Uganda’s banks are in rude health—or so it seems at first glance.
According to
a recent report by JSR Consulting, total commercial banking assets stood at
UGX54 trillion at the close of 2024, having grown at an annual average of 11%
since 2018. The numbers track closely with GDP growth over the same period,
suggesting the sector has been floating comfortably on the tide of overall
economic expansion. But scratch beneath the surface and the picture becomes
more nuanced—part triumph, part trouble, and a whole lot of transformation on
the horizon.
First, the
good news. Profits are booming. The JSR report shows that net profits across
the banking sector more than doubled between 2018 and 2024, rising from UGX751
billion to UGX1.63 trillion. Interest income, fees, commissions—all up. Bank
shareholders have reason to smile.
But the
spoils aren’t exactly evenly shared. As JSR points out, five banks—Stanbic,
Centenary, Absa, Equity and DFCU—account for a staggering 66% of the industry’s
profits and control 55% of total assets. Stanbic alone accounted for nearly 30%
of profits. It’s clear: in Uganda’s banking sector, scale pays. The big are
getting bigger. The rest are fighting for scraps.
That inequality extends to cost structures. JSR’s analysis reveals that the average cost-to-income ratio in the industry stands at 60%, with only a handful of institutions managing to keep it under 50%. Most
banks are groaning under the weight of high overheads—costs of legacy systems, bloated staffing, and real estate.In an era when customers are increasingly digital-first, this reliance on brick-and-mortar infrastructure is quickly becoming an expensive burden.
Return on
equity also tells the story of an uneven playing field. The larger banks—again,
Stanbic, Centenary, Absa—enjoy ROEs north of 20%, while many smaller banks
languish in single digits or worse. As the JSR report rightly notes, size
matters.
It’s not just
profitability and scale where disparities emerge. Asset quality is increasingly
a concern. The JSR report highlights that the average non-performing loans to
equity ratio is 11%, but individual bank figures range wildly—from 0% to a
worrisome 51%. Even with high capital buffers, which the report confirms are
well above the regulatory minimum of 12.5%, such levels of risk could eat into
future profits if not managed carefully.
In the face
of this uncertainty, banks have continued to flock to government securities.
Loans and advances, which once made up 45% of bank assets, have now dropped to
41%, while investments in treasury instruments have risen to 28%. Government
paper has been the safe harbour. But that harbour may no longer be as
lucrative. JSR warns that as yields on government securities continue to slide,
banks will have little choice but to pivot back to private sector lending.
That pivot, however, comes with its own challenges. Lending to the real economy—especially SMEs and the informal sector—is messy, costly, and risky. But it’s also where the growth is. To thrive, banks will need to invest in better risk models, credit analytics, and digital channels that can reach the customer segments traditionally left behind.
The JSR
report is particularly clear-eyed about the biggest looming disruptor: fintech.
Telecom-led financial services, mobile wallets, and agent banking have already
eaten into the banks’ turf. Digital-first customers are increasingly bypassing
traditional banks for faster, cheaper, and more convenient alternatives. JSR
flags this as a key threat—and rightly so. The banks that still see fintech as
a threat rather than a partner may not be around to learn the lesson a second
time.
What’s more,
the report foresees continued consolidation. With 25 licensed commercial banks,
many of them small and inefficient, the logic for mergers and acquisitions is
growing stronger. Regulatory pressure could accelerate the trend, especially if
some institutions fail to keep up with capital or compliance requirements.
And then
there’s inclusion. The JSR data shows that banks offering microfinance
products—typically targeting the unbanked or underbanked—recorded significantly
higher net interest margins, some as high as 35%. But these products are still
a sideshow for many large banks. There’s a massive opportunity here:
mobile-based lending, simplified KYC processes, and credit scoring based on
alternative data could bring millions more into the financial fold.
So what lies
ahead?
The report projects continued growth in banking assets, potentially crossing UGX100 trillion by 2030. But future success won’t be about balance sheet size alone. It will depend on a bank’s ability to adapt to a new model—leaner, digital-first, customer-centric. The winners will be those that embrace partnerships with fintechs, open banking frameworks, and embedded finance models. Even environmental, social, and governance (ESG) considerations will come to define lending policies and capital access.
Regulation,
too, is expected to evolve. JSR anticipates tighter oversight on cybersecurity,
digital transactions, and cross-border flows. Capital adequacy rules may become
more stringent for systemically important banks. There is even scope for
innovation-friendly policy to support green financing, sandbox experimentation,
and broader digital integration.
Ultimately,
Uganda’s banking sector is at a crossroads.
The model
that delivered growth and stability over the past decade—one rooted in risk-free
government lending, branch-led customer acquisition, and fee-based income—is
fast becoming obsolete. The new model will demand technological agility, credit
risk innovation, and meaningful financial inclusion.
The JSR report offers both a diagnosis and a roadmap. Whether banks heed its message could determine not just who wins in the market, but whether banking in Uganda remains relevant at all. Because in the financial game of the future, it’s not the biggest or oldest players that win—it’s the most adaptable.