As billions of Chinese across the world usher in the Lunar New Year today, the Year of the Dragon will give way to the Year of the Snake. 

For those who celebrate the festival, the 12 zodiac signs correspond with varying fortunes. This extends beyond a Western-style horoscope, where your birth sign determines your personality traits; the Snake will be the ‘ruler’ of 2025, and one must change their priorities and behaviour accordingly, to align with its energy. 

It may be tenuous to connect the Year of the Snake’s symbolism with 2025 in trade finance. But it’s worth assessing whether during the two most recent Years of the Snake – 2001 and 2013 – any parallels could be drawn with the energy the snake is said to prophesy. 

Granted, 2025 is the Year of the Wood Snake, while 2013 was the Water Snake and 2001 the Metal Snake, all with different connotations. Also, every dozen years, the trade finance industry transforms past the point of recognisability. But looking at Years of the Snake forgone may provide some instructions on how best to – or not to – navigate the year ahead.

What to expect with the Year of the Snake

Discard any preconceptions of a biblical snake as symbolic of evil. In Chinese tradition, the snake holds more nuanced symbolism. Yes, they are cunning and hold a sharp sting, but can also bring opportunity. The Snake is determined to instigate change – particularly as this is a Wood Snake, associated with growth and stability. That the Snake sheds its skin symbolises the capability for renewal, and letting bygones be bygones.

If willing to embrace his energy, the Snake is said to bring opportunity however long and tumultuous the road ahead. It is believed that collaborating and listening to one another’s needs, rather than ‘over asserting’ your authority, are the most effective ways to navigate the snake. 

Largely, the most prominent advice for 2025 would be to focus on your piece of the puzzle and allow and trust that the greater picture will come together. 

2001 in trade finance

The Year of the Snake in 2001 brought significant challenges for global trade and finance, offering a cautionary tale for navigating similar periods in 2025. A sharp economic downturn marked the year, with global GDP growth dropping to 1.5% and world trade shrinking by 1.5%—the first negative trade growth since 1982. This slowdown stemmed from a combination of factors, including a slump in major industrial markets, declining investment, and the implosion of the ‘Dot-Com’ bubble. Notably, the semiconductor industry saw a staggering 29% drop in global sales, while personal computer and mobile phone sales stagnated.

As a result of the reduced demand for capital goods and IT products, East Asian economies specialising in these sectors entered a recession for the first time in decades. Capital flows also dwindled, with foreign direct investment (FDI) declining by over a third.

Adding to the turbulence, the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks disrupted trade between the US and its partners, the result of higher insurance premiums and tighter border controls impacting transportation costs. Around the world, sectors reliant on low transport costs, from fresh produce to tourism, were particularly affected.

In 2001, regional trade agreements (RTAs) played a significant role in global trade, accounting for 43% of world merchandise trade by the end of the year. Despite the overall decline in global trade, intra-regional trade within RTAs demonstrated varying levels of resilience. The European Union (EU) saw a smaller decline in intra-trade compared to world trade, while NAFTA, ASEAN, and MERCOSUR experienced sharper contractions, with ASEAN intra-trade decreasing by over 10% and MERCOSUR’s intra-trade share falling to its lowest since 1992.

Nonetheless, a policy feature of 2001 was adaptability. Central banks and governments successfully mitigated some repercussions through accommodative monetary and fiscal policies. Similarly, intra-regional trade amongst smaller parties saw growth. Despite declines in intra-regional trade within major RTAs, the ANDEAN group saw better fortune; the share of intra-Andean trade rose to nearly 11% for ANDEAN exports, pushed up by Colombia’s strong intra-regional exports and Ecuador and Venezuela’s imports.

2013 in trade finance

The trade finance sector in 2013, the next Year of the Snake, saw transformation which, while challenging, demonstrated the sector’s ability to adapt and renew itself. Just as the snake sheds its skin, the industry underwent significant structural shifts, moving from traditional instruments like letters of credit toward open account financing. And transformation made space for new opportunity: developing regions such as Asia and Latin America captured a growing share of global trade and trade finance activity.

There were numerous obstacles to trade finance in 2013. The market experienced slow growth, aligned with the modest recovery in global trade volumes, with no significant global capacity constraints at the time. The trade finance gap stood at $1.64 trillion – a gap then perceived as worryingly large.

In the wake of the financial crisis, the number of regulations was raising “seemingly exponentially”, according to the ICC Global Trade and Finance Survey that year. Stringent Basel III regulatory requirements increased compliance burdens for financial institutions; it affected the cost of funds and liquidity for trade finance.

As tends to happen, stress was most acute at the lower end of the market. To finance trade, SMEs in emerging markets continued to rely on loans in local currency, restricting their ability to optimally engage in international trade. Structural shifts became evident, with a transition from traditional instruments such as letters of credit to open account financing, driven by expanding global supply chains. 

In 2013, bank-to-bank trade finance was on the rise, particularly in emerging markets (such as Colombia, Russia, Turkey, Pakistan, and the Philippines).

Furthermore, non-bank entities and trade insurance providers grew more prominent, while regional banks gained influence as global banks saw reduced convening power in third-party financing. Uncertainties included the potential misalignment of financial sector incentives with trade finance needs, overemphasis on high-yield activities, and the risk of “re-nationalisation” of lending. As such, despite challenges, trade finance remained a demand-driven sector with low default rates and high-quality assets.

Allowing the Snake to guide

2025 is different, but not entirely foreign. Basel 3.1 and similar regulatory deadlines compound uncertainty amidst labyrinthian sanctions and tariffs, the trade finance gap only widens, and global trade concerns are amplified by speculation. But throughout, trade finance has maintained its reputation for supporting parties across the supply chain even during difficult periods, which reinforces the Snake year’s wisdom about maintaining strong fundamentals and risk management practices while allowing the market to evolve naturally.

Years of the Snake have historically brought significant structural changes that required adaptability. In 2001, this manifested through the 2001 crash from the rise and fall of technology stocks and post-9/11 disruptions, while 2013 saw a fundamental shift from traditional trade finance instruments to open account financing. 

Where 2025 stands out is in terms of digitalisation – whether in trade documents and verification, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), large language models (LLMs) for analysis, or generative AI (Gen-AI) assistants. Luckily, the potential for ‘renewal’ means that the digital revolution could not be better timed. Institutions should shed institutions of antiquity and prepare for adaptation rather than resistance.

On the flip side, it is important to eschew from egotistical assertions of authority surrounding closed-door trade policy. Unfortunately, the past month of 2025 has proven this will likely be impossible, and the industry will have to brace for the sting. Nonetheless, supply chains have been rerouted with agility, bolstering trade amongst emerging markets in a similar fashion to 2001.

—

Bearing the Year of the Snake in mind should serve as a reminder for the necessity of agility and resilience to avoid obstacles. The Snake’s symbolism of renewal and pragmatism offers a valuable perspective: rather than resisting change, institutions should lean into innovation while maintaining strong fundamentals. The wisdom of the Snake lies in knowing when to strike and when to retreat—those who balance caution with ambition may find 2025 a year of transformation rather than turbulence.

For this lunar year, proceeding with attentiveness and pursuing collaboration will surely guide the ship of trade finance into the sunlit seas of equitable growth.