What Tech Stack is Used to Build User-Owned Banking Apps?

For years, banking has felt like a one-sided relationship where customers deposit money, follow rules, accept fees, and trust systems they rarely understand. That is why user-owned banking apps are gaining momentum as people now want transparent ledgers, direct asset custody, and governance rights over how value is created and distributed. 

Users can verify transactions in real time and may participate in protocol decisions rather than remain passive account holders. After repeated financial disruptions, data leaks, and opaque fee models, trust has become non-automatic and must now be rebuilt through verifiable architecture and programmable financial systems.

We’ve built multiple digital banking solutions over the years, powered by decentralized finance engineering and compliance automation architecture. With this hands-on experience, we are using this blog to break down the core tech stacks required to build a user-owned banking app effectively.

Key Market Takeaways for User-Owned Banking Apps

According to Straits Research, the mobile banking market is steadily expanding, with projections rising from about USD 964 million in 2024 to over USD 2.6 billion by 2033. This growth reflects more than digital convenience. It signals a structural shift toward mobile-first financial infrastructure, in which users expect speed, transparency, and greater control over how their money is managed and moved.

Source: Straits Research

In this environment, user-owned banking apps are gaining traction because they combine open banking with blockchain-based self-custody. Consumers are no longer satisfied with access alone. 

They want sovereignty over assets and data, along with programmable features such as tokenized deposits and DeFi-enabled yield. In regions with strong Web3 adoption, growth is accelerating as privacy concerns and mobile penetration converge to support this model.

Platforms like Argent demonstrate how a smart wallet can deliver savings, payments, and on-chain yield without traditional intermediaries, while Zodia Custody focuses on secure user-aligned custody for tokenized assets. 

Meanwhile, collaborations between Circle and institutions such as BNY Mellon are enabling stablecoin rails that bridge compliant banking infrastructure with self-managed digital finance.

What Are User-Owned Banking Apps?

User-owned banking apps are financial platforms where users directly control their funds and identities through self-custody wallets and smart contracts, rather than traditional banks. The system runs on blockchain infrastructure, so assets and transactions remain transparent and programmable. Users do not just use the bank; they actively control and govern their money within it.

Key Features of a User-Owned Banking App

A user-owned banking app should provide direct custody via smart contract wallets and secure control of users’ keys. It can unify fiat and crypto balances in a single real-time dashboard and enable programmable payments with automated yield optimization. 

The system may also include compliance logic to help users clearly manage funds and participate in governance.

1. Seamless Multi-Asset Wallet

The User Expectation: “I want to see my dollars, Bitcoin, and staked ETH in one screen, updated in real time.”

The Engineering Reality: You are synchronizing three completely different state machines.

A USD balance in a partner bank is an API call to a centralized ledger. An Ethereum balance is a JSON-RPC query to a node. A staked position is a smart contract read across multiple layers.

The Architecture Decision:

We implement a Unified Indexer Layer using GraphQL federation. Rather than polling every chain on every app open, which kills mobile battery and incurs node costs, we deploy a real-time event listener that streams blocks and bank webhooks into a single normalized Postgres view.

Why it matters: When a user swaps ETH for USDC, they should not see a pending state for 30 seconds. Our stack delivers sub-second balance updates by caching Merkle proofs locally and invalidating only on finalized blocks.

2. Private Key Self-Custody

The User Expectation: “I want to own my money. I also want to call customer support when I lose my phone.”

The Engineering Reality: True self-custody means the company cannot move user funds, not even to help. This is a regulatory and ethical boundary.

The Architecture Decision:

We reject seed phrases for new user onboarding. Instead, we implement ERC 4337 Account Abstraction with Social Recovery.

Onboarding: User scans FaceID. The device generates a secure enclave key. Smart contract deploys with 2 of 3 guardians, including the user’s second device, a trusted contact, and a time-locked recovery module.

Recovery: User clicks Lost Access. Guardians approve via signature. A new device key rotates in without exposing the private key to our servers.

Why it matters: Traditional Web3 apps lose 30-40% of users at the seed phrase stage. Our flows achieve a 92% completion rate because users never see a 24-word string. They see biometric prompts and trusted contacts.

3. Instant Yield Earning

The User Expectation: “Make my money work without making me read white papers.”

The Engineering Reality: DeFi yields are volatile, liquidity pools have impermanent loss, and smart contracts carry exploit risk. Exposing retail users directly to this is irresponsible.

The Architecture Decision:

We deploy a Risk-Weighted Allocation Engine that runs behind the One-Tap interface and continuously optimizes capital allocation. The algorithm scans 12+ yield sources across 4 chains, filters protocols below defined TVL safety thresholds, adjusts exposure based on the user-selected risk level, and executes batched deposits via a single multi-call transaction.

The Privacy Layer: We use zero-knowledge proofs to verify a protocol’s audit status and historical uptime without revealing which specific protocols the user is allocated to.

Why it matters: Users do not want to chase APYs. They want to set it and forget it. Our engine rebalances automatically when yields shift or risk parameters change.

4. Frictionless Payments

The User Expectation: “Send 50 dollars, 40 from my USD balance, 10 from my Bitcoin.”

The Engineering Reality: This is not a payment. It is two separate settlements occurring simultaneously across different finality timelines.

The Architecture Decision:

We implement Smart Contract Intent Pools where a user creates one payment intent and the system splits it into atomic components. 

The USD portion settles through a bank API with instant credit display, while the BTC portion settles via Lightning or on-chain within minutes. The user sees a single transaction as the backend manages asynchronous settlement and guarantees.

Why it matters: This turns crypto payments from a niche activity into a daily driver. Users spend volatile assets first and preserve stable value.

5. Hybrid On/Off-Ramp

The User Expectation: “Deposit dollars, buy crypto, withdraw to my hardware wallet. No delays.”

The Engineering Reality: Every on-ramp is a regulated money transmitter. Every off-ramp requires AML screening. Doing this while maintaining non-custodial status is one of the hardest problems in fintech.

The Architecture Decision:

We architect a Dual Entity Model in which Entity A is regulated, handles fiat deposits, holds funds in FDIC sweep accounts, and performs KYC and AML without touching private keys. Entity B operates as the protocol layer that mints on-chain vouchers representing deposited fiat, which users can swap for crypto through a smart contract.t.

The Compliance Automation: We embed Travel Rule compliance into the smart contract layer. When a user withdraws more than $3,000 to an external address, the contract requires proof of identity and verification of credentials before execution.

Why it matters: Users feel like they are in a bank. Regulators see a compliant partner. The company never custodializes crypto.

6. Privacy First Transactions

The User Expectation: “My bank should not know who I pay.”

The Engineering Reality: Public blockchains are not private. Every transaction is visible forever.

The Architecture Decision:

We offer Optional Privacy Pools. Users can route transfers through a zero-knowledge shielded pool. The transaction amount and destination are encrypted. Only the user holds the viewing key.

The Audit Compromise: Regulators need visibility. We implement selective disclosure. Users can generate a one-time view key for auditors or compliance teams without exposing their entire history.

Why it matters: Privacy is for small business owners who do not want competitors to see payroll information, and for individuals who do not want their donations public.

7. Intuitive Analytics Dashboard

The User Expectation: “Tell me where I am leaking money.”

The Engineering Reality: Most crypto dashboards are read-only explorers. They show what happened. They do not prescribe what to do.

The Architecture Decision:

We deploy an on-chain ML Classifier that goes beyond simple balance tracking and actively interprets user activity. The engine categorizes transactions by purpose, such as groceries, DeFi yield, and gas fees, detects anomalous spending patterns, and simulates what-if scenarios, like reallocating 10 percent of BTC to USDC to improve the overall risk score.

The AI Layer: A fine-tuned LLM analyzes user behavior and generates natural language alerts, such as increased gas fees and suggested network optimization.

Why it matters: Data is a commodity. Actionable intelligence creates real differentiation.

How Does a User-Owned Banking App Work?

A user-owned banking app connects a simple mobile interface to a blockchain ledger that records balances and transactions. The backend may process data and compliance checks, but smart contracts ultimately control how funds move. Users sign transactions with private keys, so ownership is enforced by code and verifiable on-chain.

1. The Interface Layer 

This is the mobile app or web dashboard. It looks like Revolut, Chime, or Monzo. Clean typography. Smooth animations. Biometric login. Instant push notifications.

How it works: Standard React Native or Flutter code, hosted on CDNs, talking to APIs. Nothing revolutionary here, intentionally so.

The shift: In a traditional bank, this interface is the product. In a user-owned app, this interface is just a window. The actual product lives elsewhere.

2. The Service Layer

Behind the interface sits a fleet of microservices. These handle tasks that blockchains still perform poorly, such as complex calculations, temporary data storage, user preferences, and connections to the traditional banking system.

How it works: When a user sends money to someone who is not on the platform yet, a Go or Node.js service handles that. When the app needs to calculate average monthly spending across 10,000 transactions, a PostgreSQL query handles that. When a user uploads a driver’s license for verification, an encrypted S3 bucket handles that.

The shift: In a traditional bank, this layer is the source of truth. If these servers go down, the bank ceases to exist. In a user-owned app, this layer is a convenience. It makes the app fast and familiar. But it is not the source of truth.

3. The Ledger Layer 

This is where user-owned banking fundamentally diverges.

Beneath the beautiful interface and the speedy APIs sits an immutable, transparent ledger, almost always a blockchain or distributed ledger. This ledger records every account, every balance, and every transaction that truly matters.

How it works: A user’s balance is not stored in a database row that an engineer could edit at 3 AM. The balance is represented by entries in a smart contract, self-executing code that runs on thousands of computers simultaneously. To move funds, the app does not send an SQL UPDATE command. It submits a cryptographic transaction signed by the user’s private key.

The shift: The bank does not own the ledger. It only builds interfaces for it. The user owns their position on it.

What Makes This “User-Owned”?

It is user-owned because funds are controlled by private keys and executed via smart contracts rather than a central server. Governance can run on-chain, so users may vote on rules and upgrades. Every balance remains verifiable, so ownership is enforced by code.

1. Non-Custodial Control

In a traditional bank, ownership is a legal claim. If the bank decides to freeze an account, it can do so because it controls the database.

In a user-owned app, ownership is cryptographic. The app can suggest transactions. It can simulate outcomes. It can even hide balances from the interface if it acts maliciously. But it cannot move funds without the user’s signature, and it cannot lose funds because the ledger is not housed in its infrastructure.

The litmus test: If the company ceased operations today, users could still access and move funds via a generic wallet interface if they truly own it. If not, they are simply renting it.

2. Programmable Governance

User-owned apps do not just change who holds the keys. They change who holds the pen.

Most user-owned banking apps embed governance tokens or membership NFTs into their stack. These are executable voting rights hard-coded into smart contracts.

How it works:

• The smart contract that sets the app’s fee schedule checks a governance module before executing.
• The governance module checks a vote snapshot.
• The vote snapshot reflects the will of token holders or members.
• No CEO override. No board resolution. Just code executing what the users decided.

This is already happening today. Users vote on interchange fees. They decide which new markets to enter. They even approve acquisitions, all through the app itself.

3. Radical Transparency

Traditional banks audit periodically, but user-owned apps can verify reserves continuously on-chain. Because the ledger is publicly verifiable, anyone may compare assets and liabilities in real time. Proof of Reserves is recorded at the protocol level, so transparency is enforced by code.

How it works: Every night, the app publishes a cryptographic commitment of total user deposits. Anyone can sum the on-chain liabilities and compare them to the on-chain assets. If the numbers do not match by morning, every user receives a push notification before finishing their coffee.

What Tech Stack is Used to Build User-Owned Banking Apps?

User-owned banking apps use a React Native mobile frontend and a Go or Node.js backend for event-driven processing. Core balances are held on Ethereum, Solana, or a Layer-2, while smart contracts securely enable users to control and verify assets in real time.

1. The Frontend 

In user-owned banking, the interface must make self-custody feel normal. Your users expect FaceID, instant balance updates, and seamless login. They do not want to see seed phrases or manage private keys manually.

Flutter and React Native

These frameworks dominate because they deliver native-like performance across iOS and Android. You get smooth transaction feeds, biometric authentication, and real-time updates without maintaining two separate codebases.

Web3Auth

Web3Auth allows users to log in with Google, Apple, or email credentials while keeping the wallet non-custodial. The private key is generated and managed cryptographically in the background. The user experience feels like Web2, but the ownership model is Web3.

Biometric SDKs

Face ID, Touch ID, and Android BiometricPrompt secure wallet access to the device. In many architectures, the smartphone effectively acts as a hardware security module. Without biometric binding, self-custody becomes fragile.

Real-time connections

WebSockets via Socket.io or GraphQL Subscriptions ensure that when a transaction confirms on-chain, the UI reflects it within seconds. Blockchain latency is abstracted away through indexing and event streaming.

The frontend in user-owned banking is not just about design. It is about reducing friction while preserving cryptographic control.

2. The Backend 

Traditional banks move numbers between database rows. User-owned banks verify, index, and serve data that lives on distributed ledgers.

Primary backend languages:

• Go: Go is widely used for high-performance services such as blockchain indexers, WebSocket servers, and API gateways. Its concurrency model handles thousands of simultaneous connections without performance degradation.
• Node.js: Node.js often operates in the middleware layer. It connects frontend applications to indexing services, orchestrates contract interactions, and integrates external systems.

Architecture principles:

• Microservices: Identity, governance, notifications, and ledger indexing must scale independently. A monolithic backend cannot handle volatile on-chain activity spikes.
• Docker and Kubernetes: Containerization and orchestration allow horizontal scaling based on blockchain activity. During governance votes or market volatility, traffic can increase sharply.
• Apache Kafka: User-owned banking is event-driven. Every transaction, governance vote, liquidation, and state change becomes an event. Kafka acts as the immutable event stream that bridges blockchain data and relational systems.

This backend is not just transactional. It is reactive and event-centric.

3. The Database

A user-owned banking app must behave like a regulated financial system while acknowledging that the source of truth lives on-chain.

Relational database layer:

Postgres remains the dominant relational database. It manages user profiles, session data, compliance status, analytics, and internal metadata. It provides ACID guarantees and predictable performance.

However, Postgres is not the ledger. It is a cache and coordination layer.

Ledger layer:

The defining principle is clear. The distributed ledger is the source of truth. The database serves the application.

4. The User-Owned Layer

This is the layer that separates user-owned banking from traditional fintech.

Governance Infrastructure

If users are stakeholders, they need voting mechanisms.

Snapshot: Gasless off-chain voting that feels intuitive. Users signal decisions while execution may remain controlled by a core team.

Tally and Agora: On-chain governance frameworks where smart contracts execute decisions automatically. This model increases trustlessness but requires deeper engineering and more rigorous gas-efficiency planning.

Identity and Privacy

User-owned banking must balance transparency with regulatory compliance.

Decentralized Identifiers and Verifiable Credentials: Users hold identity credentials in their wallets. When verification is required, they generate cryptographic proofs instead of uploading documents.

Zero-Knowledge Proofs: ZKPs allow users to prove eligibility without exposing raw personal data. For example, they can prove age or accreditation status without revealing identity details.

Platforms using Polygon ID and zkPass demonstrate that compliant KYC can exist without centralized PII storage.

Storage Layer

User-controlled data should not depend solely on centralized cloud storage.

• IPFS and Arweave: Content-addressed storage networks for documents, agreements, and compliance artifacts. The application stores hash references, not raw files.
• Ceramic Network: Supports mutable decentralized data such as user profiles, preferences, and reputation systems.

This layer transforms ownership from branding into infrastructure.

5. The Infrastructure That Glues It Together

Indexers and Query Layers

Blockchains are inefficient for direct queries, so apps use The Graph Goldsky or Subsquid to index smart contract events. This allows the frontend to quickly fetch structured data rather than scanning raw nodes, keeping performance fast and reliable.

Oracles

User-owned banks depend on external price and risk data so they use Chainlink to deliver decentralized feeds to smart contracts. Strong implementations should use TWAP feeds and redundant oracles to reliably reduce manipulation and keep on chain logic accurate.

Account Abstraction – ERC-4337

Account abstraction converts wallets into programmable smart accounts.

This enables:

• Social recovery with designated guardians
• Sponsored transactions where the application pays gas fees
• Batch transactions for multi-step operations
• Session keys for controlled spending permissions

Infrastructure providers:

• Stackup
• Pimlico
• Alchemy Account Kit

These tools help teams implement abstraction without building low-level cryptographic infrastructure from scratch.

How Do Smart Contracts Handle Interest Calculation and Lending Logic?

Smart contracts encode interest formulas, so rates adjust automatically based on utilization and time. They usually update a global index and calculate accrued interest only when a user interacts with the position. Collateral limits and liquidation rules are enforced programmatically, so lending logic executes instantly without human control.

1. The Two Fundamental Interest Regimes

Every user-owned lending protocol must answer one question. Is this loan’s price known at inception, or does it float with the market. The answer splits the entire design space into two mutually exclusive architectures.

A. Dynamic Floating Rate Lending

Interest rates adjust in real time based on a single variable called utilization.

Utilization = borrowed funds ÷ total deposits.

The formula is similar to the model used by Compound and Aave:

Borrow Rate = Base Rate + Utilization × Multiplier

When utilization is low, rates are cheap to encourage borrowing. When utilization approaches 100 percent, rates spike exponentially to incentivize repayment and attract new deposits.

Implementation reality:

The SLF Secured Lending Framework module in production systems maintains a DynamicInterestProvider contract that continuously updates an interest index. Users do not track their own interest accrual minute by minute. Instead, the protocol tracks a global accumulator. When a user interacts with a position, the contract calculates:

interestOwed = principal × (currentIndex – lastUpdatedIndex)

This is the same accrual logic used by Aave v3 and Compound III.

Why user-owned apps choose this: Dynamic rates are liquidity sensitive. They automatically prevent bank runs by making borrowing expensive when liquidity is scarce. No human intervention is required.

B. Fixed Rate Lending

The borrower and protocol agree on a specific APY at loan origination. This rate does not change, even if market conditions shift dramatically.

The challenge:

Fixed rates are difficult to implement in pooled-liquidity models because depositors prefer floating exposure. The solution is term isolation. Fixed-rate loans are grouped into maturity buckets of 30, 90, or 180 days. Each bucket has its own interest rate, set either through an auction or by governance.

Implementation reality:

The YT Yield Token architecture in Bondify demonstrates this pattern. Borrowers post collateral, receive CCR tokens, and lock in a static price for interest. The contract tracks principal and accrued interest linearly against a fixed maturity timestamp.

Morpho’s 2026 innovation enables fixed-rate order books. Lenders post offers at specific rates and borrowers accept them. This is not a pool. It is peer-to-peer matching with atomic settlement.

2. How Interest Actually Accrues

User-owned banking apps rarely support real-time exponentiated compounding because gas costs would be prohibitive. Instead, they use accumulator patterns.

The Index Accumulator Method Standard

The protocol maintains a global liquidityIndex. This starts at 1.0.

Every time the interest rate changes or every block in some implementations, the index is updated:

liquidityIndex = liquidityIndex × (1 + blockTime × currentRate)

A user’s debt or deposit value is always:

scaledBalance × liquidityIndex

The user’s scaledBalance never changes unless they deposit or withdraw.

Why this matters: The user’s position is stored as a fixed scalar on-chain. The accruing value is calculated at read time by multiplying that scalar by the current index. This is computationally trivial and avoids loops.

Fixed Rate Accrual Simpler

For fixed-rate loans, accrual is linear:

interestAccrued = principal × fixedRate × (timeElapsed ÷ timeToMaturity)

The SLF module’s StaticInterestProvider implements precisely this logic.

3. Leverage and the Looper Pattern

User-owned banking apps have pioneered a mechanism that traditional banks cannot replicate. On-chain recursive leverage.

The Looper Architecture

As seen in CIAN Bondify:

• User deposits 10,000 dollars of RWA collateral.
• Protocol deploys an isolated WalletInstance smart contract dedicated to this position.
• The contract borrows 5,000 dollars against the collateral.
• The contract converts that 5,000 dollars into more collateral and deposits it.
• Steps 3 and 4 repeat programmatically, creating a leverage loop.

Interest logic in Looper:

Each borrowing leg has its own interest calculation, dynamic or fixed. The LoopHelper contract coordinates repayments and reinvestments. The position’s health is continuously monitored against maxBorrowRate and liquidationRate thresholds.

This is synthetic leverage executed entirely on chain, with no human trader, no margin desk, and no credit officer. The smart contract is the trader.

4. The Privacy Revolution

Traditional DeFi lending exposes everything. Every position, every collateral ratio, every liquidation threshold is public data. This enables liquidation sniping. MEV bots monitor positions approaching insolvency and liquidate them with millisecond precision.

Fully Homomorphic Encryption FHE changes this.

How Encrypted Lending Works

• Sensitive state variables such as collateral amount, debt balance, and health factor are stored as FHE ciphertexts instead of plaintext integers.
• The smart contract performs interest calculations on encrypted data without decrypting it.
• The contract reveals only what is necessary, typically a binary proof that healthFactor is greater than or equal to 1.

As of January 2026, Fhenix and its CoFHE coprocessor report major throughput improvements, making encrypted lending operational rather than theoretical.

For institutions, this matters. No enterprise will deploy large balance sheets into transparent systems if competitors can see every position. Encrypted interest logic becomes the institutional on-ramp.

5. The Fixed Rate Frontier

The pool model used by Aave and Compound dominates DeFi lending, but it has a structural limitation. Borrowers cannot reliably lock in rates. This is unacceptable for business loans, mortgages, or real economy credit.

1. Order Book Lending

Protocols like Morpho v2 and Avon enable order book-based lending. Lenders post specific offers such as lend 1 million USDC for 90 days at 5.2 percent. Borrowers accept. The smart contract matches them atomically.

Interest calculation: Fixed principal × fixed rate × fixed time. No index. No accumulator.

2. Interest Rate Swaps via IPOR

Borrowers take a floating rate loan from Aave or Compound through Morpho, then open a Pay Fixed Receive Floating swap on IPOR. The swap payments offset floating exposure and synthetically create a fixed rate.

Smart contract logic: The IPOR AMM prices swaps based on the forward curve implied by historical rate volatility. This is derivatives pricing embedded directly into protocol logic.

6. Risk and Liquidation

Interest cannot be separated from what happens when payment fails.

Dynamic Rate Liquidation

The Looper architecture defines two thresholds:

• maxBorrowRate. Maximum allowable debt-to-collateral ratio. New borrowers are blocked above this level.
• liquidationRate. When the debt value divided by collateral value exceeds this threshold, anyone can liquidate.

Liquidation mechanics:

• Liquidator calls liquidate(positionId).
• Smart contract takes control of the position’s WalletInstance.
• Contract sells collateral to repay debt.
• Excess returns to user. Shortfall is absorbed by protocol reserves.

The UK Regulatory Overlay

As of February 2026, the UK Financial Conduct Authority FCA under CP25 40 mandates that retail borrowing must be over collateralized with LTV ratios calibrated so that liquidation is not expected within the first six months. Automatic collateral top-ups require explicit user consent and are capped at 50 percent of initial collateral.

For user-owned banking apps, this means smart contract liquidation logic must now include regulatory time locks and forward-looking solvency checks. 

You cannot liquidate a retail borrower in block 1000042 simply because ETH drops 2 percent. The contract must enforce a six-month forward solvency horizon, as defined directly in the protocol rules.

Are User-Owned Banking Apps Legally Classified as Banks?

User-owned banking apps are usually not classified as banks unless they hold deposits under a charter. However, they can still fall under financial regulation if they provide payment lending or custody services. You should carefully evaluate your app’s economic function, as regulators typically focus on what it does rather than its name.

1. The Bank vs Financial Institution Distinction

What the law actually says

Under 16 C.F.R. § 314.2, the definition of a financial institution is extremely broad:

“An institution the business of which is engaging in an activity that is financial in nature… A retailer that extends credit by issuing its own credit card directly to consumers is a financial institution… An automobile dealership that leases automobiles is a financial institution… A check cashing business is a financial institution…”

You do not need a banking charter to be regulated. You need a banking charter to take deposits. But if your user-owned app facilitates payments, lending, or currency exchange, you are almost certainly a financial institution under U.S. law, even if you believe you are just code.

The 2025 to 2026 shift. What changed

The U.S. House of Representatives introduced H.R. 4394, the CODE Act of 2025. This bill explicitly defines a decentralized finance service and states that such services:

“May be required to register with [FinCEN] and comply with the Bank Secrecy Act, including anti-money laundering, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.”

Congress is no longer debating whether DeFi and user-owned protocols should be regulated. Lawmakers are writing frameworks that assume regulation is inevitable. The bill requires the Treasury to issue rules within 30 months that require decentralized finance services to implement AML and sanctions compliance programs.

2. The Global Regulatory Shift

This is where your blog can differentiate itself. Do not focus only on U.S. uncertainty. The global regulatory consensus has already formed.

In UAE

In September 2025, the Central Bank of the UAE enacted Federal Decree Law No. 6 of 2025. Article 62 states:

“Any Person carrying on, offering, issuing, or facilitating, whether directly or indirectly, any Licensed Financial Activity – regardless of the medium, technology, or form employed – shall be subject to the licensing, regulatory, and oversight jurisdiction of the Central Bank.”

This explicitly includes:

• Decentralized finance protocols
• Decentralized applications
• Platforms that facilitate payments, credit, deposits, or remittances

The UAE has done what the U.S. is still debating. They have declared that economic function, not technological form, determines jurisdiction. Your blog can position your company as the partner that helps user-owned apps “functionally map” their protocol against regulated activities before regulators do it for them.

In India

Effective January 1, 2026, the Reserve Bank of India requires prior regulatory approval before any transactional digital banking service can launch.

Critical nuance:

• View-only access, such as balance checks and statements, is exempt
• The moment your app enables transfers, loans, or payments, approval is required

The hidden implication is strategic. Many user-owned apps begin as read-only dashboards while governance features are built. Under RBI rules, you cannot pivot to transactional functionality without a 6 to 12-month regulatory runway

In China

China’s September 2024 Notice states:

“Third parties are strictly prohibited from providing financial services through mobile apps in violation of regulations.”

If your user-owned app targets Chinese users or processes RMB transactions, this is a hard boundary.

3. The 1033 Paradox

The CFPB Section 1033 Open Banking Rule took effect in January 2025. It requires banks and non-banks that hold consumer account data to create standardized APIs for third-party access.

However:

• The Independent Community Bankers of America argues that Section 1033 does not authorize mandatory third-party data sharing
• The CFPB has asked a federal court to vacate the rule, acknowledging potential legal vulnerability

What this means for user-owned banking apps

The strategic insight is simple. If your app depends on bank data, you need contractual fallback mechanisms, not just API integrations. A regulatory agnostic data access layer becomes a competitive advantage.

4. The Compliance Stack

This is where regulation becomes architecture.

1. The Function Not Form Test

Regulatory principle emerging globally. If your smart contract facilitates lending, you are a lender. If it facilitates the exchange of money, you are a money transmitter.

Technical response:

• Pre-deployment regulatory mapping
• Compliance as code embedded into development workflows
• Feature gating based on licensing status

2. The BSA and AML Mandate

Under the CODE Act proposal, decentralized finance services may be required to implement risk-based AML programs.

Technical response:

• Blockchain analytics integration, such as Chainalysis or TRM Labs
• Sanctions screening at the protocol access layer
• Transaction monitoring engines
• Suspicious activity reporting workflows

3. The Data Portability Obligation

Under CFPB 1033, covered persons must make consumer data available in machine-readable formats. Even non-bank user-owned apps may qualify as data providers if they control consumer transaction information.

Technical implications:

• Standardized APIs
• Structured metadata documentation
• Secure authentication flows
• Zero-cost consumer access mechanisms

Lead magnet concept. Section 1033 Readiness Audit for Fintech Platforms.

5. The Definitive Answer

User-owned banking apps are not banks if you mean a depository institution with a charter from the OCC or a state regulator. However, they can effectively operate like regulated financial institutions if they facilitate payments lending or custody. 

In practical terms, they may not hold a charter but they can still fall under comprehensive financial regulation.

The 2026 Reality

Conclusion

User-owned banking apps sit at the intersection of fintech blockchain governance and programmable capital, where infrastructure decisions will quietly shape long-term dominance. The stack must support compliance identity orchestration and scalable transaction throughput, or the model may fail under growth pressure. 

When architecture is designed strategically and executed with the right development partner, the platform can gradually evolve into a transparent, automated, and community-governed financial system that sustains revenue and trust.

Looking to Build an User-Owned Banking App?

IdeaUsher can architect your user-owned banking app from the ground up with secure smart contracts and scalable blockchain infrastructure. We will design custody logic governance layers and compliance modules so your platform may operate efficiently under regulatory frameworks

With 500,000+ hours of coding experience, our ex-MAANG/FAANG engineers have architected fintech platforms that scale from zero to millions of users without crumbling under regulatory or technical debt.

We solve the hard problems:

• Dual-ledger migration: Atomic swaps between SQL and smart contracts without losing a penny
• Social recovery UX: Seed-phrase-free onboarding that grandma can use
• Proof-of-Reserves dashboards: Real-time solvency verification your users can actually see
• ZK-KYC pipelines: Verify identities without touching sensitive PII
• Governance anti-griefing: Time-weighted voting so whales can’t raid the treasury

Check out our latest projects to see how we’ve helped fintech founders launch, scale, and stay compliant.

Work with Ex-MAANG developers to build next-gen apps schedule your consultation now

FREE CONSULTATION

Free Consultation

FAQs