Reading the Signals: What's Really Driving Investment into Saudi Arabia

Aug 11, 2026

Ghada Ismail

 

Saudi Arabia's rise as a hub for institutional capital has become hard to ignore, and few are better placed to explain why than the people structuring the deals themselves. Behind the headlines about giga-projects and sovereign wealth lies a quieter shift in how founders raise money, how investors assess risk, and which sectors are actually ready for capital. We spoke with Sayed A., Chief Business Officer of Graystone Capital's Dubai office, who walked us through what's genuinely changed for founders and investors in the Kingdom, the missteps that still catch fundraisers off guard, the financing routes too often overlooked in favor of venture capital, and where the smart money is heading as the market matures toward 2030.

 

 1. Graystone Capital has identified Saudi Arabia as one of its strategic markets. What makes the Kingdom particularly attractive for institutional investors today? 

A few numbers tell the story better than any pitch deck could. According to UNCTAD's World Investment Report 2026, Saudi Arabia climbed to 13th place globally for FDI inflows in 2025, up from 17th the year before, with net inflows of $32.6 billion, a jump of roughly 53% year-on-year. That is not a one-off spike; it is the compounding effect of reforms that have been building for several years now. 

The most consequential of these, in our view, is the new Investment Law that came into force in February 2025, replacing legislation that had governed foreign investment since 2000. It puts local and foreign investors on genuinely equal footing, extends protections against expropriation, and has accelerated the shift toward 100% foreign ownership across a widening list of sectors. Combine that with a sovereign credit profile now rated in the A-category across Moody's, Fitch and S&P, a public investment pipeline north of $1 trillion tied to the giga-projects, and a domestic consumer market of over 36 million people with strong disposable income, and you have a market that offers both scale and increasingly predictable rules of engagement. For institutional capital, that combination of scale, reform, and macro stability is rare, and it's precisely why we've prioritized the Kingdom. 

 

2. What differentiates Saudi founders from entrepreneurs in other GCC markets when raising capital? 

Saudi founders today are raising in a market that has genuinely pulled ahead of its neighbors. MAGNiTT's FY2025 data shows Saudi Arabia captured $1.72 billion in venture funding across 257 deals, the highest figure and deal count ever recorded by a single country in the MENA region, and enough to make the Kingdom the top-ranked VC market regionally for the third consecutive year. That changes founder behavior. Where entrepreneurs elsewhere in the Gulf often have to court capital from Dubai, London or Riyadh simultaneously, Saudi founders increasingly have deep local pools to draw from first, sovereign-backed vehicles like SVC and Sanabil, family offices such as Olayan and Alturki, and homegrown institutional funds like STV and Raed. 

The other distinguishing factor is proximity to government-anchored demand. A Saudi founder building in logistics, healthtech, or industrial software isn't just pitching an addressable market; they are often pitching direct alignment with a named Vision 2030 program, a giga-project procurement pipeline, or a PIF portfolio company that could become a first customer. That gives Saudi founders a credibility shortcut in the room that founders in more mature, less state-directed ecosystems don't always have, though it also means investors here scrutinize a founder's actual government and enterprise relationships more closely than they might elsewhere. 

 

3. Many founders believe securing funding is simply about having a great idea. From your experience, what are the biggest reasons startups fail to raise capital? 

The idea is rarely the problem. In our experience arranging financing across the region, the founders who struggle almost always stumble on three things: unclear capital structure, weak financial discipline, and a mismatch between what they're asking for and what stage they're actually at. 

On capital structure, we regularly see founders who haven't thought through their cap table until an investor asks about it in the room, prior friends-and-family rounds with vague terms, undocumented related-party loans, or founder equity splits that don't survive due diligence. On financial discipline, even at seed and Series A stage, investors now expect management accounts that reconcile, not back-of-envelope spreadsheets; the bar has risen noticeably as the Saudi market has matured and institutional money has entered. And on stage mismatch, we still see founders pitching growth-stage valuations off pre-revenue traction, which immediately signals to a sophisticated investor that the founder doesn't yet understand how their own business will be underwritten. None of these are about the idea; they're about whether the business is investment-ready, which is a very different, and fixable, problem. 

 

4. What common valuation mistakes do founders make during fundraising? 

The most common mistake is anchoring a valuation to a regional headline round rather than to the founder's own unit economics. Saudi Arabia's 2025 VC market saw funding rise 145% year-on-year, and mega deals like Tabby and Ninja understandably get attention, but those are outliers, not benchmarks, and founders who price their own seed or Series A round off a mega-deal multiple usually find the market pushes back hard, or worse, get a term sheet loaded with structure (liquidation preferences, ratchets) that quietly claws back the headline number. 

The second mistake is treating valuation as a single negotiation rather than a signal that carries into the next round. We've seen founders take an aggressive valuation from a less discerning investor, only to face a painful down-round eighteen months later because growth couldn't catch up to the number. And the third, more technical mistake, is founders not distinguishing between pre-money and post-money terms clearly enough in the term sheet, which sounds basic, but in a market where deal velocity has increased sharply, we still see it trip up first-time founders regularly. 

 

5. Venture capital often dominates the startup scene, but your business covers a much broader range of financing solutions. What funding options are Saudi founders overlooking? 

Venture capital gets the headlines, but it's genuinely the wrong tool for a large share of the businesses we speak with. A founder running an asset-light logistics or fulfilment operation, for instance, is often better served by working capital or trade finance than by giving up equity to fund inventory or fleet expansion, particularly now that Saudi ports are handling record throughput and warehousing demand is outpacing supply. Similarly, businesses generating predictable card or POS receivables can access overdraft or receivables-based financing well before they'd qualify for a meaningful equity round, and without diluting the cap table for what is fundamentally working capital, not growth capital. 

At the other end of the spectrum, founders scaling into capital-intensive infrastructure, a data center build, a healthcare facility, an industrial plant tied to one of the localization programs should be thinking about project finance and structured debt long before they think about a growth equity round, because the risk-return profile of that kind of asset is genuinely better suited to debt investors than to venture funds. The Saudi fintech sector alone has grown from roughly 82 companies in 2020 toward a 2030 target of 525, and financing companies licensed by SAMA have expanded accordingly, which tells you the debt and structured finance infrastructure to support this kind of financing now actually exists locally. Founders who only ever speak to VCs are leaving a lot of that infrastructure unused. 

 

6. How important are cross-border partnerships in today's fundraising environment? 

Increasingly central, and for a very practical reason: Saudi Arabia's own capital base, while deep, is still building the full stack of expertise in some specialized verticals, deep tech, advanced manufacturing finance, certain climate technologies, where regional and international partners bring both capital and domain experience. We've also seen this play out at the sovereign level: HUMAIN, the PIF-backed AI company, has structured its own scale-up through partnerships with Nvidia, AMD, AWS and others rather than trying to build every layer domestically, and that same logic increasingly applies to how founders should think about their own cap tables. 

There's also a market-access dimension. A Saudi startup with a UAE, Egyptian, or Gulf-wide co-investor on its cap table typically finds it easier to expand into those markets, because that investor brings relationships and regulatory familiarity the founder doesn't have to build from scratch. For international investors, meanwhile, a credible local partner, someone who understands the specific licensing environment, the difference between operating from Riyadh versus a special economic zone, or how a giga-project tender actually works, meaningfully de-risks their entry. We see this constantly in our own work: cross-border deals close faster and on better terms when there's a trusted party on the ground on both sides of the table. 

 

7. What opportunities do you see in sectors such as AI, fintech, logistics, climate tech, healthcare, and industrial technology? 

Each of these is moving at a genuinely different pace, so it's worth taking them individually. AI is the most capital-intensive story in the Kingdom right now; HUMAIN alone has committed to a $100 billion technology investment program and is targeting up to 6.6 gigawatts of AI data center capacity by 2034, with partnerships already signed with Nvidia, AMD, AWS, Qualcomm and Cisco. That creates a large downstream opportunity for firms in power infrastructure, cooling technology, and enterprise AI applications layered on top of that compute base. 

Fintech remains the most mature vertical for founders and investors alike; SAMA-licensed finance companies have grown into the sixties, electronic payments now account for roughly 85% of retail transactions, and the central bank issued its first live open banking licenses in March 2026, which genuinely opens a new product category. Logistics is being reshaped by necessity as much as ambition: the $7 billion Landbridge rail project and continued Red Sea port investment are direct responses to regional shipping disruption, and cold chain and warehousing remain visibly underserved relative to demand. Healthcare is one of the largest reform stories in the Kingdom; the government is targeting private-sector contribution of up to 65% by 2030, with 290 hospitals and 2,300 primary care centers earmarked for privatization, which is a multi-decade PPP and asset-transfer opportunity. Climate tech and industrial technology are earlier-stage but tied directly to giga-project execution; NEOM, green hydrogen, and the localization of industrial manufacturing under the National Industrial Strategy all need capital and technology partners now, not in five years. 

 

8. What's one misconception international investors still have about Saudi Arabia? 

That it's a single, government-directed market where private capital plays a supporting role to sovereign wealth. That was arguably a fairer characterization five years ago; it isn't today. MAGNiTT's data on the 2025 Saudi VC market shows the investor base reaching its broadest and most international composition to date, and non-mega deals, the smaller, more genuinely private-market transactions, grew meaningfully alongside the headline rounds, which tells you liquidity is deepening across the stack, not just concentrating at the top. 

The other version of this misconception is timing risk, the assumption that Vision 2030 is a long-dated bet that won't pay off for years. In practice, we're already past the point where this is purely aspirational: fintech alone has gone from fewer than thirty licensed companies before 2020 to over sixty finance companies today, non-cash transactions hit their 70% target ahead of schedule, and the Kingdom posted a record year for both FDI and venture funding in the same twelve-month period. Investors who are still waiting for a clearer signal to enter are, in our assessment, already behind the founders and funds who moved two or three years ago. 

 

9. How do you see Saudi Arabia's investment ecosystem evolving by 2030? 

Three shifts stand out to us. First, we expect the venture and private capital base to keep localizing; Saudi-headquartered funds, family offices and sovereign vehicles already anchor most early and growth-stage rounds, and as more Saudi fund managers get their CMA licenses, that trend should deepen further rather than reverse. Second, we expect financing to diversify well beyond equity: the government's own $100 billion annual FDI target for 2030, alongside a healthcare PPP pipeline that includes a further $16.5 billion in targeted public-private partnerships and the Landbridge and port investments in logistics, all point toward debt, project finance and structured capital playing a much larger role in the ecosystem than they do today, which is exactly the space we operate in. 

Third, and most structurally significant, is that Saudi Arabia is positioning itself for reclassification onto deeper global capital pools, from MSCI frontier status toward more emerging and eventually developed-market benchmarks, mirroring the trajectory the broader GCC has been on. If the current pace of reform, privatization and sector diversification holds, by 2030 the more interesting question won't be whether international investors are looking at Saudi Arabia, but whether they got in early enough. 

Tags

Share

Advertise here, Be the LEADER

Advertise Now

Latest Experts Thoughts

From peak to pause: How seasonal businesses thrive all year

Noha Gad

 

Businesses do not all operate the same way throughout the year. Some enjoy steady demand month after month, while others experience clear peaks and quieter periods driven by seasons, holidays, or industry cycles. Understanding these patterns is essential for owners, managers, and investors who want to plan wisely and avoid cash-flow surprises. From tourism resorts and landscaping companies to holiday retail and travel services, seasonal companies can be highly profitable when managed well; however, they also face distinct challenges in finance, staffing, and marketing. 

 

What are seasonal businesses?

Seasonal business refers to fluctuations in business that correspond to seasonal changes. This does not mean they operate only in one season for the most part, with a few exceptions. Key examples of seasonal businesses include alternative holiday retailers, moving services, tour guides, holiday clubs, and more. There are few steps founders and business owners must follow to start a seasonal business:

  • Understand the market. As an owner, you must be sure there is enough demand for the products or services that can generate enough income during the peak season. To gain knowledge, you can conduct simple market research, asking potential customers whether they would buy from you at the prices you are considering charging.
  • Develop a marketing plan. Seasonal businesses must often work harder to promote themselves, often to simply remind customers they are there. To hit the ground running, you should leave enough time for your publicity and advertising to attract customers. 
  • Manage cash flow. Successful cash flow management can represent a significant challenge for seasonal businesses because they receive most of their income in a set period, but may have outgoings at other times. The temptation can be to spend too much when cash is plentiful, creating cash flow issues when revenue is down.
  • Purchase essentials. You must accurately estimate demand by using your market knowledge/research. Getting favorable terms from suppliers can be more difficult when buying within a limited period, but there's no harm in trying by using your business relationship with them. 
  • Diversify products. If offering discounts and holding promotions doesn't help you to make sales when sales slow down, maybe you could modify your offer to give it wider and longer-lasting appeal. 
  • Improve offering and analyze results during quiet period. Use quiet periods to analyze your results and think of ways you can improve the business for when it becomes active again.  

 

Key challenges seasonal businesses face

Seasonal businesses share several recurring difficulties that stem from their uneven revenue patterns. These challenges affect cash flow, staffing, inventory, and overall planning.

  • Cash-flow volatility: revenue concentrates in a few busy months, while many costs, such as rent, loan payments, insurance, and subscriptions, continue year-round. This mismatch can create liquidity gaps during the off-season.
  • Staffing and training pressures: Owners must hire and train temporary staff quickly for peak periods, then manage layoffs or reduced hours when demand falls. High turnover and repeated onboarding can raise costs and affect service quality.
  • Inventory and capacity planning risks
    Over-ordering before a slow period ties up cash in unsold stock, while under-ordering before a peak can lead to missed sales and dissatisfied customers. Balancing inventory levels with uncertain demand is a constant challenge.
  • Marketing timing inefficiencies. Spending on advertising too late or too early reduces return on marketing investment. Seasonal businesses must align promotion with the demand curve to maximize impact.

 

To sum up, seasonal businesses can deliver strong profits, but only when owners plan for the full annual cycle, not just the busy months. Success depends on understanding demand patterns, preparing a focused marketing plan, and, above all, managing cash flow so that peak-season earnings cover off-season costs.

The main challenges, such as cash-flow volatility, staffing swings, inventory risks, and mistimed marketing, are predictable and manageable with the right discipline. Founders who research their market, negotiate smartly with suppliers, diversify offerings, and use quiet periods to analyze results and improve operations are better positioned to turn seasonality from a risk into a strategic advantage.

Limited Partners (LP) vs. General Partners (GP): What’s the Difference?

Ghada Ismail

 

When people talk about venture capital and private equity, two terms appear repeatedly: Limited Partners (LPs) and General Partners (GPs). While both are essential to an investment fund, they play very different roles.

In simple words, LPs provide the capital, while GPs manage and invest it. Understanding this relationship is key to understanding how venture capital and private equity funds work.

 

What is a Limited Partner?

A Limited Partner is an investor who commits money to an investment fund but generally does not participate in its day-to-day management.

LPs can include pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, family offices, insurance companies, endowments, banks, and high-net-worth individuals. In the venture capital ecosystem, they provide the majority of the capital that funds use to invest in startups.

LPs typically commit a specific amount to a fund, but they do not necessarily transfer the entire amount upfront. Instead, the GP can make capital calls when investments or other fund expenses require funding.

In return, LPs receive a share of the fund's returns. Their potential liability is generally limited to the amount they have committed to the fund, which explains the term "limited" partner.

 

What is a General Partner?

General Partners are responsible for running the investment fund.

The GP is typically the venture capital or private equity firm managing the fund. Its responsibilities include identifying investment opportunities, conducting due diligence, negotiating deals, supporting portfolio companies, and deciding when to exit investments.

GPs also manage the fund's relationship with LPs, provide performance updates, and oversee the fund's overall strategy.

Unlike LPs, GPs are actively involved in investment decisions and typically commit some of their own capital to the fund.

 

The basic financial structure behind LP and GP partnerships

LPs and GPs usually make money in two main ways: management fees and carried interest.

GPs typically charge a management fee to cover the costs of running the fund, such as salaries, office expenses, and other operating costs. They can also earn carried interest, or “carry,” which is a share of the profits made from the fund’s investments.

For example, if a venture capital fund invests in several startups and those investments become highly successful, the GP can receive a percentage of the profits once certain conditions are met.

LPs receive most of the profits generated by the fund after management fees and carried interest are deducted. In simple terms, LPs provide most of the capital, while GPs manage the fund and earn fees plus a share of the profits if the investments perform well.

 

LP vs. GP: The Key Difference

The easiest way to remember the distinction is:

LP = supplies capital
GP = manages capital

LPs typically do not choose individual startups or companies for investment. Instead, they select funds based on factors such as the GP's track record, investment strategy, team, geographic focus, and expected returns.

GPs then deploy the capital according to the fund's investment strategy.

 

Why the Relationship is Important

A strong LP-GP relationship can be critical to a fund's success.

LPs want GPs to generate attractive returns while managing risk responsibly. GPs, meanwhile, rely on LPs for the capital needed to execute their investment strategy and often seek to build long-term relationships that can support future funds.

For startups, this relationship may seem distant, but it can have a direct impact. A well-capitalized VC fund has the resources to back promising startups through multiple funding rounds and potentially provide additional support as they scale.

 

To Wrap Things Up…

LPs and GPs are two sides of the same investment structure. LPs provide the financial firepower, while GPs provide the investment expertise and management.

The model allows institutions, family offices, and other investors to gain exposure to private markets without managing individual investments themselves, while giving professional fund managers the capital needed to identify and build the next generation of companies.

For anyone looking to understand how venture capital works, knowing the difference between LPs and GPs is one of the best places to start.

CEO: Hamsa doubles down on voice AI in Saudi Arabia, eyes regional, global scale

Shaimaa Ibrahim

 

Arabic voice AI technologies are at the forefront of digital transformation in the GCC region, driven by growing demand for intelligent solutions that understand local dialects and interact with users spontaneously and instantly, as well as the increasing need for data sovereignty and compliance. Against this backdrop, Hamsa, a US-listed company headquartered in Amman, stands out as an AI company specializing in developing advanced models that understand Arabic language and dialects; an integrated voice AI system; and intelligent agents capable of interacting with users, implementing tasks, and integrating with enterprise systems.

In an exclusive interview with Sharikat Mubasher, Ibrahim Jabarin, CEO of Hamsa, discussed the company’s strategy, its vision for the future of voice AI in the region, its competitive position among international peers, and its expansion plans across Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and other Gulf and Arabian markets.

Jabarin highlighted major pitfalls in the sector and unveiled Hamsa’s roadmap that includes supporting more than 16 languages, developing a new generation of intelligent agents, and enhancing security and compliance, thereby strengthening its presence regionally and globally.

 

First, tell us more about Hamsa, what distinguishes it in the Arabic AI technologies market, and the key solutions and services that the company provides for enterprises?

Hamsa is a voice AI company that develops its proprietary models capable of understanding and processing the Arabic language. We developed our Arabic model from scratch rather than relying on models originally developed for English and subsequently adapted for Arabic. This approach positively impacted performance; the accuracy of Hamsa’s models reached about 94% in transcribing Saudi and Gulf dialects and about 92% in standard Arabic. 

The company is also developing an integrated ecosystem that features speech recognition, voice synthesis, noise cancellation, speaker recognition, and integration with enterprises’ communication systems and operational infrastructure. This provides a quick response of up to 280 milliseconds to the first audio byte, with intelligent agents’ response time ranging from 0.8 to 1.2 seconds.

For enterprises, Hamsa provides a wide spectrum of comprehensive solutions, including real-time voice processing for calls and web applications; a Low-Code platform dedicated to designing chat agents and executing operations; APIs that help developers build their own solutions; and the ‘Hamsa Media’ product that processes voice content at large scale, including transcription, voice-over, and dubbing.

All these solutions can be deployed within customer data centers or via a private cloud hosted within the country to meet enterprises’ need for data sovereignty and compliance. 

 

To what extent have the strategic partnerships forged by Hamsa contributed to expanding the company’s business, deepening its regional presence, and attracting new customers?

For Hamsa, partnerships are not merely an additional sales channel; they represent a fundamental pillar for entering markets and accelerating the adoption of voice AI solutions, particularly in regulated sectors, such as banking and government entities that choose trustworthy suppliers with established experience and relationships. 

We adopt four main partnership tracks: systems integration and consulting firms, infrastructure and hardware partners, customer experience platforms and contact centers, as well as telecommunications operators

These partnerships help accelerate sales cycles, strengthen Hamsa’s ability to implement projects and expand in the market without a significant increase in the teams, and unlock access to strategic enterprises and accounts that are otherwise difficult to reach directly.

The company also relies on integration with customers’ existing technical infrastructure through open protocols and standards that reduce transformation complexities and shorten implementation time. Therefore, Hamsa’s strategy for entering any new market begins with searching for the right partner before the first customer. This underscores our belief that a strong partnership is the cornerstone for building a sustainable presence and accelerating growth.

 

Hamsa recently concluded a strategic agreement with OmniOps. In your opinion, how will this partnership accelerate the adoption of voice AI technologies within government and private organizations?

The significance of this partnership lies in its ability to address the most prominent barriers to voice AI adoption in the Kingdom, which are no longer related to model quality, but rather revolve around three key questions: where is the data stored? Who operates the solutions within the Kingdom? And how are they integrated with existing systems? The partnership provides comprehensive answers to all these requirements by keeping sensitive voice data within the Kingdom, with an accredited local authority responsible for operations, integration, and support, in compliance with the Personal Data Protection Law (PDPL) and data localization requirements.

This ecosystem enables enterprises to transition from limited pilot phases to full-scale production deployment by providing models, infrastructure, integration, and support within an integrated framework and a single accountable entity, rather than dealing with multiple suppliers and technologies.

Based on Hasma’s experience, this approach could shorten project implementation timelines to between six and nine months, while delivering intelligent Arabic voice services all day long, with all data remaining within the Kingdom's borders.

 

Why does Saudi Arabia represent a priority in Hamsa’s expansion strategy, and where do you see growth opportunities you are targeting over the upcoming period?

Saudi Arabia is the top market for Hamsa for several reasons. First, language and dialects. The company’s technologies have been built from the ground up to understand Arabic and its dialects, particularly the Saudi dialect, rather than adapting a global product to meet local market needs.

Second, the market size. The Kingdom hosts the largest call center operations in the region, especially in the banking, telecommunications, and healthcare sectors, which handle millions of calls per month. This offers significant opportunities to automate repetitive tasks using intelligent voice agents.

Third, the regulatory and strategic environment. Vision 2030 and the National Data and AI Strategy have made AI adoption a national priority, accelerating transformation and uptake.

Fourth, data sovereignty requirements. Though these requirements represent a challenge for many solution providers worldwide, they represent a strength for Hamsa. We designed our solutions to operate within customers’ data centers or via a private cloud hosted within the Kingdom, in line with compliance and data localization mandates.

We see significant growth opportunities in the banking and financial sector, particularly in customer services, card management, collections, and identity verification; in telecommunications, government services, and healthcare, in areas such as patient follow-up and preliminary screening; as well as retail and e-commerce, in order management and delivery services.

 

Beyond Saudi Arabia, which other GCC markets does Hamsa target, and what are your expansion plans for the next few years?

The United Arab Emirates is the second most important strategic market for Hamsa, as it is one of the fastest countries globally in AI adoption, particularly within the government sector, along with its position as a regional innovation hub. Hamsa enables the deployment of its solutions within the country, in line with the regulatory requirements and data sovereignty mandates.

Qatar represents another significant market for the company, notably in the healthcare and government services sectors, while Bahrain and Oman are considered promising markets, where Hamsa relies on local partnerships to reach customers and implement projects efficiently.

Beyond the GCC, Hamsa aims to expand in Egypt, Jordan, and Morocco, given the substantial operational scales these markets offer in communications centers, government services, and the financial sector. The next phase will focus on expanding into global markets by strengthening the platform to support more than 16 languages, leveraging the company’s expertise in developing models that can understand Arabic dialects and switch between languages despite limited data availability.

In all markets it enters, Hamsa adopts a unified approach that depends on three main principles: a local partner with deep market knowledge and established relationships; hosting solutions within the country to ensure compliance with sovereignty and data protection requirements; and providing technical and operational support in accordance with local time.  

 

Amidst the growing competition with global companies, where does the competitive advantage of Hamsa’s Arabic voice AI solutions lie?

It is important to acknowledge that global companies have extensive expertise and substantial budgets to develop AI technologies; however, our competition is not built on scale, but on delivering value that resonates with the needs of the Arab market. We believe Hamsa excels in four key areas: 

  1. Building Arabic models from the ground up. Most global solutions rely on models originally developed in English, with Arabic support added as an afterthought. This limits their ability to understand local dialects and switch between Arabic and English. At Hamsa, we trained our models from the beginning on this linguistic reality.
  2. Owning the full technology stack. Hamsa develops core components of the technology stack through a single platform, from speech recognition and voice synthesis to telecommunications, which ultimately reduces complexity and costs. This enables us to optimize performance, adjust response time, and deliver a stable, reliable experience.
  3. Data sovereignty and compliance. Hamsa’s solutions are designed to operate within customers’ data centers or via a private cloud hosted within the Kingdom, fulfilling the requirements of banks and government entities. Our solutions comply with personal data protection laws in Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
  4. Deep market knowledge. Our teams across the region deeply understand enterprises' needs, procurement dynamics, and regulatory requirements. This enables us to develop solutions tailored to the local market, including models specifically designed for local dialects.

 

How do you see the future of AI Agents in the GCC region?

The voice AI market in the region is moving toward three major shifts, the first of which has already begun:

  1. From pilot phases to full-scale production: Organizations are moving beyond exploring potential and are now seeking scalable, production-ready solutions with high reliability, compliance, and auditability. 
  2. From providing answers to executing procedures: The current generation of intelligent assistants can complete transactions, such as checking balances, booking appointments, opening tickets, and implementing procedures through integration with enterprise systems.
  3. From voice-only to multi-interface experiences. The future points toward intelligent agents that combine voice conversation with visual interfaces, offering option display, sending confirmations, and visualizing order or transaction status. I expect government entities to lead this shift ahead of the private sector, given their focus on improving service quality and enhancing accessibility. The biggest challenge will not be developing the models themselves, but rather integrating them with legacy systems, ensuring compliance with regulatory frameworks, and measuring their business impact through clear, measurable metrics.

Based on your experience, what are the key challenges facing Arab AI companies today, and what does the sector need to accelerate its growth and enhance competitiveness regionally and internationally? 

Voice AI companies in the region face five main challenges. The first is the limited availability of high-quality voice data, especially for Arabic dialects, which forces companies to build their own database from scratch, ultimately slowing model development. Second, the high cost of graphics processing units (GPUs) and sovereign infrastructure, which imposes financial burdens on local companies.

Third, the scarcity of specialists in deep learning and speech processing technologies. This places regional companies in direct competition with global companies for top-tier talent. Securing finance is the fourth challenge, as model development companies require significant investment before generating revenue. 

Fifth, long procurement cycles and preference for global suppliers, along with the absence of unified Arab references to measure model performance, collectively hinder the expansion of local companies.

To accelerate the sector’s growth, the region needs to:

  1. Create common, open Arabic databases and references that support model development.
  2. Provide a sovereign computing infrastructure with competitive costs to promote local innovations.
  3. Expand the presence of specialized investment funds that understand the nature and cycle of developing AI models.
  4. Strengthen regulatory coordination among Gulf countries to reduce the variability of compliance requirements, enabling companies to expand regionally within a unified, more efficient framework.

 

What are Hamsa’s ambitions for the next few years, either on geographical expansion, launching new products, or establishing partnerships?

Hamsa’s roadmap for the upcoming years is centered on four key pillars. Geographically, we focus on strengthening our presence in Saudi Arabia and the UEA, then expanding into other GCC countries, notably Qatar, Kuwait, and Bahrain. Later, we will enter Morocco before expanding into Europe and the US through our multilingual platform.

At the product level, we are pursuing three strategic tracks: expanding the platform to support over 16 languages while preserving Arabic’s positional excellence; developing intelligent agents that integrate voice capabilities with visual interfaces; and advancing custom voice solutions, advanced analytics, and model fine-tuning tailored to the specific needs of various sectors.

On the compliance and security side, we aim to achieve ISO 27001 certification and transition to SOC 2 Type II compliance, while expanding the deployment of voice agents to web applications, smart kiosks, and other environments where voice-based interaction offers superior efficiency.

Hamsa will continue to forge comprehensive partnerships with infrastructure and digital sovereignty partners, system integrators, and customer experience platforms, thereby accelerating our expansion and ensuring implementation quality.

Our ambition for Hamsa is to become the premier choice for Arabic voice AI and subsequently strengthen its position globally through a multilingual platform.

 

Translation: Noha Gad

Synthetic Data vs AI Hallucination: What’s the Difference?

Ghada Ismail

 

As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly embedded in business, not everything an AI system generates should be taken at face value.

Two concepts often create confusion in this context: synthetic data and AI hallucination. Both involve information generated by AI rather than directly collected from the real world, but their roles could not be more different.

One is a tool that can help businesses overcome data limitations. The other is a reliability problem that can undermine trust in AI systems.

 

What Is Synthetic Data?

Synthetic data is artificially generated information designed to replicate the characteristics and patterns of real-world data.

Instead of collecting thousands of real customer transactions, for example, a startup could generate synthetic transactions that mimic realistic purchasing behavior. Similarly, an AI developer could create synthetic images, customer profiles or financial scenarios to train and test an AI model.

This can be particularly valuable for startups that lack access to large datasets or operate in areas where data is sensitive.

Synthetic data can help companies reduce data-collection costs, accelerate AI development and limit exposure to sensitive information. It can also allow developers to test AI systems across scenarios that may be difficult or expensive to reproduce in the real world.

However, synthetic data is only useful when it is representative and properly validated. Poor-quality synthetic datasets can reproduce errors, biases or unrealistic patterns.

 

What Is AI Hallucination?

AI hallucination is something very different.

It occurs when an AI model generates information that sounds convincing but is factually incorrect, unsupported, or completely fabricated.

An AI chatbot, for instance, might invent a statistic, cite a research paper that does not exist, or provide an incorrect explanation with complete confidence.

Hallucinations can occur because generative AI models are designed to predict and generate likely sequences of information. They do not automatically distinguish between what is true and what merely appears plausible.

For businesses, this can become a serious issue. An inaccurate AI-generated answer may be inconvenient in a consumer application but potentially damaging in areas such as financial services, healthcare, legal technology or enterprise decision-making.

 

Synthetic Data vs AI Hallucination

The simplest way to distinguish the two is intention and purpose.

Synthetic data is deliberately created. AI hallucination is an unintended output.

Synthetic data is generated for a specific purpose, such as training, testing, or simulating scenarios. It can be reviewed, measured, and validated before being used.

Hallucinations, by contrast, emerge during an AI system's operation and need to be detected, corrected, or prevented.

In other words, synthetic data can be an AI development asset, while hallucination is an AI reliability risk.

 

Why Does This Matter for Startups?

The distinction is especially important for startups building AI products.

Early-stage companies often face limited access to high-quality data. Synthetic data can provide a way to experiment and develop models without relying exclusively on costly or sensitive real-world datasets.

At the same time, startups must ensure that their AI products do not generate unreliable information. A hallucination can quickly erode customer confidence, particularly when an AI product is being used to make business or financial decisions.

Importantly, synthetic data does not automatically cause hallucinations. However, if synthetic datasets are poorly designed or contain unrealistic patterns, they can affect the quality of the models trained on them.

That makes data validation, testing, and human oversight critical throughout the AI development process.

 

One Is a Tool, the Other Is a Risk

Synthetic data and AI hallucination may both involve AI-generated information, but treating them as interchangeable misses a crucial distinction.

Synthetic data can help startups solve one of AI's biggest challenges: access to useful, scalable, and privacy-conscious data.

Hallucinations represent another challenge: ensuring that AI systems remain accurate and trustworthy.

As businesses move beyond experimenting with AI and begin deploying it in real-world operations, knowing the difference between data that was intentionally generated and information that was unintentionally invented will become increasingly important.

Beyond the peak: How high-water marks keep performance fees fair

Noha Gad

 

In the investment management world, it is common for fund managers to earn a performance fee when they generate strong profits for their clients, but this arrangement can create an unfair situation if those gains are later lost and then partially recovered. Without additional safeguards, a manager could collect a performance fee during a good year, see the portfolio value drop sharply in the following year, and then earn another performance fee simply by bringing the fund back to its earlier level even though investors have not truly benefited from any new gains.

The high-water mark is a widely used rule in hedge funds and other managed investment products that prevents this outcome by linking performance fees to real, additional value creation rather than temporary swings in portfolio value. This rule sets the highest value that the fund has ever reached as a benchmark, allowing managers to charge a performance fee only on profits that rise above that previous peak.

 

What is meant by a high-water mark?

This term refers to the highest level that a body of water reaches, but metaphorically, it refers to the peak value of an investment fund or the highest point of achievement.

In the business realm, the high-water mark is a benchmark investment funds use to ensure investors only pay performance fees when a fund’s value reaches a new peak. It ensures that investors do not have to pay performance fees for poor performance, but, more importantly, guarantees that investors do not pay performance-based fees twice for the same amount of performance.

For asset management companies, including a high-water mark in their fee structure can be a strong signal of fairness and alignment with investors, ultimately contributing to attracting and retaining capital in a competitive market.

From a managerial perspective, the high-water mark encourages a focus on sustainable, long-term performance rather than short-term increases that might be followed by sharp declines. As performance fees are only available after the fund exceeds its highest historical value, managers have a clear incentive to avoid strategies that generate volatile returns with large drawdowns.

 

Why do high-water marks matter?

High-water marks are widely viewed as a key investor protection in hedge funds and other performance-fee-based investment structures, and they bring several clear advantages for both investors and fund managers. This includes:

  • Protecting investors from paying twice for the same gains.
  • Aligning manager incentives with genuine outperformance.
  • Promoting more disciplined risk management.
  • Supporting long-term thinking over short-term spikes.
  • Enhancing trust and credibility with investors.
  • Encouraging clearer communication about performance.

 

In conclusion, the high-water mark is more than a technical fee detail; it is a core element of fair and transparent performance-based compensation in investment management. Setting the fund’s highest historical value as the threshold for performance fees ensures that managers are rewarded only for creating new gains, not for recovering past losses or simply returning to earlier levels.

For investors, this structure provides a clear safeguard against paying twice for the same performance and helps align the manager’s interests with their own long-term outcomes. For managers and firms, it encourages more disciplined risk-taking, supports a focus on sustainable growth, and can strengthen trust and credibility in a competitive market.