RECRYPYour CBDC works domestically. We make it work with everyone else's.
For monetary authorities issuing or piloting a central bank digital currency, Recryp is the interoperability layer that lets your rail transact with other sovereigns' rails — without a bespoke bilateral bridge for every corridor you want to open.
Your mandate stops at the border. Cross-border demand doesn't.
Central banks have spent years designing wholesale and retail CBDC architecture domestically — but the mandate, and the ledger, stop at the border. Making that CBDC useful cross-border means either building a bilateral bridge for every counterpart sovereign (a bespoke engineering project per corridor), or joining a multilateral platform, which requires years of coordination across every participating central bank before a single payment moves.
Neither path is fast. Meanwhile pressure is mounting — from the BIS, the IMF, and G20 cross-border payments roadmaps — to demonstrate real interoperability, not just domestic issuance. A CBDC that only works inside its own borders answers half the question.
And readiness is asynchronous across sovereigns by design, not by accident. The UAE's Digital Dirham launched for retail use in March 2026 with cross-border transfer capability to Saudi Arabia, India, and China already live. India's e₹ is deliberately sequencing domestic scale — 19 banks, UPI-QR interoperability, a programmable-CBDC pilot in Gujarat's public distribution system — before its next cross-border step. The Eurosystem won't reach a first-issuance decision before 2029. An interoperability layer built for this landscape has to work with a counterpart that's live today and still be ready for one that isn't live for years.
Recryp exists to be the layer in between: infrastructure that connects your rail to another sovereign's rail without requiring either of you to build a bespoke bridge, and without requiring a multilateral consortium to form first. You keep your ledger, your monetary policy, and your jurisdiction's rules. We handle the connective tissue.
The same four-layer stack, built around your rail.
Recryp's architecture sits above your CBDC's core ledger — here's what each layer means specifically for a monetary authority.
Connectivity
Direct integration with your CBDC's core ledger and API — wholesale and retail — speaking your ledger's native protocol and translating to ISO 20022 message types at the edge, so you don't retool your domestic system to talk to Recryp.
Compliance
Every cross-border transaction carries jurisdiction-aware policy: your capital-control rules, transaction limits, and reporting obligations are enforced as configurable policy, not hardcoded — you set the rules, Recryp enforces them consistently at the rail.
Settlement
Atomic settlement means a payment leaving your CBDC rail and arriving on a counterpart sovereign's rail either completes on both sides or neither — no leg risk, and no need to pre-fund a foreign reserve account to backstop the transaction.
Liquidity & FX
Where your currency doesn't have deep direct liquidity against a counterpart currency, Recryp's FX layer sources competitive pricing across available corridors rather than forcing a fixed bilateral rate.
What this looks like in practice.
Recryp is pre-seed — these are illustrative scenarios describing the intended use of the architecture, not completed deployments.
A remittance corridor, minutes not days
A retail CBDC holder sends value to a family member in a country running a different CBDC; funds settle directly rail-to-rail instead of routing through a correspondent bank in a third currency.
A sandbox pilot with a counterpart central bank
Two monetary authorities want to test cross-border settlement without committing to a full multilateral platform; Recryp provides the interoperability layer inside both sandboxes.
Trade settlement without a vehicle currency
An exporter and importer in two CBDC jurisdictions settle an invoice directly in their respective sovereign currencies, without routing through a third currency as an intermediary.
From central bank policy and payments teams.
Is Recryp trying to replace or compete with our CBDC?
No — Recryp is not a currency and does not issue value. We're a connectivity and settlement layer that sits above sovereign rails; your CBDC remains the unit of account and the ledger of record.
How does this differ from a multilateral platform like mBridge?
Multilateral platforms require every participating central bank to join a shared ledger or consortium before any payment moves. Recryp is designed to connect rails bilaterally through a common interoperability layer, so you can open a corridor with one counterpart without waiting for a broader consortium to form — and it's built to be compatible with multilateral platforms as they mature, not a competitor to them.
What does an engagement actually look like at this stage?
We're pre-seed and building in stealth. Early conversations with central banks are about mapping your specific architecture, constraints, and priority corridors — not a sales process.
Who is accountable for compliance on a cross-border transaction?
Policy enforcement is configurable per jurisdiction and auditable — your rules are enforced programmatically at the rail. Recryp's role is consistent enforcement, not making compliance decisions on a jurisdiction's behalf.
What happened with mBridge, and how does that shape Recryp's approach?
BIS coordinated Project mBridge from 2021 through its minimum-viable-product milestone in mid-2024, then withdrew, citing an inability to support the project's expanding BRICS+-adjacent membership and the sanctions exposure that came with it. The remaining central banks kept the platform running independently. We read that as a governance lesson, not a technology one: a multilateral consortium's neutrality is only as durable as its membership, and a bridge that requires every participant to share infrastructure inherits every participant's geopolitics. Recryp's architecture is deliberately bilateral and jurisdiction-configurable so a corridor between two central banks doesn't depend on the composition of a wider group.
Does Recryp compete with Project Nexus or other instant-payment interoperability efforts?
No — Nexus connects domestic instant-payment systems (like UPI or PayNow) to each other; Recryp connects sovereign digital currency rails. They solve adjacent but different problems and could plausibly sit in the same stack: Nexus for retail instant payments, Recryp for CBDC-denominated settlement underneath them.
Want the longer version? Read what mBridge's BIS withdrawal actually tells us about bridge governance in the Insights hub.
Mapping a cross-border corridor for your CBDC?
Tell us about your rail and the corridors you're prioritizing — we're shaping our first partnerships now.