European Network for Payments: can five rivals operate as one network?

On 30 September 2026, Bancomat, Bizum, EPI Company (Wero), SIBS (MB WAY) and Vipps MobilePay announced the European Network for Payments (ENP), a Madrid-based company owned in equal shares by its five founders. Their solutions serve around 130 million users in 13 countries, and ENP will focus first on cross-border person-to-person payments between the five schemes, then on e-commerce and in-store payments. So what will it take for the European Network for Payments to operate as one network and grow beyond its founders, and what does it mean for banks?

Our expert’s take: Romain Rica, Payment Product Line Manager Digital Core at SBS

At this stage, ENP is a company and a governance structure, but technically, what actually exists today, and what still has to be built before the first cross-border payments go through?

ENP is not starting from scratch. Cross-border P2P payments are already available between participating banks in the EuroPA initiative, connecting solutions such as Bizum, Bancomat and MB WAY. In April 2026, a successful proof of concept also demonstrated cross-border in-store payments between Bancomat, EPI/Wero and MB WAY.

The technical feasibility is therefore no longer the main question. The challenge is to extend these capabilities into a common network operating reliably across all five founding schemes. This involves more than deploying an interoperability hub. The partners need common rules for transaction processing, fraud management, disputes, service levels and operational responsibilities. They also need an economic model that works for participants with different volumes and market positions. Connecting existing payment systems is achievable. Operating them as a single European network, with consistent service quality and clear accountability, is a much more demanding exercise.

The digital euro pilot starts in the second half of 2027, and ENP is targeting roughly the same horizon. For a bank, are these two projects complementary or competing?

The two initiatives have different foundations. ENP connects existing private payment solutions based on commercial bank money, while the digital euro would introduce central bank money into everyday digital payments. The ECB is already exploring synergies with private payment schemes, including common acceptance standards and co-badging. So there is a genuine opportunity for complementarity. But from a bank’s perspective, the economic question remains. Both initiatives could address similar payment use cases, and both may require significant investment in integration, infrastructure and operations.

The digital euro pilot in 2027 is also not a commercial launch, and its eventual adoption remains uncertain. Banks should not have to choose between these initiatives, but they need a clear understanding of where infrastructure and capabilities can be reused, and where additional investments will be unavoidable. For me, the real risk is not that Europe develops two payment initiatives. It is that banks end up financing overlapping capabilities without a sufficiently clear business case or customer benefit.

Five founders, five equal stakes, but different priorities. Could ENP’s governance become its biggest obstacle?

Equal ownership is a strong starting point for cooperation. It gives each founding scheme a voice, regardless of its size or domestic market. But equal ownership does not mean equal economic exposure. The five participants have different customer bases, transaction volumes, technical architectures and investment priorities. A development that creates significant value for one scheme may offer limited benefits to another. This raises an important question: how much decision-making authority are the shareholders prepared to delegate to ENP?

Strategic decisions should naturally remain under shareholder control. But operational and technical priorities need a governance process that allows the network to move forward without renegotiating every decision. If each participant can effectively block developments that do not align with its own priorities, the network could lose the agility it needs to compete. Equal ownership should protect the partnership, not prevent the organisation from making decisions.

ENP aims to become a pan-European network. What conditions would make its expansion genuinely open and attractive to other payment schemes?

The five founders already represent a significant part of the European payments market. But European coverage is not the same as a genuinely open European network. Other payment schemes will need to understand what joining ENP means in practice: technical integration requirements, certification, pricing, operational obligations and participation in future decisions. I would also distinguish between ownership and access. A scheme should not necessarily need to become a shareholder to benefit from interoperability, provided it meets the network’s requirements.

There is also an economic dimension. New participants will want predictable conditions and confidence that their interests can be represented, even if they do not have the same influence as the founding shareholders. Ultimately, ENP’s credibility will depend not only on the number of schemes it connects, but also on the transparency and fairness of the model it offers them. The five founders have shown that competing payment schemes can cooperate. The next test is whether they can build an organisation capable of growing beyond their initial partnership.

One network, five schemes: our expert’s wrap-up

The European Network for Payments is not starting from scratch. Connecting existing payment systems is achievable, but operating them as a single European network, with consistent service quality and clear accountability, is a much more demanding exercise. Banks should not have to choose between ENP and the digital euro; the real risk is financing overlapping capabilities without a clear business case or customer benefit. The next test is whether the European Network for Payments can grow beyond its founders’ initial partnership.

For more expert content on industry outlooks and innovation, subscribe to our newsletter or visit our Insights page.