A side-by-side comparison of Singapore, Hong Kong, and Zurich as private banking booking centres—stability, product shelves, FX, time zones, and client experience.

HNWIs often keep relationships in multiple booking centres. The question is not “which is best?” but “which centre suits this objective?”

1) Stability & rule of law

  • Singapore / Zurich: strong legal certainty, robust prudential regimes, high trust in custody.
  • Hong Kong: deep markets and China access; choice depends on client exposure and needs.

2) Product access & ecosystems

  • Singapore: broad Asian access, alternatives platform depth growing, strong FX and yield products.
  • Hong Kong: China/HK equity flow, structured products depth, IPO access.
  • Zurich: legacy private banking expertise, European managers, CHF funding options.

3) Operating convenience

  • Time zone & language: consider where your decision-makers live; English-first service varies by centre.
  • Digital capabilities: mobile onboarding, e-signatures, secure messaging—ask for a demo.
  • Tax reporting: make sure your centre supports the reports you need (e.g., consolidated statements, annual tax packs).

4) Costs & funding currencies

  • Custody & platform fees differ; FX spreads and financing rates vary by centre and AUM tier.
  • Funding currency choice (USD/SGD/CHF/HKD) impacts loan rates and FX risk.

5) A practical allocation template

  • Core custody in Singapore for Asia access and lifestyle fit.
  • Tactical sleeve in Hong Kong for structured equity/IPO flow.
  • Diversifier in Zurich for CHF stability and EU managers.

booking centre comparison, Singapore vs Hong Kong, Zurich private banking, product access, stability, time zone

Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Always consult with a qualified professional before making any banking or investment decisions.