Palm: Vision — Three Pillars¶
Author: Gurjit Pannu (Co-founder) | Date: 2026-02-25 | Source: Notion
Reference Document
This is the co-founder's long-term company vision. It serves as strategic input for product planning — not a committed product roadmap.
The Opportunity¶
Palm sits at the centre of treasury operations today. But we're only scratching the surface. The three pillars below represent where Palm goes next, from a cash visibility tool to the Treasury AI Infrastructure layer that powers how large corporates move, invest, and settle money globally.
How to Read This Document¶
Each pillar is structured around three scenarios that represent increasing levels of ambition, complexity, and regulatory investment:
| Scenario | Role | What Palm Does | Licensing | Revenue Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A: Intelligence Layer | Analytics & visibility provider | Aggregates data, normalises it, surfaces insights and recommendations. No money moves through Palm. | None required in any market. Pure SaaS. | SaaS subscription + data/analytics fees |
| B: Orchestration Layer | Marketplace / order router | Initiates actions — routes orders, triggers payments, directs investments — but a licensed partner executes the transaction. | Lighter licensing (introducing broker, tied agent, appointed representative). Partner-dependent. | Transaction margin + referral fees on top of Scenario A |
| C: Execution Layer | Principal / direct execution venue | Holds the license, takes on regulatory capital, owns the transaction end-to-end. | Full licensing (CFTC swap dealer, SEC broker-dealer, MiCA CASP issuer, FCA authorisation). Significant capital and compliance requirements. | Direct execution spread + all Scenario A and B revenue |
Scenarios are additive — each builds on the one before it. Scenario A is the natural starting point for every pillar: fastest to ship, zero regulatory burden, and meaningful revenue on its own. Scenarios B and C layer on top as the market, licensing, and customer demand justify the investment.
Long-Term Revenue Potential (7–9 Year View)¶
| Scenario | Description | Year 7–9 ARR | What It Assumes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conservative | Scenario A+B only, moderate market share | $80–150M | Palm stays in intelligence + orchestration. No direct execution licenses. Stablecoin adoption slower than expected. ~2–3% of addressable market. |
| Base | Scenario A+B+C in 1–2 markets, solid share | $200–300M | Palm obtains execution licenses in UK and EU. US remains Scenario B only. Stablecoin regulation clarifies. ~3–4% market share. |
| Aggressive | Full Scenario C across markets, stablecoin tailwinds | $350–430M+ | Palm licensed in all three markets. Stablecoin adoption accelerates. ~4–5% market share. Potential fourth pillar (cash forecasting) adds incremental revenue. |
Note on market sizing methodology: These projections are derived from Serviceable Addressable Market (SAM) growth analysis for EU/US/UK large corporates. Current SAM across the three pillars is approximately $1.85B, growing to an estimated $5.8–9.6B over 7–9 years (FX tech at ~10–12% CAGR, investment portals at ~12–15% CAGR, cross-border/stablecoin infrastructure at ~25–35% CAGR). Market share assumptions of 2–5% at maturity are benchmarked against comparable treasury technology companies.
Pillar 1: Palm Owns the FX Flow for Large Corporates¶
The Market¶
Global FX turnover hit $9.6 trillion per day as of April 2025 (BIS Triennial Survey), up 28% from 2022. Corporate FX hedging is no longer optional — 81% of non-financial corporates now actively hedge currency exposure.
Yet the workflow remains broken. Treasury teams toggle between bank portals, spreadsheets, and TMS platforms to manage exposures, request quotes, and reconcile settlements. There is no single intelligence layer sitting across all of it.
Competitive Landscape¶
FX Execution Platforms: 360T (Deutsche Börse), FXall (Refinitiv/LSEG), Bloomberg FXGO, MillTechFX
FX Hedging & Automation: Kantox (BNP Paribas), Bound, Pangea
FX Exposure & Risk Management: Kyriba, GTreasury, Chatham Financial
The key gap: none of these players own the full flow from exposure identification through to settlement reconciliation — and none sit on the normalised treasury data layer that Palm already has.
Market Sizing¶
| Level | Size | Derivation |
|---|---|---|
| TAM | ~$6.6B | Global corporate FX management software + transaction revenue |
| SAM | ~$800M–$1.2B | EU/US/UK large corporates (>$500M revenue) actively managing FX risk through technology |
| SOM (Year 1–2) | ~$2M–$8M | 25–40 enterprise customers from existing base + new logos |
Revenue Uplift by Scenario¶
| Scenario | Near-Term | Year 7–9 |
|---|---|---|
| A (Intelligence) | $1M–$3.2M | — |
| A+B (+ Orchestration) | $2M–$8M | $63–140M |
| A+B+C (+ Execution) | $4M–$16M+ | — |
Path for Palm¶
- Scenario A: Build multi-bank FX rate aggregation, exposure tracking from existing cash data, and AI-powered hedge recommendations
- Scenario B: Enable straight-through processing for FX execution via partner rails (360T, FXall), deliver TCA reporting
- Scenario C: Obtain execution licenses (UK/EU first), build direct execution capability for highest-volume corridors
Pillar 2: Palm Powers the Investment Flow for Treasury Teams¶
The Market¶
Global money market fund AUM reached $6.9 trillion as of February 2025, up 87% in five years. 91% of treasurers plan to maintain or increase MMF investments. The problem: investment decisions are disconnected from cash visibility.
Competitive Landscape¶
Investment Portals & Execution: ICD Portal (Tradeweb), Cachematrix (BlackRock), Money Fund Market
Investment Accounting & Analytics: Clearwater Analytics, BlackRock Aladdin, Bloomberg
Treasury-Integrated Tools: Hazeltree, Addepar, Rho, ION/Kyriba/GTreasury
Nobody connects the full chain: cash position → forecast → investment decision → execution → reconciliation. Palm's normalised data layer makes this possible.
Market Sizing¶
| Level | Size | Derivation |
|---|---|---|
| TAM | ~$1.8–$2.2B | Corporate investment management technology market |
| SAM | ~$400–$600M | EU/US/UK large corporates actively managing short-term investment portfolios |
| SOM (Year 1–2) | ~$1.5M–$5M | 20–25 enterprise customers |
Revenue Uplift by Scenario¶
| Scenario | Near-Term | Year 7–9 |
|---|---|---|
| A (Intelligence) | $1M–$2.5M | — |
| A+B (+ Orchestration) | $1.5M–$5M | $36–90M |
| A+B+C (+ Execution) | $2M–$8M+ | — |
Path for Palm¶
- Scenario A: Build instrument-based investment tracking, add MMF/time deposit/notice account visibility, deliver AI-optimised allocation recommendations
- Scenario B: Connect to ICD/Tradeweb for execution, launch marketplace with MMF provider referral fees
- Scenario C: Obtain broker-dealer / investment firm authorisation, build direct execution and automated sweep capability
Pillar 3: Palm Facilitates Real-Time Cross-Border Payments via Stablecoins¶
The Market¶
Annual cross-border payment volume exceeds $200 trillion, yet the infrastructure is stuck in the 1970s. SWIFT messages take 1–5 days, cost 1.5–6% in fees, and provide zero real-time visibility. Meanwhile, stablecoin transaction volume hit $11.1 trillion in 2025 — surpassing Visa — growing 50%+ year-on-year.
Regulatory momentum is real. The EU's MiCA framework is live. The US is advancing stablecoin legislation (GENIUS Act, CLARITY Act). The UK FCA is building its crypto regulatory regime.
Competitive Landscape¶
Legacy Cross-Border: SWIFT GPI, Wise Business, Corpay (Fleetcor)
Blockchain-Native Settlement: Ripple / XRP, JPM Coin (Kinexys)
Stablecoin Infrastructure: Circle (USDC), Bridge (Stripe, $1.1B acquisition), BVNK, Conduit, Zero Hash
Stripe's $1.1B acquisition of Bridge signals the market's conviction. But most stablecoin infrastructure is built for fintechs and crypto-native companies. Enterprise treasury teams — Palm's customers — are underserved.
Market Sizing¶
| Level | Size | Derivation |
|---|---|---|
| TAM | ~$4.2–$8.4B | Global cross-border payment technology revenue |
| SAM | ~$200–$500M | EU/US/UK large corporates willing to use stablecoin rails |
| SOM (Year 1–2) | ~$3M–$12M+ | 15–35 enterprise clients routing $1.5–4B in cross-border volume |
Revenue Uplift by Scenario¶
| Scenario | Near-Term | Year 7–9 |
|---|---|---|
| A (Intelligence) | $600K–$2.8M | — |
| A+B (+ Orchestration) | $3M–$12M | $50–200M |
| A+B+C (+ Execution) | $5M–$22M+ | — |
Path for Palm¶
- Scenario A: Build payment intelligence and routing optimisation, stablecoin wallet visibility for treasury accounts
- Scenario B: Partner with Circle/BVNK for settlement rails, enable payment initiation and on/off-ramp, launch USD-EUR and USD-GBP corridors
- Scenario C: Obtain settlement/issuance licenses, build direct settlement capability, enable programmable payments
The Combined Picture¶
Near-Term Revenue Impact (Year 1–3)¶
| Pillar | Timeline | Scenario A Only | Scenario A+B | Scenario A+B+C |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FX Flow | 12–18 months | $1M–$3.2M | $2M–$8M | $4M–$16M+ |
| Investment Flow | 18–24 months | $1M–$2.5M | $1.5M–$5M | $2M–$8M+ |
| Cross-Border Payments | 24–36 months | $600K–$2.8M | $3M–$12M | $5M–$22M+ |
| Combined | $2.6M–$8.5M | $6.5M–$25M | $11M–$46M+ |
Scenario A alone — zero licensing, pure SaaS intelligence layer — gets Palm to $2.6M–$8.5M incremental ARR. That's a meaningful business with no regulatory risk. Scenarios B and C are optionality that compounds on top.
Why Palm Wins¶
Palm's moat is not bank connectivity (plenty of players have that). Palm's moat is:
- Treasury workflow intelligence — Palm already lives inside treasury teams' daily workflows
- Data normalisation across fragmented sources — Palm aggregates and normalises treasury data from ERPs, bank portals, and spreadsheets
- Existing customer relationships — Palm has the trust and integration footprint with the exact ICP these pillars target
- "Time to Intelligence" — how fast a treasurer goes from raw data to an actionable decision. Today, that's hours or days. With these three pillars, it's seconds.
Discussion Guide¶
Key questions to align on:
- Which pillar is closest to our current product and fastest to ship?
- Where do we have the strongest customer pull today?
- What's the minimum viable Scenario A for each pillar that we can validate?
- How do we staff this without derailing current roadmap commitments?
- How do we sequence Agentic AI capabilities across the pillars?