Every supply chain conversation about energy transition, batteries, and grid metals eventually runs into Africa. Cobalt from the Democratic Republic of Congo, copper from Zambia and the DRC, manganese from South Africa and Gabon, bauxite from Guinea, graphite from Mozambique, and rare earth related projects in several states are now central to OEM and utility planning. At the same time, those very jurisdictions sit in the highest buckets on many bank risk maps, which drives scarce trade finance, conservative credit lines, and a constant hunt for “alternative” capital at origin.
The result is a clear paradox. The world depends on African feedstock for critical minerals, yet capital that supports extraction, processing, and logistics at source is treated as a fringe activity. Western buyers expect reliability, ESG reporting, and stable volumes. Traders and intermediaries are pushed to deliver that on thin margins and short tenors, while many banks have exited or sharply reduced their appetite for African risk. This is less about hard data on counterparties and more about blanket de-risking driven by policy, headlines, and compliance pressure.
Many of the largest known reserves and most prospective discoveries for battery and transition metals sit in countries that face recurring labels such as high political risk, weak institutions, or challenging legal enforcement. Some of these concerns are real. There are coups, regulatory shifts, infrastructure deficits, and governance failures that any serious lender must price and mitigate. The problem is that crude risk scores are often applied across the board, without separating well run sponsors and structured trades from speculative or poorly managed projects in the same jurisdiction.
At the same time, capital expenditure and working capital needs for mining and midstream assets are heavy. Concentrate needs to move from inland to port. Smelters and refineries require long lead time investments. Traders need reliable LC confirmation lines and borrowing base facilities to finance cargoes between mine, port, and refiner. When traditional banks retreat, juniors and mid tier operators at origin turn to short term offtake prepayments, opaque funds, or high coupon private credit, which drives up their cost of capital and raises the risk of supply disruption for downstream buyers.
In cobalt, a single African country accounts for most global mine output. Several other minerals are not far behind in terms of concentration. When supply is concentrated in higher risk jurisdictions yet trade finance does not keep pace, the system relies on a thin set of intermediaries that can still secure bank lines and insurance coverage. This pushes more volume into fewer hands and reduces transparency.
That concentration is now a systemic exposure for OEMs, battery makers, and governments that talk about supply security but often ignore how capital actually reaches origin.
After years of de-risking, many banks treat any African commodity exposure as a potential sanctions, AML, or reputational incident. In some cases this is justified. In many cases, it simply reflects a lack of local knowledge and a fear of supervision outcomes. Deals that tick all the boxes on collateral, offtaker quality, and documentation are declined or heavily constrained on tenor because the region itself is tagged as problematic.
The funding cost that flows from this approach has little to do with the actual risk of a specific structured trade and a lot to do with internal comfort thresholds.
Credit teams and correspondent banks that review African commodity flows typically see a stack of issues at once. Core points include uncertainty over legal enforcement, exposure to sudden royalty or export tax changes, infrastructure fragility that can interrupt production or logistics, and ESG scrutiny in areas such as artisanal mining or community impact. On top of that, there is pressure from supervisors to prove that AML, sanctions, and KYC standards are fully applied across the chain, from local counterparties to offshore trading entities.
None of this is imaginary. The problem is that it is easier to decline entire classes of business than to separate out transactions that are clean, well documented, and structured with real control. Over time, this approach erodes internal familiarity with Africa related risk, which makes the next file even harder to approve. The label “high risk” becomes a default answer rather than a conclusion reached after granular analysis.
The irony is that many African commodity deals are highly structureable when approached with the same discipline that banks apply in other emerging markets. Lenders are not buying a passport; they are taking exposure to specific cash flows, secured against identifiable assets, inventory, and receivables, with carefully chosen counterparties. Once transactions are framed that way, the question shifts from “Is this country too risky” to “Can this structure withstand the shocks that are realistic over the life of the facility”.
Serious sponsors and traders already know this and shape their capital requests accordingly. They bring clear offtake contracts, transparent ownership chains, and governance that stands up under diligence. They accept controls that less complex markets may not need, such as multi signature escrow, offshore collection accounts, and third party collateral management agreements. Where that discipline is present, the gap between real risk and perceived risk starts to narrow.
Structured trade finance has a set of tools that work well in African commodity flows when properly implemented:
None of these tools remove risk entirely, but they turn diffuse country concerns into measurable transaction risk.
There are weak operators, speculative promoters, and poorly governed assets in every jurisdiction. Africa is not unique in that sense. The key is to distinguish between a junior with no audited accounts and a mid tier producer with a stable cost curve, ESG audits, and tier one offtakers, even if both sit in the same country. Blanket refusal to engage does not punish the worst actors. It punishes the operators who are trying to do things properly and are willing to accept tight structures.
For lenders and traders that put in the work, this creates a pricing and relationship premium that is hard to replicate in crowded low risk markets.
For downstream buyers, the trade finance risk paradox in Africa is not an abstract policy debate. It sits behind the security of supply that boards and governments claim to prioritise. If serious operators at origin are forced to rely on expensive, short term capital, their ability to weather price shocks, political moves, or operational setbacks is worse. That feeds directly into the probability of shipment delays, contract disputes, and renegotiations during stress.
For lenders and funds, the paradox represents a clear commercial opportunity combined with reputational and operational risk. There is space to build speciality strategies around African mining and commodity flows that apply conservative structures, strict ESG filters, and honest pricing. There is also real danger for anyone who shortcuts diligence, outsources risk judgment to local fixers, or accepts vague chains of intermediaries. The difference between those two paths is not geography. It is discipline.
Financely focuses on structuring real transactions in trade and project finance, including African commodity flows, through regulated partners. We do not buy or sell cargoes and we are not a lender. Our role is to package deals so that banking partners and private credit funds see the actual risk profile of a transaction rather than a generic label tied to a flag on a map.
In practice, that means working with sponsors, traders, and midstream operators to:
The aim is not to convince anyone that risk does not exist. The aim is to separate strong transactions from noise so that capital can reach the assets and operators that underwrite global supply chains in a credible way.
If you operate or trade in African mining and critical minerals and need a credible structure for banks or private credit funds, our team can review your case and outline realistic options through regulated partners.
Submit Your Transaction For ReviewDisclaimer: This page is for general information only and does not constitute advice, an offer, or a solicitation to buy or sell any financial product. References to countries, commodities, trade finance structures, and market practice are high level and may not reflect the details of your situation. Financely acts as advisor and arranger through regulated partners and is not a bank or lender. Any facility, guarantee, or investment is subject to underwriting, KYC, AML, sanctions screening, legal review, perfected security, and approvals by relevant stakeholders. Professional and wholesale audience only.
Submit your deal using our secure intake form, and receive a quote within 1-3 business days. Existing clients can connect with their relationship manager through our secure web portal.
All submissions are
promptly reviewed, and all communications are conducted through the intake form or the client portal for a seamless and secure process.
Thank you for considering working with us. A nominal fee of US$500 is required upon completion of each form. This fee covers the time and effort we invest in reviewing your submission and crafting a thorough proposal. We receive numerous inquiries and prioritize those that carry this fee, ensuring serious applicants receive prompt attention.
Tap into solutions like letters of credit, bank guarantees, and payment facilitation. We address the challenge of global transaction risk through structured strategies that foster cross-border growth. Complete the form to unlock streamlined funding aligned with your commercial objectives.
Submit a RequestAccess non-recourse funding for infrastructure, renewable energy, or other capital-intensive ventures. We mitigate capital constraints by isolating project assets and focusing on risk management. Provide your details to receive a structure that drives growth and maximizes returns.
Submit a RequestSecure financing for business or real estate acquisitions. We ease transaction hurdles by reviewing cash flow, synergy opportunities, and exit plans. Complete the form for a customized proposal that supports your strategic investment objectives.
Submit a RequestFinancely assists banks facing Basel III pressures by distributing trade finance deals and providing collateral for letters of credit. We reduce capital burdens while preserving client relationships and fostering service expansion. Submit your request to optimize your trade finance offerings.
Submit a RequestOnce we receive your submission, our team will review your information to determine feasibility. If eligible, you will receive a proposal or term sheet within 1–3 business days. Visit our FAQ and Procedure pages for more information.
Disclaimer: Financely provides financing based on due diligence and feasibility. Approval is not guaranteed, and past performance does not predict future outcomes. All terms are subject to review. Financely primarily assists with structuring and distribution. Qualified parties carry out the project if the client approves the proposal.
Financely advises growth-focused businesses on accessing capital by introducing their opportunities to professional investors. Financely is not a securities broker or dealer. Where appropriate, engagements are coordinated with regulated broker-dealers, investment banks, legal counsel, and other specialists.
Financely does not solicit, offer, or accept orders to buy or sell securities and makes no assurance regarding capital-raising outcomes.
Services are strictly business-to-business. Financely does not provide personal finance, consumer credit, or retail advisory services.
Advisory services are reserved for post-revenue companies that recognize the time and resources required for professional underwriting.
All mandates start with an RFQ. We review submissions, issue a brief Go/No-Go memo, and where bankable, release a Term Sheet that leads to funding. We arrange capital across Senior Secured, Unitranche, Second Lien/Mezzanine, Preferred Equity, and Gap Solutions. We do not process deals by email or chat.
Letters of Credit, Standby LCs, Confirmations, Receivables Finance, and Inventory Lines with control.
Funding arranged for trade flows with instruments sized to your cycle and aligned to delivery and settlement.
Move forward to secure working capital and keep goods moving. Submit the RFQ to start underwriting for funding.
Limited or non-recourse structures for energy and infrastructure with lender-ready materials.
Funding solutions aligned to project cash flows with credible covenants and conditions to reach notice to proceed.
Advance the file to termable status. Submit the RFQ so we can underwrite and secure funding.
Debt and Preferred solutions anchored on cash flow, Quality of Earnings, and clear closing mechanics.
Funding across senior, unitranche, and preferred to match stable cash flows and acquisition timelines.
Get financed on workable terms for closing. Submit the RFQ to start underwriting.
Acquisition, development, bridge, and refinance with lender-ready packs and third-party reports managed.
Funding calibrated to DSCR, leverage, and tenancy with terms designed to close.
Move to a financeable package. Submit the RFQ to initiate underwriting for funding.
KYC and Source of Funds required. Engagements are best-efforts and subject to underwriting. Preference for operating companies with meaningful revenue. See our FAQ and Procedure.
Financely Inc. (“Financely”) provides corporate-finance advice and is wholly owned by Aurora Bay Trust, a trust formed under Bahamian law, together with its authorized affiliates. Depending on deal structure, jurisdiction, and local rules, engagements may be carried out through Financely Group LLC, a non-deposit-taking, non-banking financial company; Ashford Capital Advisory LLC; or another related entity.
Financely and its affiliates are not registered as securities broker-dealers and do not execute securities transactions or hold client funds or securities. When a mandate involves the purchase or sale of securities and a registered intermediary is required, any orders are introduced to and executed by one or more independent U.S. broker-dealers registered with the SEC and FINRA. Those broker-dealers are solely responsible for trade execution, custody, and related regulatory obligations. Nothing in this material constitutes an offer, solicitation, or recommendation to buy or sell any security or to engage in any specific transaction. Before engaging Financely Group LLC, Ashford Capital Advisory LLC, or any affiliate, you are responsible for confirming that such engagement complies with your own legal, regulatory, tax, and other requirements. In the United States, certain advisory activities may be conducted in reliance on exemptions available under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, including the “foreign private adviser” exemption where applicable. Our services and regulatory status may vary by jurisdiction and by transaction type.
Click
here to download our brochure.
