Product thesis and market opportunity

Valeo targets the structural gap between (a) crypto wallets optimised for on-chain transfers and dApp access, and (b) consumer “neobank” expectations: fast onboarding, unified views of balances, and simple spend rails. In the Solana ecosystem, wallets are positioned as a gateway to apps and services rather than passive storage, and Solana itself publicly frames wallets as programmable entry points for Web3 experiences.

What makes the proposition investable is that Valeo is not attempting to “win on chain” (a hard, protocol-level battle), but rather to win at the mobile product layer where distribution, UX, trust, and compliance become moats:

• Activity density: one app consolidates multiple high-frequency actions (top-up, swap, send/receive, scan-to-pay, card management), which increases opportunities for monetisation per active user session.

• Payments adjacency: cards and QR-pay flows shift the product from “wallet” to “spending layer”, potentially increasing daily active usage beyond speculative trading cycles (assuming successful issuance partnerships).

• Revenue stacking: swaps (basis points take-rate), on-ramp (affiliate share), and cards (fees + interchange) are complementary, enabling blended ARPU rather than single-stream dependence.

Competitive landscape (selected incumbents and what they validate):

• Phantom positions itself as a self-custodial wallet and has expanded multi-chain support, illustrating that mass-market wallet adoption is a UX and distribution game, not only a technical one.

• Solflare explicitly frames itself as self-custody on Solana and includes in-wallet trading/swapping, validating the baseline expectation that a Solana wallet includes exchange paths.

• Backpack markets itself as self-custodial and multi-chain, indicating a trend towards bundled “wallet + trading” experiences.

• Coinbase describes self-custody wallets as device-key-controlled and distinct from hosted exchange wallets, signalling mainstream regulatory and consumer framing of the custody distinction.

Valeo’s stated differentiators relative to wallet incumbents (based on supplied dossier) are: non-custodial + multi-wallet + Solana-native, coupled with embedded neobank primitives (cards and paycodes) and an optional privacy-enhanced channel (“Private Send”). The investor question becomes whether Valeo can (i) ship those primitives with sufficient reliability and compliance, and (ii) capture revenue without undermining conversion through friction (KYC, fees, app store constraints).

Go-to-market and growth levers (analytical rationale):

• Cards as acquisition + retention hooks: physical/virtual card products can create a “membership” feel and improve retention by adding real-world utility. However, card issuance introduces the highest compliance and operational burden (see risk section).

• ValeoPay QR flows: scan-to-pay features can be used to seed network effects in merchant-lite contexts (events, creators, peer-to-peer collections). The growth lever is as much behavioural (habit formation) as technical.

• Private Send: privacy features can differentiate and attract niche power users, but also amplify AML/sanctions risk and may restrict distribution in some jurisdictions if not carefully engineered and governed (see risk section).