In this article, Jonny examines how Hong Kong’s financial sector is stabilising while still operating under significant geopolitical and talent-related uncertainty. Hiring activity appears to be recovering, yet talent outflows continue, and firms remain cautious, with limited investment in political risk capabilities despite rising regional complexity. As Hong Kong deepens its integration with Mainland China, financial institutions face both new opportunities and heightened exposure to external shocks. To navigate the next phase, Jonny highlights the need for stronger local risk oversight, strategic talent planning, and organisational flexibility amid ongoing volatility.
Questions still remain about the city’s future growth trajectory and how its competitiveness stacks up against regional and global peers – making uncertainty the one constant in an otherwise improving landscape.
The raw data suggests that hiring volumes and talent flows between Hong Kong and Singapore have nearly returned to parity – a welcome change when compared to the imbalance of COVID times. In reality, however, this shift reflects the broader challenges now facing both economic hubs rather than any meaningful rebound in Hong Kong’s optimism or momentum. And when comparing Hong Kong to several other developed markets, a broadly concerning reality continues; talent is leaving Hong Kong at a faster rate than it is arriving (see Fig. 1).
| Location | Ratio of individuals leaving Hong Kong vs. entering |
| Singapore | 1.1 : 1 |
| United States | 1.2 : 1 |
| Canada | 1.2 : 1 |
| Australia | 1.5 : 1 |
| UAE | 1.3 : 1 |
| United Kingdom | 1.2 : 1 |
Fig 1. Talent Flows from Hong Kong over the past 12 months (source: LinkedIn Talent Insights)
For financial services firms, the ongoing, and in many cases, increasing political and economic uncertainty in both ‘Eastern’ and ‘Western’ markets is driving a period of stagnation across hiring markets, especially in risk management and wider control functions. Banks, for example, may continue to post impressive – if not record – revenues and profits in the region, but with only limited clarity on any roadmap for China’s economic turnaround, and the US’ profound ability to dictate market direction with a simple tweet, true investment and expansion into Hong Kong and Greater China teams continues to elude.
When examining the hiring and growth rates across sectors, a clear mismatch is observed across financial services and other industries, notably technology. Over the past 12 months, international banks have typically seen headcount growth of 2-4%, insurers marginally higher at 6-8%, whilst the likes of Tencent and Huawei have seen employee growth of 18% and 29% respectively. (Source: LinkedIn talent insights)
Given these hiring limitations and despite Hong Kong’s position at the intersection of these political tensions, significant investment in dedicated political risk management remains limited.
Against this increasingly hostile political backdrop, an important question emerges: are existing political and country risk teams – often led from, and in many cases solely based in the US or UK – truly equipped to face the myriad challenges expected to evolve in Greater China over the coming years? In this article, we examine the overall situation on the ground in Hong Kong, current hiring trends across core risk functions and the wider financial services market, and the key issues financial institutions need to be braced for.
Despite significant ongoing headwinds (China and Hong Kong Corporate Real Estate as a prime example), the ‘post-COVID’ years have, in many cases, seen positive performance and financial results for a variety of financial services firms. Hedge funds and global markets teams have successfully ridden the volatility in equity markets, insurers have capitalised on the sheer scale of the emergent Mainland China customer base, and capital markets businesses are busy once more as Hong Kong’s IPO waitlist continues to balloon. However, this optimism does coexist alongside the precariousness of the political landscape, not least the veritable tightrope that is the US-China relationship.
“Whilst this looks incredibly promising for now, we are conscious that all it takes is one major decision or announcement in either the US or China, and this pipeline could be reduced significantly” – Senior Risk Leader, Asian Non-Bank Financial Institution
This is the key challenge for risk management and wider control functions across Hong Kong: how to be optimised and right-sized to meet these complexities and capitalise on any potential growth areas, whilst simultaneously operating in a state of uncertainty that drives wider cost controls and hiring limitations.
It is in the sell-side, especially, that this limited hiring activity is most apparent, with many regional risk management teams remaining the same size as they have for years, if not going through periods of headcount reduction in the core hubs of Hong Kong and Singapore. Underpinned by these restrictions, it is no wonder that we have failed to observe true investment in political risk management functions when the need for such skillsets has arguably never been higher. A cursory LinkedIn search for individuals currently holding “Political Risk” or “Country Risk” job titles across key hubs reveals a stark picture; headcount in Hong Kong is currently less than 10% of the markets in both London and New York.
As with all risk and control-related functions, the multi-jurisdictional nature of the Asia Pacific as ‘one region’ cannot be ignored. When business decisions are influenced by the political and regulatory policies of multiple countries simultaneously, the question must be asked: can geopolitical and country-specific risk truly be managed from a headquarters that, in many cases, is not fully attuned to the local, nuanced dynamics at play?
Some institutions – a handful of Tier 1 banks most prominently – do appear further along the maturity curve for their management of political risk management within the region, whilst for others it remains a truly nascent and emerging risk type. So, how have the geopolitical dynamics shifted for Hong Kong over the past 12 months, and what do business leaders and risk managers need to be focused on moving forward? We have been discussing these questions with some leaders in the geopolitical risk space and have shared a summary of their views below.
Over the past 12 months, Hong Kong’s political environment has ultimately continued its shift toward deeper integration with Mainland China. Beijing increasingly positions the city as a “super connector” linking China with the ‘Global South’ and ASEAN economies in particular, rather than solely as an East‑West intermediary. This approach supports Beijing’s broader ambitions in sectors such as artificial intelligence governance, electric vehicles, robotics and the emerging “low‑altitude economy,” with Hong Kong serving as a launch platform for these industries to reach international markets. Although the city continues to engage openly with Western partners, its strategic direction and policy alignment now reflect Mainland economic objectives more directly.
The impact of these geopolitical shifts differs by industry, but for financial services firms, the landscape remains highly sensitive to macro-political developments. Recent APEC and ASEAN summits helped reduce immediate tensions between China and the US, yet core trade and technology disputes remain unresolved. At the same time, Hong Kong continues to benefit from the gradual decoupling of global capital markets, which is steering more Mainland-related activity through the city – but this dynamic is also deepening Hong Kong’s reliance on China’s economy.
“Financial institutions therefore face a complex balance: the city’s role as a cross‑border finance conduit remains essential, yet its exposure to Mainland China policy direction continues to grow, at a time when questions and concerns over the resilience of the onshore economy continue to deepen.”
For business leaders operating in or through Hong Kong, the priority is to strengthen resilience and flexibility in an environment that remains highly dependent on external political conditions. Firms are increasingly adopting structured scenario‑planning to address potential shifts in trade, sanctions, and market access. Many are building contingency plans for tariff escalation, export‑control changes, and possible sanctions risks, while pursuing diversified supply‑chain or “China + 1” strategies to hedge exposure.
Operational resilience, particularly regarding cybersecurity and regulatory compliance, has become a central component of regional risk frameworks. The consensus is that although the current US-China ‘truce’ offers breathing room, it remains a fragile agreement at best, and prudent institutions are preparing for renewed volatility across political and economic fronts.
Despite this uncertainty, Hong Kong continues to demonstrate notable areas of opportunity. It remains a leading venue for financial listings and capital‑raising, supported by sophisticated institutions, robust legal frameworks, and a globally connected investor base. In technology, the city has achieved high rankings in digital competitiveness and innovation, positioning it well for the development of fintech and digital‑asset ecosystems. Simultaneously, new policy initiatives are advancing Hong Kong’s ambitions to become a regional centre for carbon trading and broader ESG investment. For financial services firms, whilst Singapore and Dubai continue to grow as regional and global hubs, Hong Kong remains differentiated by the depth of its financial institutions, its integration with Mainland markets, and the efficiency of its capital‑market infrastructure.
Taken together, these developments highlight that although the balance of risk and opportunity is shifting, Hong Kong retains the institutional depth and adaptive capacity to turn regional volatility into renewed relevance.`
Despite the challenges mentioned above, one can still point to niche areas of growth in the market, and it is true that select incremental hiring can still be observed in pockets. This is particularly evident in the non-banking sector as firms embrace new markets or geographies; take, for example, the significant hiring efforts currently being undertaken in the stablecoin market, or dedicated Equities or Macro Risk Manager hires at hedge funds that had previously operated with one ‘generalist’.
However, within banking and traditional investment management firms, the vast majority of what we have observed continues to be replacement hires or hiring outside of Hong Kong and Singapore. Strategic hires and leadership roles will continue to be made locally, and it is encouraging to see a number of global positions being created or relocated to Hong Kong, although it remains the key offshore hubs of India and Malaysia that continue to see volume hiring.
Another trend that has gained momentum through 2025 is the increased use of contract and interim staff within financial services firms. Unlike the UK – where this model is well-established – the interim market in Hong Kong has traditionally been limited to large international banks. This year, however, we have seen smaller institutions adopt the approach as a way to manage headcount restrictions and navigate tighter budget conditions.
“Whilst our hiring volumes have admittedly been reduced this year, we have made approximately 50% of these hires on a contract basis” – TA Leader, Asset Manager.
One clear opportunity for Hong Kong in addressing any talent outflows and resultant skills gaps is the significant talent pool just north of the border. According to recent figures from the Hong Kong Government, the 12 months of June ‘24-’25 have seen approximately 190,000 applications across all available talent schemes, of which 26% were via the Top Talent Pass Scheme (TTPS) and 16% via the Admission Scheme for Mainland Talents and Professionals (ASMTP). In 2025 alone, 94% of the TTPS applicants were based in Mainland China.
This talent pool brings valuable skills in areas such as quantitative risk, financial technology, and local regulatory engagement in particular; capabilities that complement Hong Kong’s established financial expertise. At the same time, hiring managers note that the integration of new talent requires thoughtful alignment, particularly in adapting to Hong Kong’s cross‑market context, international client exposure, and corporate governance frameworks. In time, this convergence is expected to broaden Hong Kong’s leadership bench and create a more interconnected talent ecosystem across Greater China.
Returning to the impact of current US policymaking, not only is the current leadership impacting Hong Kong from a political and economic perspective, current leadership is also having a significant impact on talent and hiring considerations at a micro level. U.S.-headquartered institutions are having to precariously balance regional commitments to areas such as diversity and inclusion and ESG/climate risk with U.S.-based decision makers that inhibit them from being as vocal and public with such initiatives as they were 12 months ago.
“We remain committed to our existing initiatives in the region. We need to be aware of the potential sensitivities in HQ, but our local stance hasn’t changed” – TA Leader, Investment Bank
As geopolitical volatility persists and the pace of structural reform remains uncertain, Hong Kong’s financial sector faces another pivotal period of adaptation.
Success will hinge on three imperatives:
Hong Kong has long thrived as the city that bounces back, but the coming years will continue to test this resilience. The challenges facing financial institutions – geopolitical, economic, and talent-driven – will not dissipate anytime soon, and firms must be disciplined, data-driven, and committed in their approach to managing local risk and talent.
If you are interested in scheduling a meeting to discuss any of the above trends in more depth, please do get in touch.
