Five tech businesses retreat in first 10 months of 2026 as Nigeria’s operating costs mount

From Uber and Moove to Gigbanc and Baxi, currency pressures, expensive infrastructure and funding constraints expose the economics threatening technology businesses in Nigeria.

Five prominent technology businesses have exited Nigeria, wound down services or withdrawn major business lines in the first 10 months of 2026, highlighting the growing difficulty of sustaining digital businesses amid currency volatility, high operating costs and constrained funding.

The developments involving ride-hailing companies Uber and Moove, fintech startups Gigbanc and Chimoney, and Onafriq’s Baxi agent-banking business reflect different pressures, but share a common question: whether technology companies can generate sufficient returns to justify the cost of operating in Nigeria.

The decisions are not all full company exits. Uber and Moove ended their Nigerian operations, Gigbanc wound down its services, Chimoney halted new transactions before being acquired, while Onafriq is withdrawing from agent banking but retaining other operations in the country.

Together, the cases expose the gap between Nigeria’s large consumer market and the economics of serving it profitably. Naira depreciation raises the local cost of dollar-denominated infrastructure, inflation increases operating expenses, and weak consumer purchasing power limits how much businesses can charge without losing customers.

Read also: Nigeria reclaims Africa’s startup funding lead for the first time since 2022

Uber, Moove expose mobility economics

Uber ended its Nigerian ride-hailing operations on September 2, 2026, after approximately 12 years in the market. The company cited evolving business priorities and a review of where it would concentrate investment across Africa.

The withdrawal came amid rising fuel and vehicle-maintenance costs, currency volatility and competition from platforms such as Bolt and inDrive. These pressures have made it difficult for ride-hailing operators to balance affordable fares with the need to maintain commercially sustainable operations.

Moove’s decision to end its Nigerian operations in October further exposed the vulnerabilities of the sector. The vehicle-financing company, which was founded in Nigeria, depended partly on ride-hailing demand to support its financing model.

The loss of a major platform partner weakened the economics of its Nigerian business. Under its exit arrangements, eligible customers were to receive full ownership of their vehicles without further payments, with the vehicles valued at approximately N35 billion.

The sequence illustrates how the withdrawal of one technology platform can affect businesses built around its ecosystem. Drivers, vehicle financiers and mobility platforms depend on sufficient passenger demand and earnings to cover fuel, maintenance, financing and other operating expenses.

Ibrahim Ayoade, general secretary of the Amalgamated Union of App-Based Transporters of Nigeria, has described the difficulty of sustaining ride-hailing businesses in a market where consumers prioritise affordability.

He noted that more than 2,500 ride-hailing applications had attempted to enter Nigeria since 2014, with the overwhelming majority failing to achieve scale or remain operational.

The departures do not mean that Nigerians no longer need ride-hailing services. Rather, they raise questions about whether operators can serve that demand at prices passengers can afford while generating enough revenue to cover their costs.

Funding constraints squeeze fintech startups

The pressure extends beyond mobility to fintech businesses that must finance technology infrastructure, regulatory compliance and customer acquisition while competing in a price-sensitive market.

Gigbanc announced in July 2026 that it would wind down its services after struggling to secure sufficient funding to sustain its operations. The company had processed more than N10 billion, but its experience illustrates why transaction volumes alone do not guarantee a viable business.

Fintech companies must meet identity-verification requirements, maintain secure systems and support reliable transactions. These expenses can become difficult to absorb when fundraising slows and customers are unwilling or unable to pay enough to cover the full cost of the service.

Chimoney, a cross-border payments infrastructure startup, halted new transactions and integrations from May 1 after failing to raise enough capital to continue operating. The company began refunding customer balances before its subsequent acquisition by CapitalSage Vantage in October.

Chimoney’s trajectory highlights an important distinction in the technology sector: a startup can cease operating independently without its underlying technology or business necessarily disappearing. Its acquisition offers a potential route for preserving some of the business, even as its original operating model comes to an end.

For early-stage companies, the challenge is particularly acute when they must finance expansion across several markets, each with its own regulatory requirements and operating costs. A limited funding runway leaves little room to absorb unexpected expenses or wait for a product to achieve commercial scale.

Baxi closure reflects changing payment economics

Onafriq’s decision to wind down its Baxi agent-banking business in October provides another illustration of the pressures facing digital financial services.

The company attributed the decision to inflation, naira depreciation, rising operating costs and competitive pressures that undermined the sustainability of its offline agent network. Changes in payment behaviour, including the growing use of instant account-to-account transfers, have also affected the environment in which agent-banking services operate.

Agent networks require spending on distribution, cash availability, technology and day-to-day operations. When these expenses rise faster than transaction revenue, maintaining a large physical network becomes more difficult.

However, Baxi’s closure does not represent a complete withdrawal by Onafriq from Nigeria. The company is retaining its broader cross-border payments and card-issuing operations, making the move a retreat from one business line rather than an exit from the country.

The distinction matters because the wider trend is not simply about foreign companies abandoning Nigeria. It also reflects businesses reassessing which products, services and operating models can remain commercially viable.

Nigeria’s market size faces a profitability test

Godwin Oyedokun, professor of accounting at Lead City University, has identified high energy and financing costs, exchange-rate risks, weak consumer purchasing power and regulatory uncertainties as factors undermining investment.

Gbolade Idakolo, chief executive officer of SD & D Capital Management, has similarly argued that inflation, currency depreciation and rising operating expenses have eroded the projected returns that initially attracted multinational businesses to Nigeria.

These pressures create a difficult equation for technology companies. Many earn revenue in naira but incur some expenses in dollars, leaving them exposed when the local currency weakens. Businesses that depend on low transaction charges or affordable consumer prices may struggle to pass rising costs on to customers.

The consequences extend beyond companies that shut down. Businesses that remain may delay expansion, reduce recruitment or redirect investment towards markets where expected returns are more predictable.

The departures can also create opportunities for local competitors to acquire customers, recruit experienced workers and develop replacement services. But those opportunities will produce lasting benefits only if the remaining businesses can operate sustainably.

Read also: Twelve student startups to compete at JAN national finals

Fixing the economics matters more than market size

Reversing the trend will require more than attracting fresh venture capital or promoting Nigeria’s population and digital growth potential.

More reliable electricity could reduce energy expenses, while greater exchange-rate stability would improve planning for businesses exposed to dollar-denominated infrastructure and services. Predictable regulation and lower barriers to compliance could also make it easier for companies to estimate their costs and commit capital over longer periods.

Consumer purchasing power is equally important. Technology companies cannot rely indefinitely on subsidised prices to attract customers if the revenue generated does not cover the cost of providing their services.

For startups, deeper funding pools and more patient capital could provide additional time to build sustainable businesses. But capital alone cannot resolve weak demand, poor product-market fit or operating models that consistently lose money.

Nigeria retains substantial demand for financial services, digital payments, communications and mobility. The challenge is converting that demand into viable businesses.

The five cases show why the distinction between market opportunity and commercial sustainability matters. For technology investors, Nigeria’s population remains an attraction, but the cost of serving that population increasingly determines whether an investment can deliver acceptable returns.