Techcombank uses syndication for Vietnam infrastructure loans

Techcombank said its separate-bank loan book rose 16.3% from the start of the year when project loans excluded from the growth quota are included. Corporate lending reached 542.4 trillion dong, up 20% from the start of 2026 and 17.1% from a year earlier, driven mainly by disbursements to large national infrastructure projects. MBS Securities estimates the bank had financed 18 major projects with outstanding loans of about 20 trillion dong in the first half, a figure that could climb to 50 trillion dong by end-2026.

The economic significance is clear: infrastructure lending is becoming a growth engine for one of Vietnam’s largest private banks at a time when the country needs large amounts of long-term capital to support investment-led expansion. But the business only works if banks can control funding costs, liquidity and regulatory ratios. The central bank’s cap on the share of short-term deposits that can be used for longer-dated lending makes the maturity gap a live issue, especially as credit growth accelerates.

Lottner said Techcombank is not treating itself as the permanent holder of every loan it originates. The bank enters early, arranges and structures financing during construction, then looks after two to three years for syndication, refinancing or bond placement once the project has de-risked and operating cash flow is visible. In practice, that means Techcombank is trying to monetize its underwriting franchise rather than simply stretch its balance sheet.

That approach also helps explain why the lender says it can keep supporting bigger tickets without loading up on term risk. Techcombank is applying Basel III metrics such as the liquidity coverage ratio and net stable funding ratio even though they are not yet mandatory across the system, giving it a tighter internal framework for matching assets and liabilities. In a market where deposit duration is still limited, those ratios can determine how far a bank can stretch before returns on equity are diluted by higher funding costs.

For investors, the key question is whether Techcombank can turn infrastructure finance into a high-quality fee-and-interest stream rather than a balance-sheet trap. The bull case is that early origination gives the bank first look at Vietnam’s best project pipeline, strengthens relationships with corporates and investors, and creates opportunities to distribute risk to domestic and foreign institutions hungry for exposure. The bear case is that if refinancing markets tighten or projects take longer to stabilize, the bank could be left carrying long-duration assets against shorter-dated deposits, pressuring margins and liquidity buffers.

The broader backdrop remains supportive but not risk-free. Vietnam’s banking sector is under pressure to keep lending rates competitive while preserving asset quality and regulatory headroom. If Techcombank’s distribution model works as advertised, it could become a template for private lenders financing the country’s infrastructure cycle. If not, the maturity mismatch problem that Lottner highlighted will become more expensive as credit growth meets tighter funding constraints.