Summary
- Stablecoin transactions were approximately $390 billion annually by late 2025, a mere 0.02% of the $208 trillion cross-border payments market.
- Payments begin and conclude in fiat currency, with stablecoins facilitating only the intermediary step that previously relied on correspondent banking.
- The reliance on a single bank poses significant operational risks, as evidenced by the recent experiences with Silvergate and Signature Banks.
Initially designed to bypass traditional banking systems, stablecoins are increasingly becoming integrated into them as companies expand their operations.
Stripe recently acquired Bridge for $1.1 billion, which specializes in coordinating bank transactions. Meanwhile, Citi is establishing a crypto custody service, and Standard Chartered is trialing stablecoin settlements in Singapore. These instances demonstrate a trend where institutions are gravitating towards a similar operational framework.
In enterprise cross-border payments, the process consists of three components. The payer's funds are transferred in local currency through domestic systems, such as a Brazilian buyer using BRL via Pix. The recipient ultimately receives their payment in local currency, such as USD.
The crucial step in between involves transferring value internationally from one institution to another. Historically, this was done through correspondent banking, where SWIFT messages navigated through various intermediary banks, each adding delays and fees. However, when both parties accept a stablecoin, this transfer can occur almost instantly on the blockchain. Despite this, banks still manage the other two components of the transaction.
This division of tasks illustrates that while stablecoins can expedite the middle leg of the transaction, every process still originates and concludes with fiat currency, which is where banks play an indispensable role as the entry point, compliance anchor, and local payment facilitator.
Payments Initiate in Fiat
All enterprise payment transactions commence from a bank account. Payments for payroll, vendor invoices, customer sales, and capital distributions occur in fiat currency, navigating through regulated financial systems that companies must maintain, regardless of their payment provider's preferences.
The scale of the cross-border payments market reached $208 trillion in 2025, according to FXC Intelligence. In contrast, actual stablecoin transactions amounted to around $390 billion annually at the same time, as reported by McKinsey and Artemis. This translates to just 0.02% of the total global payment volume, which includes both cross-border and domestic transactions. The larger figures often cited regarding annual stablecoin "volume" primarily stem from automated trading and exchange flows rather than actual payments. For instance, a hedge fund's treasury operations, a multinational's payroll across various countries, and an exchange managing institutional withdrawals all start with fiat currency.
These entities seek to determine which banking infrastructures can reliably connect with various settlement networks and which have the capacity to handle institutional volumes. Many stablecoin firms find it challenging to provide satisfactory answers.
From $50 Million to $10 Billion: The Growth Challenge
At an annual payment volume of $50 million, a single banking relationship, one stablecoin issuer, and one compliance framework can suffice. However, at $500 million, these resources become inadequate. When reaching $10 billion in volume, the pressing question shifts from the quality of technology to how many corridors the banking, FX, and licensing frameworks can effectively support. Ultimately, volume is contingent on infrastructure.
Brazil serves as a case study in this trend. In 2025, Pix, the nation’s instant payment system, processed over R$35 trillion (approximately $6.3 trillion), with B2B transactions constituting 47% of that total, according to the central bank's data. Effective BRL settlement, access to local payment systems, and robust FX infrastructure become essential at this level of institutional volume.
Building these layers requires extensive time and relationship development with banks, regulators, and local partners. While the mechanics of stablecoins are straightforward, the regulated fiat-to-crypto bridges, comprehensive banking networks, and the FX systems capable of managing multi-currency exchanges are where growth often stagnates. Companies that encounter limitations at mid-scale typically face challenges not from the crypto layer, but from the banking layer they failed to establish adequately.
The Risks of Single-Bank Dependency
Reliance on a single banking partner represents a significant overlooked risk in the crypto payments sector. Most businesses utilizing stablecoin frameworks depend heavily on one primary banking relationship.
Banks can withdraw from fintech and crypto initiatives suddenly, abandon corridors following regulatory changes, or alter their risk profiles due to management shifts or compliance assessments. Recent events illustrate this pattern, including the closure of Silvergate, the collapse of Signature Bank, and the FDIC's issuance of "pause letters" to Coinbase, which were later revealed through public records requests.
In March 2026, the FTC issued warning letters to PayPal, Stripe, Visa, and Mastercard regarding their debanking practices, part of a larger federal initiative stemming from an executive order issued in August 2025.
For a company relying on a single banking partner, losing that relationship can result in an immediate operational halt. To mitigate this risk, it is essential to establish a robust banking network with multiple regulated connections, alternative rail access, and compliance systems that meet the requirements of all jurisdictions involved. Building this foundation requires considerable time and financial investment, yet it remains critical when existing setups fail.
Compliance as a Competitive Advantage
The crypto-centric perspective often views compliance as a hindrance and banking as an outdated necessity. This viewpoint may hold true at smaller scales, where users are primarily retail consumers, but it falters when dealing with corporate clients, CFOs of multinational companies, and compliance officers at major exchanges. These stakeholders expect their infrastructure partners to adhere to the same regulatory standards they themselves must follow.
Current regulations underscore this reality. The GENIUS Act, enacted in July 2025, mandates that compliant stablecoin issuance aligns with bank-level reserve, disclosure, and licensing standards. Even in cases where regulations allow non-bank issuers, they often drive significant transaction volumes towards partnerships with banks and reserves held by banks. An EY-Parthenon survey revealed that 13% of financial institutions and corporations are currently utilizing stablecoins, while 80% of those not using them are actively considering adoption.
As demand continues to grow, the limitation lies in the availability of regulated, institutional-level infrastructure that enterprise clients trust. A stablecoin provider unable to demonstrate adequate licensing, banking connections, and solid compliance will lose out on institutional contracts to competitors that can.
Characteristics of Robust Infrastructure
Companies that are successfully developing payment infrastructure capable of supporting enterprise-level operations are increasingly collaborating with banks rather than distancing themselves.
These firms are integrating regulated banking connections across multiple partners, gaining access to local payment systems in key corridors, and establishing FX frameworks for efficient multi-currency conversions, all while utilizing stablecoin settlements as a programmable layer. By late 2025, B2B stablecoin payments had reached an annualized rate of approximately $226 billion, marking a 733% increase year-over-year, with this growth concentrated in companies that prioritized establishing banking infrastructure first.
Stablecoins enhance value through rapid processing, programmability, 24/7 settlement, and reduced correspondent banking friction. However, these benefits can only be realized once a solid banking framework is established. Infrastructure that performs well in demonstrations but fails under real-world volume represents a product that has not been fully developed.
Bernardo Brites is co-founder and CEO of Trace Finance, which creates regulated banking and stablecoin settlement systems for Brazil, the U.S., and emerging markets. His views reflect his perspective in that market.