Key Takeaways Up to $500B in US bank deposits at risk by 2028. Stablecoins projected to reach ~$2T by decade-end. […] The post Potential $2 Trillion Stablecoin Key Takeaways Up to $500B in US bank deposits at risk by 2028. Stablecoins projected to reach ~$2T by decade-end. […] The post Potential $2 Trillion Stablecoin

Potential $2 Trillion Stablecoin Boom Puts Banks Under Pressure

2026/01/30 02:11
3 min read
Key Takeaways
  • Up to $500B in US bank deposits at risk by 2028.
  • Stablecoins projected to reach ~$2T by decade-end.
  • Banks oppose yield-bearing stablecoins in the CLARITY Act.

According to estimates from Standard Chartered, stablecoins could drain up to $500 billion in deposits from US banks by 2028. At the same time, the broader stablecoin market is projected to expand toward roughly $2 trillion by the end of the decade, with around one third of that growth coming from developed markets such as the United States.

Stablecoins move beyond crypto trading

The shift matters because stablecoins are no longer used only as plumbing for crypto markets. They are increasingly behaving like digital cash alternatives, offering instant settlement, global transferability, and in some cases the potential for yield. That puts them in direct competition with bank deposits, which remain the backbone of the traditional banking funding model.

As stablecoins gain traction as a store of value rather than just a transaction rail, they begin to challenge banks on their most important advantage: low-cost, sticky deposits that support lending and net interest margins.

US regional banks appear to be the most exposed to this shift. Their business models rely heavily on deposit-funded net interest income, making them more vulnerable if customers reallocate cash into stablecoins. Data comparing deposit sensitivity across banks shows regional lenders clustering at the higher-risk end, while investment banks and brokerages appear far less exposed.

Diversified banks are better positioned, but not immune

Large, diversified US banks are better insulated thanks to broader revenue streams across trading, asset management, and investment banking. Even so, they are not immune. A sustained migration of deposits into stablecoins would still create structural pressure on margins over time, especially if the trend accelerates rather than stabilizes.

READ MORE:

Tokenized Gold Debuts in Hong Kong as U.S. Crypto Rules Face Senate Vote

Another key difference lies in how stablecoin issuers manage reserves. Major players such as Tether and Circle largely park backing assets in short-term government securities rather than recycling capital back into commercial bank deposits. This limits the indirect funding support banks typically receive from payment activity, weakening the traditional deposit loop.

Banks push back against yield-bearing stablecoins

The growing threat has turned stablecoins into a regulatory flashpoint in Washington. US banks are actively opposing proposals under the CLARITY Act that would allow yield-bearing stablecoins. Banking groups argue that permitting stablecoin issuers to offer yield would accelerate deposit outflows, undermine bank funding stability, and increase systemic risk.

Crypto firms and stablecoin issuers counter that banning yield would be anti-competitive and slow innovation, particularly as consumers look for more efficient and flexible ways to hold and move money.

As lawmakers debate the final shape of the CLARITY Act, the outcome could prove decisive. If yield-bearing stablecoins are approved and adoption continues to scale, the shift away from traditional bank deposits may become structural rather than cyclical, reshaping the US financial system over the next decade.


The information provided in this article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice. Coindoo.com does not endorse or recommend any specific investment strategy or cryptocurrency. Always conduct your own research and consult with a licensed financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

The post Potential $2 Trillion Stablecoin Boom Puts Banks Under Pressure appeared first on Coindoo.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

HitPaw API is Integrated by Comfy for Professional Image and Video Enhancement to Global Creators

HitPaw API is Integrated by Comfy for Professional Image and Video Enhancement to Global Creators

SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 7, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — HitPaw, a leader in AI-powered visual enhancement solutions, announced Comfy, a global content creation platform, is
Share
AI Journal2026/02/08 09:15
Journalist gives brutal review of Melania movie: 'Not a single person in the theater'

Journalist gives brutal review of Melania movie: 'Not a single person in the theater'

A Journalist gave a brutal review of the new Melania documentary, which has been criticized by those who say it won't make back the huge fees spent to make it,
Share
Rawstory2026/02/08 09:08
Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Prominent analyst Cheeky Crypto (203,000 followers on YouTube) set out to verify a fast-spreading claim that XRP’s circulating supply could “vanish overnight,” and his conclusion is more nuanced than the headline suggests: nothing in the ledger disappears, but the amount of XRP that is truly liquid could be far smaller than most dashboards imply—small enough, in his view, to set the stage for an abrupt liquidity squeeze if demand spikes. XRP Supply Shock? The video opens with the host acknowledging his own skepticism—“I woke up to a rumor that XRP supply could vanish overnight. Sounds crazy, right?”—before committing to test the thesis rather than dismiss it. He frames the exercise as an attempt to reconcile a long-standing critique (“XRP’s supply is too large for high prices”) with a rival view taking hold among prominent community voices: that much of the supply counted as “circulating” is effectively unavailable to trade. His first step is a straightforward data check. Pulling public figures, he finds CoinMarketCap showing roughly 59.6 billion XRP as circulating, while XRPScan reports about 64.7 billion. The divergence prompts what becomes the video’s key methodological point: different sources count “circulating” differently. Related Reading: Analyst Sounds Major XRP Warning: Last Chance To Get In As Accumulation Balloons As he explains it, the higher on-ledger number likely includes balances that aggregators exclude or treat as restricted, most notably Ripple’s programmatic escrow. He highlights that Ripple still “holds a chunk of XRP in escrow, about 35.3 billion XRP locked up across multiple wallets, with a nominal schedule of up to 1 billion released per month and unused portions commonly re-escrowed. Those coins exist and are accounted for on-ledger, but “they aren’t actually sitting on exchanges” and are not immediately available to buyers. In his words, “for all intents and purposes, that escrow stash is effectively off of the market.” From there, the analysis moves from headline “circulating supply” to the subtler concept of effective float. Beyond escrow, he argues that large strategic holders—banks, fintechs, or other whales—may sit on material balances without supplying order books. When you strip out escrow and these non-selling stashes, he says, “the effective circulating supply… is actually way smaller than the 59 or even 64 billion figure.” He cites community estimates in the “20 or 30 billion” range for what might be truly liquid at any given moment, while emphasizing that nobody has a precise number. That effective-float framing underpins the crux of his thesis: a potential supply shock if demand accelerates faster than fresh sell-side supply appears. “Price is a dance between supply and demand,” he says; if institutional or sovereign-scale users suddenly need XRP and “the market finds that there isn’t enough XRP readily available,” order books could thin out and prices could “shoot on up, sometimes violently.” His phrase “circulating supply could collapse overnight” is presented not as a claim that tokens are destroyed or removed from the ledger, but as a market-structure scenario in which available inventory to sell dries up quickly because holders won’t part with it. How Could The XRP Supply Shock Happen? On the demand side, he anchors the hypothetical to tokenization. He points to the “very early stages of something huge in finance”—on-chain tokenization of debt, stablecoins, CBDCs and even gold—and argues the XRP Ledger aims to be “the settlement layer” for those assets.He references Ripple CTO David Schwartz’s earlier comments about an XRPL pivot toward tokenized assets and notes that an institutional research shop (Bitwise) has framed XRP as a way to play the tokenization theme. In his construction, if “trillions of dollars in value” begin settling across XRPL rails, working inventories of XRP for bridging, liquidity and settlement could rise sharply, tightening effective float. Related Reading: XRP Bearish Signal: Whales Offload $486 Million In Asset To illustrate, he offers two analogies. First, the “concert tickets” model: you think there are 100,000 tickets (100B supply), but 50,000 are held by the promoter (escrow) and 30,000 by corporate buyers (whales), leaving only 20,000 for the public; if a million people want in, prices explode. Second, a comparison to Bitcoin’s halving: while XRP has no programmatic halving, he proposes that a sudden adoption wave could function like a de facto halving of available supply—“XRP’s version of a halving could actually be the adoption event.” He also updates the narrative context that long dogged XRP. Once derided for “too much supply,” he argues the script has “totally flipped.” He cites the current cycle’s optics—“XRP is sitting above $3 with a market cap north of around $180 billion”—as evidence that raw supply counts did not cap price as tightly as critics claimed, and as a backdrop for why a scarcity narrative is gaining traction. Still, he declines to publish targets or timelines, repeatedly stressing uncertainty and risk. “I’m not a financial adviser… cryptocurrencies are highly volatile,” he reminds viewers, adding that tokenization could take off “on some other platform,” unfold more slowly than enthusiasts expect, or fail to get to “sudden shock” scale. The verdict he offers is deliberately bound. The theory that “XRP supply could vanish overnight” is imprecise on its face; the ledger will not erase coins. But after examining dashboard methodologies, escrow mechanics and the behavior of large holders, he concludes that the effective float could be meaningfully smaller than headline supply figures, and that a fast-developing tokenization use case could, under the right conditions, stress that float. “Overnight is a dramatic way to put it,” he concedes. “The change could actually be very sudden when it comes.” At press time, XRP traded at $3.0198. Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Share
NewsBTC2025/09/18 11:00