to risks such as fraud, counterparty default, and political instability.
2. The Bretton Woods System and Beyond
After World War II, the Bretton Woods Agreement (1944) created the U.S. dollar–centric system, where the dollar was convertible into gold and became the dominant reserve currency. This system enhanced cross-border payments but still relied heavily on correspondent banks.
Following the collapse of Bretton Woods in 1971, fiat currencies began floating freely, further complicating international payments as exchange rate volatility increased.
3. The Rise of Electronic Payment Systems
The digital era of the late 20th century transformed payments:
CHIPS (Clearing House Interbank Payments System) in the U.S.
TARGET2 in Europe.
Fedwire for domestic U.S. transfers.
SWIFT, which emerged as the global financial messaging system connecting thousands of banks.
Part II: SWIFT – The Backbone of Global Financial Messaging
1. What is SWIFT?
Founded in 1973 and headquartered in Belgium, SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) is not a payment system itself but a secure messaging network that enables banks and financial institutions worldwide to exchange standardized financial messages.
Key functions include:
Transmitting payment instructions (wire transfers, securities transactions, trade finance documents).
Enabling standardization through message formats (MT/MX messages).
Providing security with encrypted and authenticated communication channels.
2. How SWIFT Works
Participants: Over 11,000 institutions in 200+ countries.
Message Types: SWIFT MT (Message Type) and newer ISO 20022 MX formats.
Process:
A bank initiates a payment request via SWIFT.
The message is sent securely to the counterparty bank.
Actual fund settlement occurs separately through correspondent banking or clearing systems.
3. Why SWIFT Became Dominant
Global Reach: No other network connected as many banks worldwide.
Security: High encryption standards and authentication.
Neutrality: As a cooperative owned by member institutions, SWIFT is not tied to any single nation-state (though geopolitics complicates this claim).
Efficiency: Faster than telex, fax, or older systems.
4. SWIFT’s Economic and Political Significance
Handles millions of messages daily, representing trillions of dollars in transactions.
Acts as a gatekeeper of the international financial system.
Has been used as a tool of geopolitical leverage, with nations being excluded (e.g., Iran, Russia).
5. Limitations of SWIFT
Not instant: Settlement still depends on correspondent banking, which can take 2–5 days.
Expensive: Multiple intermediaries add costs (correspondent bank fees, FX spreads).
Opaque: Hard for individuals and small businesses to track payments in real time.
Geopolitical risk: Heavy influence from the U.S. and EU raises questions of neutrality.
Part III: Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and the Future of Payments
1. What are CBDCs?
Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) are digital forms of sovereign money issued directly by central banks. Unlike cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin, Ethereum) or stablecoins (USDT, USDC), CBDCs are:
Legal tender, backed by the state.
Centralized, controlled by the central bank.
Stable in value, tied to fiat currencies.
CBDCs can be classified into:
Retail CBDCs: For use by the general public (e.g., digital yuan wallet).
Wholesale CBDCs: For interbank and institutional settlements.
2. Motivations for CBDC Development
Central banks globally are exploring CBDCs for reasons including:
Faster and cheaper payments (especially cross-border).
Financial inclusion for unbanked populations.
Reduced reliance on private intermediaries (Visa, Mastercard, SWIFT).
Geopolitical sovereignty (reducing dollar dependency).
Improved monetary policy tools (programmable money, negative rates).
3. CBDCs in Cross-Border Payments
CBDCs offer potential solutions to SWIFT’s limitations:
Instant settlement: Peer-to-peer transfers between central banks.
Lower cost: Eliminates correspondent banking layers.
Transparency: Real-time tracking of payments.
Programmability: Smart contracts for automated compliance.
4. Leading CBDC Projects Worldwide
China: Digital Yuan (e-CNY) already in pilot across multiple cities and tested for cross-border use.
Europe: The European Central Bank is developing a Digital Euro.
India: The Reserve Bank of India launched pilot programs for the Digital Rupee in 2022.
USA: The Federal Reserve is researching a Digital Dollar, though progress is slower.
Multi-CBDC Platforms: Projects like mBridge (BIS, China, UAE, Thailand, Hong Kong) aim to build interoperable cross-border CBDC networks.
Part IV: SWIFT vs. CBDCs – Collaboration or Competition?
1. Will CBDCs Replace SWIFT?
Possibility: If central banks interconnect CBDCs directly, the need for SWIFT messages may decline.
Reality: Transition will be slow; SWIFT’s vast network is difficult to replicate overnight.
2. SWIFT’s Response
SWIFT is experimenting with CBDC interoperability solutions, connecting multiple digital currencies through its network.
Focus on ISO 20022 standardization to ensure compatibility with CBDC systems.
Partnerships with central banks to ensure relevance in the digital era.
3. Coexistence Scenario
In the short to medium term, SWIFT and CBDCs may coexist:
SWIFT remains dominant for traditional bank-to-bank messaging.
CBDCs gain traction for specific corridors, especially in Asia and emerging markets.Part I: The Evolution of International Payment Systems
1. The Early Days of Cross-Border Payments
Historically, cross-border payments were facilitated through:
Gold and Silver Settlements: Merchants exchanged precious metals, which were universally recognized as stores of value.
Bills of Exchange: Used in medieval trade, these paper instruments allowed merchants to settle accounts without moving physical assets.
Correspondent Banking: In the 19th and 20th centuries, banks built networks of correspondent relationships to settle payments across borders.
These methods were slow, costly, and prone to risks such as fraud, counterparty default, and political instability.
2. The Bretton Woods System and Beyond
After World War II, the Bretton Woods Agreement (1944) created the U.S. dollar–centric system, where the dollar was convertible into gold and became the dominant reserve currency. This system enhanced cross-border payments but still relied heavily on correspondent banks.
Following the collapse of Bretton Woods in 1971, fiat currencies began floating freely, further complicating international payments as exchange rate volatility increased.
3. The Rise of Electronic Payment Systems
The digital era of the late 20th century transformed payments:
CHIPS (Clearing House Interbank Payments System) in the U.S.
TARGET2 in Europe.
Fedwire for domestic U.S. transfers.
SWIFT, which emerged as the global financial messaging system connecting thousands of banks.
Part II: SWIFT – The Backbone of Global Financial Messaging
1. What is SWIFT?
Founded in 1973 and headquartered in Belgium, SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) is not a payment system itself but a secure messaging network that enables banks and financial institutions worldwide to exchange standardized financial messages.
Key functions include:
Transmitting payment instructions (wire transfers, securities transactions, trade finance documents).
Enabling standardization through message formats (MT/MX messages).
Providing security with encrypted and authenticated communication channels.
2. How SWIFT Works
Participants: Over 11,000 institutions in 200+ countries.
Message Types: SWIFT MT (Message Type) and newer ISO 20022 MX formats.
Process:
A bank initiates a payment request via SWIFT.
The message is sent securely to the counterparty bank.
Actual fund settlement occurs separately through correspondent banking or clearing systems.
3. Why SWIFT Became Dominant
Global Reach: No other network connected as many banks worldwide.
Security: High encryption standards and authentication.
Neutrality: As a cooperative owned by member institutions, SWIFT is not tied to any single nation-state (though geopolitics complicates this claim).
Efficiency: Faster than telex, fax, or older systems.
4. SWIFT’s Economic and Political Significance
Handles millions of messages daily, representing trillions of dollars in transactions.
Acts as a gatekeeper of the international financial system.
Has been used as a tool of geopolitical leverage, with nations being excluded (e.g., Iran, Russia).
5. Limitations of SWIFT
Not instant: Settlement still depends on correspondent banking, which can take 2–5 days.
Expensive: Multiple intermediaries add costs (correspondent bank fees, FX spreads).
Opaque: Hard for individuals and small businesses to track payments in real time.
Geopolitical risk: Heavy influence from the U.S. and EU raises questions of neutrality.
Part III: Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) and the Future of Payments
1. What are CBDCs?
Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) are digital forms of sovereign money issued directly by central banks. Unlike cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin, Ethereum) or stablecoins (USDT, USDC), CBDCs are:
Legal tender, backed by the state.
Centralized, controlled by the central bank.
Stable in value, tied to fiat currencies.
CBDCs can be classified into:
Retail CBDCs: For use by the general public (e.g., digital yuan wallet).
Wholesale CBDCs: For interbank and institutional settlements.
2. Motivations for CBDC Development
Central banks globally are exploring CBDCs for reasons including:
Faster and cheaper payments (especially cross-border).
Financial inclusion for unbanked populations.
Reduced reliance on private intermediaries (Visa, Mastercard, SWIFT).
Geopolitical sovereignty (reducing dollar dependency).
Improved monetary policy tools (programmable money, negative rates).
3. CBDCs in Cross-Border Payments
CBDCs offer potential solutions to SWIFT’s limitations:
Instant settlement: Peer-to-peer transfers between central banks.
Lower cost: Eliminates correspondent banking layers.
Transparency: Real-time tracking of payments.
Programmability: Smart contracts for automated compliance.
4. Leading CBDC Projects Worldwide
China: Digital Yuan (e-CNY) already in pilot across multiple cities and tested for cross-border use.
Europe: The European Central Bank is developing a Digital Euro.
India: The Reserve Bank of India launched pilot programs for the Digital Rupee in 2022.
USA: The Federal Reserve is researching a Digital Dollar, though progress is slower.
Multi-CBDC Platforms: Projects like mBridge (BIS, China, UAE, Thailand, Hong Kong) aim to build interoperable cross-border CBDC networks.
Part IV: SWIFT vs. CBDCs – Collaboration or Competition?
1. Will CBDCs Replace SWIFT?
Possibility: If central banks interconnect CBDCs directly, the need for SWIFT messages may decline.
Reality: Transition will be slow; SWIFT’s vast network is difficult to replicate overnight.
2. SWIFT’s Response
SWIFT is experimenting with CBDC interoperability solutions, connecting multiple digital currencies through its network.
Focus on ISO 20022 standardization to ensure compatibility with CBDC systems.
Partnerships with central banks to ensure relevance in the digital era.
3. Coexistence Scenario
In the short to medium term, SWIFT and CBDCs may coexist:
SWIFT remains dominant for traditional bank-to-bank messaging.
CBDCs gain traction for specific corridors, especially in Asia and emerging markets.
Part V: Risks, Challenges, and Opportunities
1. Risks of CBDCs
Privacy concerns: Central banks could track every transaction.
Cybersecurity threats: Centralized systems are high-value hacking targets.
Financial disintermediation: Banks may lose deposits if individuals prefer CBDCs.
Geopolitical fragmentation: Competing CBDC blocs (U.S.-led vs China-led) could split the financial system.
2. Risks of SWIFT
Sanctions weaponization undermines neutrality.
Inefficiency relative to new technologies.
Exposure to cyberattacks (e.g., Bangladesh Bank heist in 2016).
3. Opportunities
For SWIFT: Remain the global connector by facilitating CBDC interoperability.
For CBDCs: Create a more inclusive, efficient, and sovereign financial system.
For Businesses and Consumers: Faster remittances, lower costs, better transparency.
Conclusion
International payment systems are undergoing one of the most profound transformations since the Bretton Woods era. SWIFT, the dominant global financial messaging system for decades, remains crucial but faces challenges from new technologies and shifting geopolitics. Meanwhile, CBDCs represent both an opportunity and a threat—promising faster, cheaper, and more sovereign payment infrastructures but also raising risks of fragmentation, surveillance, and competition.
The likely future is not a complete replacement of SWIFT by CBDCs, but rather a hybrid system where SWIFT evolves to act as an interoperability layer while CBDCs gain prominence in specific cross-border corridors.
Ultimately, the future of international payments will depend not only on technological innovation but also on political will, global cooperation, and the balance of power among major economies. The contest between SWIFT and CBDCs is not just about efficiency—it is about who controls the financial arteries of the 21st-century global economy.
منشورات ذات صلة
إخلاء المسؤولية
لا يُقصد بالمعلومات والمنشورات أن تكون، أو تشكل، أي نصيحة مالية أو استثمارية أو تجارية أو أنواع أخرى من النصائح أو التوصيات المقدمة أو المعتمدة من TradingView. اقرأ المزيد في شروط الاستخدام.
منشورات ذات صلة
إخلاء المسؤولية
لا يُقصد بالمعلومات والمنشورات أن تكون، أو تشكل، أي نصيحة مالية أو استثمارية أو تجارية أو أنواع أخرى من النصائح أو التوصيات المقدمة أو المعتمدة من TradingView. اقرأ المزيد في شروط الاستخدام.