Stablecoins 2.0: Exploring Blockchain Solutions for the Next Generation of Digital Currencies

On July 18, 2025, President Donald Trump signed the federal legislation known as the GENIUS Act, initiating comprehensive regulation of “stablecoins” in the United States. This marked a pivotal moment for both the American cryptocurrency market and the global digital asset industry, as the world’s largest economy officially opened its doors to the legal circulation of dollar-backed stablecoins.

China

In 2021, mainland China prohibited mining and cryptocurrency operations. However, amid a global trend toward stablecoin regulation, a meeting took place on July 11, 2025, in Hong Kong involving the Shanghai State Asset Supervision and Administration Commission and local government officials. In response to calls from experts and major companies, officials discussed the development of a “stablecoin” pegged to the yuan.

«Given China’s robust fintech ecosystem, it has the potential to become a key player in shaping the future of blockchain-based payments,» stated Nik Rak, director of LVRG Research.

At the Lujiazui Forum in June, Pan Gongsheng, director of the People’s Bank of China, announced the expansion of international use of the digital yuan, the establishment of an international e-CNY center, and an ambition toward a multipolar currency system.

The business sector is also becoming involved, with e-commerce giant JD.com and fintech leader Ant Group calling on the central bank to allow the issuance of yuan-backed stablecoins to counter the rising influence of dollar-linked cryptocurrencies. The companies plan to submit applications for coin issuance licenses in Hong Kong.

Market participants assert that any changes in China may encounter significant challenges due to the control over capital flows, which is likely to be a major obstacle to the development of stablecoins. However, discussions are active, and following the U.S. enactment of the GENIUS Act, the process of regulatory adaptation in China may accelerate considerably.

European Union

On June 30, 2024, the technical requirements of MiCA came into effect. Firstly, stablecoin issuers are required to obtain a license within the EU and must be registered in the appropriate registry. Secondly, issuing companies are obligated to disclose the structure of reserves supporting the stablecoin, including regular reports on liquidity and fund custody in reliable institutions.

Additionally, MiCA imposes transaction limits: no more than 1 million transactions per day or €200 million daily—otherwise, the asset may be classified as systemically significant and fall under the supervision of the European Central Bank.

In January 2025, increased scrutiny began when ESMA issued a requirement to eliminate unlicensed tokens from the market. In April, the agency officials also expressed concern about the active integration of cryptocurrencies with TradFi. Among the risks associated with this process, the regulator highlighted the popularity of stablecoins and ETFs on digital assets.

United Kingdom

The United Kingdom is developing a two-tier model for regulating stablecoins: the FCA will handle basic registration of issuers, reserves, and custody, while the Bank of England will oversee systemically significant payment tokens. Key proposals have already been brought forward for public consultation, with a transition to final regulations expected in 2026. Simultaneously, an initiative is underway to launch a CBDC, although the Bank of England is open to considering a digital pound only if convinced of its feasibility.

Russia

In Russia, the approach to stablecoins is evolving within a strategy of managed integration focused exclusively on international transactions. The foundational law regarding the digital ruble became effective on August 1, 2023. From March 2024, an experimental mode for the use of digital financial assets (DFA), including “stablecoins,” in international payments has been permitted, but not domestically.

The central bank advocates for restrictions on the use of private stablecoins. It is expected that such assets will not be recognized as legal tender, leaving only room for the digital ruble, which is scheduled to be introduced into circulation by September 1, 2026.

In February 2025, a company registered in Kyrgyzstan, Old Vector, issued a ruble-backed stablecoin A7A5, which serves as a component in a parallel payment system.

Japan

Since June 2023, Japan has officially regulated stablecoins as “electronic payment instruments,” which can only be issued by licensed banks, trust companies, or payment service providers. Reserves must primarily be held domestically, with an allowance for up to 50% to be allocated in short-term Japanese government bonds or deposits.

Foreign issuers may operate through local intermediaries, demonstrating compliance with FSA requirements and ensuring reserve holdings in Japan. Intermediaries are required to perform KYC/AML, maintain segregated funds, and adhere to the Travel Rule.

South Korea

In June 2025, South Korean authorities announced their intention to legalize won-backed stablecoins, contingent upon their full backing, a separate reserve structure, licensing by the FSC, auditing, adherence to KYC/AML, and guarantees for fund reversibility. The central bank supports the concept but demands a gradual implementation.

Potential issuers of stablecoins and CBDCs can be broadly categorized into three major groups: banks, businesses, and governments. All share a common need for stability. However, the criteria for selecting the appropriate blockchain for issuing a coin may vary.

Banking Stablecoins: Focus on B2B and DeFi

This category primarily emphasizes interbank transfers, including cross-border transactions. There is also a need for support of multi-currency settlements, as banks frequently operate in multiple currencies concurrently. A crucial aspect is linking with existing financial solutions such as SWIFT and ISO 20022.

Another important factor is liquidity in DeFi markets, as many banks are likely to seek a share of this segment. They will undoubtedly aim to integrate into decentralized finance on their terms. In the future, institutional DeFi pools may emerge, with participation limited to a list of approved addresses and protocols that have undergone KYC and AML procedures. JPMorgan is already testing such services on the Polygon and Base networks.

Business Stablecoins: Emphasis on Mass Payments and UX

Businesses require the ability to pay for goods and services, including micropayments, thus necessitating minimal transaction costs and predictable fees. Companies prioritize user experience (UX) and conversion first and will not sacrifice convenience for hyper-security or decentralization. Everything must function simply, swiftly, and understandably; typical users are not ready for seed phrases and gas fees, making UX a top priority. A mandatory condition is straightforward integration with e-commerce tools.

Government Stablecoins: Focus on Control and Transparency

Governments are willing to sacrifice decentralization, convenience, and compatibility if it allows them to fully control the circulation of funds, so a centralized blockchain architecture (or hybrid) would be acceptable. Their primary interest is in managing the money supply (issuance, withdrawals, freezes) and combating crime, corruption, and the shadow economy.

For most nations, strategic autonomy and technical sovereignty, as well as prioritization of local or national developments, will be essential. For instance, it is highly unlikely that the USA will issue a CBDC on TRON, whereas such a possibility could theoretically exist for Russia or China. A critical factor is strong programmability, as built-in rules for allocating subsidies, distributions, tax collection, and spending conditions (for example, subsidies can only be used for food and housing) are necessary. For rural areas and populations lacking digital access, offline transaction functionality is essential.

Ethereum

CBDC: unlikely. The network is too decentralized, difficult to control, slow, and expensive.

Banking Stablecoin: partially suitable, particularly in the DeFi segment. It is utilized in pilot projects, notably via L2 solutions.

Business Stablecoin: possible, but only as one of several options.

Undoubtedly, this is the most advanced blockchain ecosystem with high liquidity, which banks will be keen to exploit. However, the primary network is too slow and expensive for mass payments, necessitating the development of cross-chain stablecoins—one for DeFi and another for remittances.

Ripple

CBDC: suitable. XRP Ledger has long been tested by central banks.

Banking Stablecoin: highly suitable due to integration with SWIFT and ISO 20022.

Business Stablecoin: suitable but limited.

Ripple is primarily focused on bank transfers and liquidity, with support for multi-currency accounts. It provides the capability to freeze funds, offers high transaction speeds, and low fees (around 1500 TPS, approximately $0.00001 per transaction). It also supports the CBDC Private Ledger, a specialized solution for central banks. It is being utilized in pilots involving central banks in Bhutan, Colombia, Montenegro, and Palau.

Stellar

CBDC: suitable, but not to the extent of Ripple.

Banking Stablecoin: suitable due to its solid adaptation for cross-border B2B transfers.

Business Stablecoin: excellent for mass and low-cost payments.

Stellar—Ripple’s younger sibling—features a more decentralized architecture and is more focused on user experience and accessibility, including payments via SMS and mobile wallets. It has partnerships with MoneyGram, Circle, and IBM World Wire, and participates in CBDC pilot projects.

BNB Chain

CBDC: unlikely. Central banks are unlikely to select a commercially-oriented platform.

Banking Stablecoin: limited. A pilot may be possible, but Western regulators lack trust, making it more suitable for BRICS countries.

Business Stablecoin: suitable. Widely used in e-commerce, Web3 commerce, and payment solutions.

A technically convenient network with high speeds (~2000 TPS) and low fees (~$0.05), it boasts strong liquidity and transaction volumes on DEX, making it very attractive for banks. However, it does not support SWIFT or ISO 20022. Its EVM compatibility and robust infrastructure—ranging from wallets to SDK—are noteworthy.

Several significant business stablecoins (USDT, USDC, TUSD) already operate on BNB Chain. However, high centralization and regulatory risks make the platform less viable for CBDCs and banks. The absence of built-in KYC further restricts institutional usage.

TRON

CBDC: unlikely. Application may be feasible in specific jurisdictions, but the overall project raises concerns among Western regulators.

Banking Stablecoin: limited. High performance but low trust within the Western sector.

Business Stablecoin: suitable. It is one of the leaders in mass transactions, especially in Asia and developing countries.

Extremely efficient for mass and micropayments with high speeds (~2000 TPS) and minimal fees if TRX is held in the wallet. USDT on TRC-20 is the most popular stablecoin by transaction volume, making TRON especially appealing for businesses in retail, gaming, and remittances.

Easy integration, support for Binance Pay, and the «energy» model that allows for fee elimination provide a unique advantage for B2C scenarios. Nevertheless, high centralization, a weak institutional reputation, and lack of support for SWIFT and ISO 20022 standards, along with TRON’s troubled image, limit its applicability in CBDCs and the banking sector.

Solana

CBDC: currently no—too unstable.

Banking Stablecoin: limited. High performance but lacking regulatory maturity.

Business Stablecoin: suitable. Fast, cheap, widely adopted for retail payments and applications.

One of the most productive blockchains with ultra-low fees (~$0.0001) and transaction speeds suitable for mass and micropayments. Its strong focus on UX, mobile wallets, e-commerce, and payment applications make it popular among businesses. Support for USDC and pilots with Visa confirm its practical usability.

However, past network instability, lack of SWIFT integration, banking case studies, and an absent KYC infrastructure render it currently less suitable for CBDCs and institutional solutions.

Polygon

CBDC: potentially feasible. Used in pilots but requires adjustments for government needs.

Banking Stablecoin: suitable. Already in testing with banks (JPMorgan, Siemens).

Business Stablecoin: well-suited due to scalability, low fees, and developed infrastructure.

Polygon is a mature ecosystem with EVM compatibility, KYC support, and active involvement in banking pilots. JPMorgan conducted its first verified DeFi pool based on Polygon, and Siemens issued tokenized bonds. zkEVM and CDK—tools for creating custom chains tailored for banks and governments—are supported. Very low fees, high speeds, and sufficient liquidity in DeFi make it attractive.

Base

CBDC: unlikely. Commercial nature and lack of control limit government applications.

Banking Stablecoin: suitable. Undergoing tests by institutions including JPMorgan.

Business Stablecoin: suitable. High scalability, UX, and API integrations make Base a compelling choice.

Base has an excellent user experience, high speeds, and low fees, along with strong ties to the Coinbase ecosystem, making the network legally and technically appealing for businesses—especially after the Flashblocks update.

Arbitrum

CBDC: currently no. Theoretically feasible through Arbitrum Orbit, but no precedents exist yet.

Banking Stablecoin: suitable. Already being tested by institutions.

Business Stablecoin: well-suited. Low fees and scalability make Arbitrum an attractive option.

One of the most mature L2 solutions with considerable institutional interest. Its low fees and high output capacity facilitate mass payments.

DeFi liquidity is sufficiently high, which may attract bank interest. There is potential for creating custom networks via Arbitrum Orbit, possibly feasible for CBDCs and banks, especially with involvement from major players like JP Morgan.

Optimism

CBDC: likely more suited as infrastructure for OP Stack than as a primary blockchain.

Banking Stablecoin: appropriate for B2B and DeFi scenarios, particularly with KYC/AML.

Business Stablecoin: possibly suitable, but better regarded as OP Stack infrastructure.

The OP Stack architecture has proven itself as a foundation for constructing tailored corporate L2 solutions. The model is actively employed by major players: Coinbase, Sonic, Worldcoin, and other projects enhancing the Superchain ecosystem.

OP Stack allows rapid launches of custom blockchains tailored for banks, corporations, or fintech. It is suitable for programmable banking and corporate stablecoins within a regulated DeFi framework. However, refinements are needed for CBDCs, e-commerce, and banking stablecoins.

Avalanche

CBDC: suitable for sovereign and modular architectures.

Banking Stablecoin: suitable for DeFi and multi-currency solutions with custom requirements.

Business Stablecoin: suitable. Particularly promising within private subnet networks.

Avalanche is a high-performance blockchain (up to 4500 TPS with finalization in under one second) with a unique architecture allowing the launch of independent blockchains for specific tasks. EVM compatibility enables the use of the entire Ethereum stack. Custom subnets allow for setting bespoke KYC and AML rules, privacy, and currency logic—a critical factor for governmental and banking solutions. Avalanche is actively promoting itself in the institutional sector (Avalanche Evergreen, case studies in Latin America).

The platform supports multi-currency transactions, programmability, and cross-chain operations, making it versatile for digital currencies in B2B and government sectors. However, the complexity of launching subnets and high resource consumption are limitations. For retail scenarios, external enhancements might be necessary. It is well-suited for CBDCs and banks where customization is critical but requires further development for mass business payments.

Hedera Hashgraph

CBDC: excellent fit. The architecture is designed for control, transparency, and scalability.

Banking Stablecoin: suitable. It offers a fast, stable, compliance-oriented infrastructure.

Business Stablecoin: suitable. An excellent choice for large corporate solutions.

Hedera is a high-performance and energy-efficient DAG network with over 10,000 TPS and fixed fees ($0.0001). It features fully finalizable payments—unlike blockchain solutions where payment is considered complete after a certain number of blocks.

It supports KYC, AML, freezing, issuance, and spending controls—everything integrated at the protocol level, making the network ideal for CBDCs. It has already been utilized in pilots, including for offline payments. It is a reliable and secure platform managed by a consortium of over 30 companies including Google, IBM, Boeing, and Dell. It is registered in the USA.

However, the lack of full EVM compatibility and centralized governance make it less appealing for DeFi. If Hedera successfully penetrates the decentralized finance sector, it could become a near-universal solution for everything.

Sui

CBDC: architectural suitability exists, but there have been no real pilots yet.

Banking Stablecoin: suitable. An innovative foundation and flexible token logic, though lacking maturity.

Business Stablecoin: suitable. High performance, user-focused, and programmable, making Sui an appealing choice.

Sui is a young but technologically advanced network. Its object-oriented language, Move, opens up new opportunities for custom tokenomics (refunds, freezes, conditional transfers, KYC). It offers high performance and low fees, making it a suitable platform for next-generation business stablecoins.

However, the youth of the network, its unconventional programming language, and weak integration with institutional and banking infrastructures currently limit its adoption in the public sector and by banks.

Aptos

CBDC: suitable. It has potential, but the network has yet to be tested in the public sector.

Banking Stablecoin: suitable, although it lacks regulatory recognition.

Business Stablecoin: suitable. Especially aligns well with Web3, gamified, and mobile scenarios.

Aptos is a high-performance blockchain platform based on the Move language, which enables a high degree of token customization. The network offers impressive performance metrics (theoretically up to 160,000 TPS) and focuses on simple integration with Web2 and Web3 services, as well as mobile applications.

A strong engineering team, significant backers (a16z, Binance Labs, Jump), and a rapidly evolving ecosystem make Aptos a promising platform for advanced business stablecoins. Nonetheless, like Sui, Aptos remains a young network with a limited number of validators and lacks practical cases within the public sector.

Cardano (ADA)

CBDC: unlikely. Low speed and a lack of practical cases or pilots.

Banking Stablecoin: unlikely. The absence of DeFi liquidity requires adaptation and infrastructure development.

Business Stablecoin: unlikely. In its current form, it is not the most convenient choice for the commercial sector.

Cardano employs an academic approach with a high level of formal verification. The Ouroboros protocol ensures reliability, while the layered architecture simplifies the customization of financial solutions. The support for identification through Atala PRISM opens avenues for integration with governmental and banking KYC systems.

Moreover, the platform allows for the issuance of native tokens without utilizing smart contracts—a safe solution for basic stablecoins. However, Cardano currently lacks cases involving CBDCs or banks. The EUTXO model demands specific expertise, and the business infrastructure is underdeveloped compared to competitors.

Algorand

CBDC: highly suitable—high technical maturity and support for sovereign scenarios.

Banking Stablecoin: suitable—especially focusing on security and low fees.

Business Stablecoin: well-suited—for micropayments, e-commerce, and automation.

Algorand is one of the most technologically mature platforms for government and banking digital currencies. It boasts high speed (6000 TPS), quick finalization (up to 4 seconds), and fixed fees (~$0.001). It includes built-in asset management tools (freezing, revocation, clawback, whitelisting), which are critical for KYC/AML and regulatory oversight.

It is actively used in governmental pilots (Georgia, Marshall Islands) and integrates with Chainalysis. Built on a sustainable and energy-efficient consensus mechanism, Pure Proof-of-Stake, It faces limitations due to a poorly developed DeFi ecosystem and the lack of EVM compatibility (utilizing the TEAL language) which hinders flexibility and integration. Multi-currency operations are possible but require frontend and infrastructure development.

Quant

CBDC: suitable. Works as an infrastructural bridge between blockchains and traditional systems.

Banking Stablecoin: suitable. Particularly effective in multi-network scenarios and for integration with legacy systems.

Business Stablecoin: limited suitability. It is not a blockchain itself but can be beneficial for integration with corporate platforms.

Quant is not a blockchain; it is an operating system for connecting diverse networks: public and private blockchains, SWIFT, Hyperledger. It supports ISO 20022, KYC/AML, and is compatible with banking standards. It requires an external blockchain for token issuance. Not suitable for DeFi or mass B2C applications, it functions best as an infrastructure layer for government and banking programs.

The world stands at a critical juncture: a fresh wave of interest in stablecoins is emerging. This is evidenced by active discussions in international agendas, the launch of numerous pilot programs, and the emergence of new legislative initiatives.

Regarding the blockchains that will serve to issue government, banking, and business stablecoins, there is currently no single ideal solution that meets all criteria. However, liquidity-rich networks will be in high demand among banks.

In the business sector, we will witness widespread issuance of stablecoins in a cross-chain format, with companies deploying their tokens across several popular networks, allowing buyers to select their preferred ecosystem.

Cross-chain infrastructure is becoming the standard. Tether serves as an example, maintaining stablecoins across various networks. A massive issuance of new “stablecoins” is inevitable, and the market will respond promptly.

Text: VGI666