Messaging giant Swift, long on the sidelines, is now adopting blockchain itself: together with 17 major banks and Chainlink, it is building a shared ledger for round-the-clock payments, without banks having to replace their infrastructure.
Since Swift went live in 1977, the network has been the nervous system of global banking — not by moving money, but by sending standardized payment messages between more than 11,500 financial institutions in over 220 countries. Settlement itself has always happened elsewhere, through chains of correspondent banks, with limited operating hours and multiple intermediaries along the way. That is precisely the model now being challenged by blockchain-based alternatives such as stablecoins and tokenized deposits, which promise settlement around the clock, without pauses on weekends or holidays. For Nordic banks and investors, who rely heavily on Swift for cross-border payments, whether the network can keep pace with this shift is anything but academic.
Swift has historically never owned or moved money itself. The network was established in 1973 by 239 banks in 15 countries as a cooperative, aiming to replace unreliable telex-based communication with a standardized, secure way for banks to instruct each other. The actual transfer of funds has always run through existing payment infrastructure, not through the Swift network itself.
Now Swift is building something fundamentally new: a blockchain-based shared ledger, developed together with more than 40 financial institutions worldwide. The ledger is designed to give participating banks a shared, trusted view of what they owe each other — a synchronized picture of funded payment obligations, as Swift itself describes it. In March 2026, Swift completed the design phase and built the first version to enable interoperability between banks' tokenized deposits. In July, 17 major banks, including UBS, BNP Paribas, BNY, Citi, HSBC and Wells Fargo, began testing live transactions across six continents, with a minimum viable version of the product expected this summer.
The point is not to replace today's system, Swift repeatedly stresses. Final settlement will still happen through existing payment infrastructure — the blockchain adds a coordination layer on top, not a substitute.
The collaboration between Swift and oracle company Chainlink dates back to the Sibos conference in Geneva in 2016, when blockchain technology was still a peripheral topic for most finance executives. Chainlink founder Sergey Nazarov demonstrated a solution in which a smart contract pulled interest-rate data from outside the blockchain and generated payment messages sent over Swift's infrastructure. Swift's head of strategy, Jonathan Ehrenfeld, has described this as the start of a collaboration that continues today.
The partnership has developed gradually since then. In 2022, Swift and Chainlink announced how Chainlink's Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) could move data and tokens between institutions, initiated using existing Swift infrastructure. In 2023, the two companies, together with more than a dozen financial institutions including Euroclear, Clearstream, Citi and BNY Mellon, tested how tokenized assets could be transferred across different blockchains. In 2024, Chainlink, Swift and Euroclear joined a broader industry initiative to standardize corporate actions data using artificial intelligence and oracle networks.
At the core of the technical solution, Chainlink's technology lets Swift's existing messaging standard, ISO 20022, trigger events on the blockchain. When a bank sends an ordinary Swift message, Chainlink's Runtime Environment (CRE) receives it and activates a transaction on the blockchain — for example, a subscription or redemption in a tokenized fund.
The clearest example of how the system works in practice came in 2025 through a pilot with UBS Tokenize. There, UBS sent standardized ISO 20022 messages through Swift, which were received by Chainlink's Runtime Environment. This automatically triggered subscription and redemption processes in a tokenized fund, handled through Chainlink's Digital Transfer Agent standard.
What makes the pilot interesting isn't just that it worked, but what the bank didn't have to do. UBS needed no new infrastructure for identity management, key management or settlement — everything ran through channels the bank already used daily. Chainlink itself describes the model as plug-and-play.
Nazarov has called the solution a landmark innovation, pointing out that the same mechanics could let asset managers and other players handle tokenized assets directly on the blockchain, without waiting for entirely new systems to be built from scratch.
The most bank-friendly argument Swift and Chainlink make is that no one has to tear down and rebuild. Swift itself describes the solution as interoperability without disruption — banks can adopt the ledger at their own pace, without having to replace core systems. The company describes the future payments landscape as "multi-rail," where existing infrastructure, new networks and different forms of value coexist, coordinated through a shared orchestration layer.
Chainlink's model is designed for the same purpose: banks connect to the blockchain through infrastructure they already have. The benefit, according to both companies, is reduced complexity and lower cost compared to building entirely new systems for every blockchain a bank wants to engage with.
At the same time, the change is real, even if gradual. A shared ledger of obligations between banks introduces a new layer of infrastructure — one that didn't previously exist in Swift's world, where messaging and settlement have always been two separate processes.
The pressure is coming from several directions at once. Stablecoin issuers already offer transfers that can settle outside banks' normal operating hours. Tokenized deposits — digital versions of ordinary bank deposits on a blockchain — are a more bank-friendly variant of the same idea, with platforms like Partior already running real-time interbank transfers between participating institutions.
Meanwhile, analyses point out that much of the friction in cross-border payments today sits in the "last mile" — the stretch from the receiving bank to the final account, where local regulations and settlement systems still cause delays. For individuals sending money across borders, it costs an average of around 12 dollars to transfer 200 dollars, according to figures from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS). At the same time, 75 percent of all Swift payments already reach the receiving bank within ten minutes, often within seconds — it's the very last step to the end customer that remains the slowest.
Swift itself does not frame the situation as a battle it can win or lose in isolation, but as a development in which several models will coexist. The direction of travel is not replacement but coexistence, Deutsche Bank's head of strategy, Jonas Stepczynski, has said of the development. Still, it's hard to overlook that Swift's new push comes just as the alternatives are becoming real competitors — and that the messaging giant, rather than being overtaken by blockchain, has chosen to build it into its own infrastructure.
Sources: CoinDesk, Deutsche Bank, Swift, Chainlink, Cryptonews
You have read what you can read for free. With an account you get unlimited access to all news and articles on kaupr.io — and become part of the network of investors, professionals and builders following onchain finance.
