Zedcrest Capital Limited, the Nigerian investment firm that led Leatherback’s $10 million pre-seed round in 2022, has completely exited the UK-based cross-border payments startup’s cap table, according to official filings dated October 20, 2025.
The documents show Zedcrest transferred all its ordinary shares it held in the company, reducing its stake to zero. The exit marks the end of a tumultuous three-year relationship that saw the investor initially exercise significant board influence before ultimately withdrawing from what had been positioned as a flagship portfolio investment.
A high-profile bet gone south
When Zedcrest Capital led Leatherback’s pre-seed round in April 2022, the deal was notable both for its size — unusually large for a pre-seed — and for the close operational involvement promised by the investor. At the time, Adedayo Amzat, group managing director of Zedcrest, joined Leatherback’s board as a non-executive director and publicly emphasized the firm’s hands-on approach.
“As principal investors, we love opportunities where we can bring our expertise to bear,” Amzat said during the funding announcement. “It has been rewarding to provide operational and strategic support to Leatherback.”
The investment was intended to fuel Leatherback’s expansion across Africa and into markets including South Africa, Egypt, Uganda, India, and the UAE. The startup, which offers multi-currency accounts and cross-border payment rails in over 180 currencies, aimed to position itself as infrastructure for global commerce.
But the relationship soured dramatically. According to industry sources and previous reporting, founder and then-CEO Ibrahim Toyeeb Ibitade left the company in October 2024 following what was described as “misalignment” with Amzat and Zedcrest over strategic direction. The investor had pushed for boardroom changes amid mounting concerns over governance and compliance.
Fraud allegations and regulatory scrutiny
The tensions came to a head in 2023 when Leatherback faced scrutiny over allegations that an entity called SDQ Facilitators had used a company account to conduct transactions totaling $10 million. While Leatherback maintained its compliance protocols were sound and was subsequently cleared of wrongdoing by Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the incident cast a shadow over the company and intensified investor concerns.
The period also saw significant operational disruption. Toni Campbell, an investor from Kinfolk Venture Capital, was initially appointed as interim CEO before the role transitioned to Ochebhoya Ekpete, a financial services veteran with experience at Cellulant, Interswitch, and Stripe, who officially took the helm in mid-2025.
The October 2025 filings also show substantial changes in the shareholdings of Leatherback’s co-founders. Oluseyi Akinbi transferred all his ordinary shares he held, reducing his stake to zero, while Ibitade’s shareholding significantly by approximately 87%.
Leatherback UK Holdings Limited remains the largest shareholder. The parent holding structure suggests ongoing consolidation of control within the company’s UK entity, though the full current ownership picture remains unclear.
A pattern of investor-led exits
Leatherback’s experience reflects a troubling pattern across Africa’s startup ecosystem, where investor-led boardroom battles have preceded the collapse of several high-profile companies. Ghana’s Dash, Nigeria’s 54gene and Lidya, Kenya’s iProcure, and Egypt’s Capiter all shut down after similar conflicts over control and strategy.
The difference in Leatherback’s case is that the company has at least survived the transition. Under Ekpete’s leadership, alongside vice president of product and operations Usman Amusat and CTO Mayowa Afe-Ogundele, the startup has pivoted sharply toward enterprise infrastructure and away from retail remittances.
“Leatherback should be a major infrastructure player in digital payments and global banking,” Ekpete said in an August 2025 interview, describing the company as “self-sustaining” with revenues covering expenses, though declining to confirm profitability.
The new team has emphasized a 70–30 split favoring enterprise clients over retail, positioning the company to offer banking-as-a-service capabilities rather than competing directly in Nigeria’s crowded consumer remittance market. In October 2025, Leatherback won the “Banking-as-a-Service Innovator of the Year” award at the Brit Fintech Awards.
For Zedcrest Capital, the exit represents a rare public retreat from a portfolio company. The firm, which was named Africa’s fastest-growing financial services company by the Financial Times in 2022, typically takes a multi-year approach to its investments and has backed over 20 African startups including AltSchool, Indicina, and TalentQL.
While neither Zedcrest nor Leatherback has commented publicly on the divestment, the timing suggests the investor may have concluded that the strategic vision under new management diverged too significantly from its original thesis, or that the operational challenges and reputational risks outweighed potential returns.
The departure also removes a key point of tension. Ekpete has explicitly stated that “alignment is critical” and that the new leadership team has “had no major conflicts” in its first months of operation — comments that appeared to draw a contrast with the previous regime.
What’s next for Leatherback
Leatherback now faces the challenge of executing its infrastructure pivot without the financial backing and strategic support of its lead investor. The company holds regulatory licenses in the UK (from the Financial Conduct Authority) and Canada (from Fintrac), which it leverages to offer services across multiple jurisdictions.
The startup’s five-year ambition is to generate $450 million in annual revenue and capture 5% of Africa’s remittance flows — a target that will require significant capital, regulatory expansion, and partner integrations in a sector where trust and compliance are paramount.
Whether Leatherback can achieve this without Zedcrest — and what the investor’s exit signals about the underlying business fundamentals — remains an open question. For now, the company’s survival and recent industry recognition suggest it has managed to navigate the storm, even as its cap table has been fundamentally reshaped.
The situation serves as an increasingly worrisome tale about the delicate balance between founder autonomy and investor oversight in African tech, where capital is scarce but operational challenges are abundant.