One company, several brands

A single legal entity can trade under more than one app name. A rebrand, a merger, or an acquired app can change the brand without changing the entity. The central bank's list may show an inactive entry whose app name is still in the store. This page explains how to check the status and the date of the list.

A single entity can have several brands

A legal entity is a corporation. It can operate multiple apps under different brand names. The entity holds the permission, and the brands are marketing names. The central bank's list may print several brand names beside the same entity. The reader should not assume each brand is a separate company. The entity is the one that matters for the licence.

The list shows the entity and the brand names it uses. The reader should look at the entity column. A brand may change, but the entity remains. The reader should match the entity in the app's terms to the entity on the list. The brand is secondary.

A brand can change owner or be retired

A brand can be sold, licensed, or retired. The app may keep the same name but have a new entity behind it. The central bank's list may show the old entity as inactive and the new entity as active under the same brand. The reader should check the entity, not just the brand. The brand is not the licence.

A rebrand can also change the app's name. The entity stays the same, but the brand changes. The list may show the old brand as inactive. The reader should look for the entity's current brands. The list is a snapshot, so the reader should check the date.

A listing can show an inactive entry whose app name is still in the store

The central bank may mark an entry as inactive, but the app may still be in the store. The store is not updated by the central bank. The app may be run by a new entity, or it may be unlicensed. The reader should not assume the app is licensed because it is in the store. The status on the list is the current one as of the list's date.

The reader should check the status column in the table. An inactive status is a signal. The reader should confirm on the central bank's page. The store page may not show the status. The reader should not rely on the store page for licensing information.

Check the status the list gives

The list gives a status for each entry: active or inactive. The status is the list's own word. The reader should read it carefully. An active status means the list currently shows that entity as active. An inactive status means the list shows that status. The reader should not guess why an entry is inactive. The list does not give reasons.

The status is a snapshot. It may change. The reader should check the date of the list. An old list may have an outdated status. The reader should confirm on the central bank's own page for the current status.

The date of the list matters

The list carries a single 'as of' date for the whole file. The date is not the day an entry was added or changed. The reader should check the date to know how current the list is. An old screenshot of a list is a weak source. The status may have changed. The reader should always check the central bank's current list.

The date is printed on the list. The table on this site shows that date. The reader should note it. If the date is old, the reader should not rely on the list for a decision. The central bank's page is the immediate source.

Why an old screenshot is a weak source

A screenshot of a list freezes the status at one moment. It may not show later changes. A brand may have been removed, or an entry may have become inactive. The reader should not rely on a screenshot. The central bank's page is the source. The reader should check the date on the screenshot and compare it with the current list.

The screenshot may also be edited. The reader should not trust a screenshot from a third party. The central bank's page is the only reliable source. The reader should go there directly. The table on this site is a weekly read, but the central bank's page is always current.

The same entity may use different names for different audiences

A legal entity registered with the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas can run more than one app under different brand names. One brand might target beginners with a simple interface, while another aims at traders who want more tools. The terms of use in each app should still name the same operating company, but a reader who only looks at the app icons will see two separate products. The central bank's list records the entity once, even when it operates several brands.

This is not a loophole but a normal business practice. A company may create a new brand for a partnership with a bank or an e-wallet, or it may buy an existing app and keep its name for continuity. The legal obligations fall on the entity behind the scenes, not on the brand itself. When a user signs up for two apps and later discovers they share one company, the discovery can change how they view their total exposure to that single entity.

To check this, open both apps and read the legal disclosures. The name printed at the bottom of the terms or in the privacy notice should match across the brands if the same entity operates them. If one app names a subsidiary and another names a parent company, the reader must compare both names with the central bank's list. Only the entity on the list holds the registration, not a marketing name that appears on the phone screen.

A brand name can hide the fact that two apps share one balance sheet

When a single entity runs several brands, a customer's funds in each app may ultimately sit with the same company. A user who holds crypto in two different apps might think they are diversified, but if both apps operate under one registered entity, the risk concentrates in one place. The app interfaces look different, the customer support emails differ, and the fees are structured separately, yet a failure at the company level affects both brands.

The central bank's list does not warn about this concentration because it simply names the entity. The reader must do the matching work. After finding the entity name in each app's terms, compare those names. If they are identical, or if both are subsidiaries of a parent that is the registered entity, then the user has not spread risk across two independent companies. The two brands are one business from a regulatory standpoint.

This matters most when deciding how much to hold in any single service. A person who would not put all their crypto with one company could accidentally do so by using two brands that share the same legal entity. Checking the status on the list only tells whether the entity is registered; it does not reveal that another app on the phone belongs to the same entity. The reader has to trace the names before they can see the connection.

A change of brand owner does not always change the listed entity

When one company buys an app from another, the brand name may stay the same for years while the legal entity behind it changes. The app store listing might still show the old developer name for a while, and old screenshots continue to circulate. The central bank's list will eventually show the new entity if that entity is the one registered, but a reader looking at the brand alone cannot tell whether the transfer has happened.

The terms of use inside the app are the most reliable place to find the current operating entity. After a sale, the new owner must update those legal documents, though the update may take time. During the transition, a user could open the app and see the old entity name in the terms while the store page already shows a new developer. That mismatch is a signal to check the central bank's own page for the latest filing.

A brand can also be retired entirely, with users pushed to a new app run by the same entity. The old app remains in some app stores or on old devices, but the central bank's list may mark the entity as inactive for that brand. An inactive entry still names the entity, but the status tells the reader that the regulator no longer considers that entity active for virtual asset services. The brand name alone cannot convey that.

The list's status applies to the entity, not to each brand separately

A common mistake is to think that one brand of a company can be active while another brand of the same company is inactive. The Bangko Sentral's list records the status of the legal entity. If the entity is active, then all brands it operates are part of that active registration. If the entity is inactive, every brand under that entity carries the same inactive status, even if the apps still work and accept deposits.

The reader must therefore find the entity name first and then look up that entity's status on the list. Checking a brand name directly on the list often fails because the list may not print that brand at all. The list is organised by legal entity, with brand names appearing only as notes or under a separate column when the regulator chooses to show them. A brand that is not printed on the list can still be covered if its entity is listed.

This means an inactive entity could still operate an app that looks fully functional. The app may process trades, show balances, and answer support tickets, but the regulator has marked the entity as inactive. The reader who only checks the brand name will never see this because the brand is not the unit of regulation. The entity is the unit, and the status belongs to the entity alone.

Two brands from one entity can confuse a user about which terms apply

When a single company runs several apps, each app has its own terms of use, but the legal entity named in those terms may be the same. A user who reads the terms in one app and then moves to the other app may assume the rules are identical. In practice, the two brands can have different fee schedules, different withdrawal limits, and different liability clauses, even though the same company wrote both documents.

The reader should not assume that knowing one brand's terms means knowing the other's. Each app is a separate product, and the company may choose to allocate risk differently between them. One brand might offer a custodial wallet while another provides a non-custodial option, and the legal entity's responsibility changes accordingly. The central bank's list does not describe these product differences; it only names the entity.

To avoid confusion, a user should match each brand to the entity and then read the terms for the specific brand they are using. If a dispute arises, the company will point to the terms of that particular app, not to the terms of a sibling brand. The reader who keeps the brands separate in their mind, while recognising they share one entity, is better prepared than one who treats all the company's apps as a single service.

The app store developer name can point to a different entity than the terms

The developer name shown in an app store is chosen by the company and may be a trading name, a parent company, or a subsidiary. It does not have to match the legal entity that appears in the app's terms of use. A reader might check the store page, see a developer name that is not on the central bank's list, and wrongly conclude that the app is unregistered. The store name is marketing information, not a regulatory filing.

Conversely, the developer name could match a listed entity while the actual operator named in the terms is a different, unlisted company. This happens when a parent company is registered but a subsidiary runs the app without its own registration. The central bank's list may show the parent as active, but the reader must still confirm that the subsidiary is covered by that registration. The terms of use should state the relationship.

The safest order is to read the terms inside the app first, find the legal entity there, and then compare that entity with the central bank's list. If the terms name an entity that is on the list, the brand is likely covered. If the terms name an entity that is not on the list, the reader should look for a parent or affiliate that is listed and understand how the app's services relate to that listed entity. The store developer name is only a starting point.