Deposits of public funds in the Paraguayan banking system reached US$4.46 billion in June 2026, an increase of approximately 56% compared to the same month the previous year, according to data from the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF). Of this total, about 19.4 trillion guaranis (US$3.19 billion) were in local currency, while US$1.27 billion were held in U.S. dollars.
The Social Security Institute (IPS) is the single largest holder of these resources, accounting for 78.2% of savings deposit certificates (CDA), which represent 45.6% of all public funds. Almost half of the balances (48%) are in demand deposits, and 6.4% are in checking accounts.
The funds are highly concentrated in just four financial institutions: the National Development Bank (BNF), Ueno Bank, Banco Continental, and Sudameris Bank, which together hold 68.8% of the total. The MEF justifies the concentration by stating these entities have a good solvency rating with strong and stable trends.
Simultaneously, the IPS faces a saturation problem. During a session of the Board of Directors, council member Emilio Argaña warned that the institution has already exceeded the overall legal limit of 55% for investments in the banking sector and is nearing 65%. This prevents new applications, even in solid banks like Continental, which recently made a bond placement proposal.
Faced with this scenario, the president of the IPS, Isaías Fretes, questioned whether the entity's Organic Charter enables investments abroad, signaling a search for alternatives to optimize the yield of pension funds. The Board decided to request a working meeting with the Superintendency of Pensions to clarify the regulatory limits.
The situation is particularly sensitive regarding Ueno Bank, linked to the Grupo Vázquez SAE, of which President Santiago Peña is a former partner. In early July, the IPS Director of Investments, Hugo Díaz, admitted that the entity was the only one with deposits above the permitted individual limit. However, the official position changed later, with an IPS statement asserting that there is no resolution determining a breach of regulations, which was interpreted as support for the bank.