BIS Latest Research: The Future of Stablecoins and the Global Monetary Landscape

marsbitPublished on 2026-06-01Last updated on 2026-06-01

Abstract

BIS Working Paper No. 170, released in May 2026, analyzes the impact of stablecoins on the global monetary system. The market has grown exponentially since 2014, with over 300 active stablecoins exceeding $300 billion in market capitalization. It is highly concentrated, dominated by USD-linked stablecoins (98% by market cap, mainly USDT and USDC), which function as new forms of private offshore dollar claims on blockchain. Currently, stablecoin use remains largely within crypto ecosystems for trading and DeFi collateral. Real-economy adoption, such as in cross-border payments, is nascent but growing in emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs) facing high inflation and volatile currencies, where they facilitate capital flight and "digital dollarization." The paper assesses impacts using the Cohen-Kennen framework. For private-sector functions, stablecoins most directly affect value storage (as a dollar-denominated safe haven in EMDEs) and the medium of exchange (enhancing cross-border payment efficiency, further entrenching dollar use). Impacts on the unit of account and official-sector functions are currently limited but could indirectly constrain monetary policy autonomy and capital controls. The report outlines three potential future scenarios: 1) **Niche adoption**, where stablecoins remain crypto-centric with minimal systemic impact; 2) **Digital dollarization**, a high-risk scenario where USD stablecoins become de facto standards in EMDEs, eroding monetary so...

Original Author丨 BIS

Source丨China Financial Case Center Compiled by丨Xie Binbin, Qi Zhiping

The rapid global development of digital finance has seen stablecoins evolve from niche tools within the cryptocurrency sphere into novel digital assets with cross-border payment and value storage functions, profoundly impacting the international monetary landscape. In May 2026, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) released Working Paper No. 170, systematically analyzing the development characteristics, operational mechanisms, and impact of stablecoins on the international monetary system, and proposing three future scenarios and regulatory approaches. The report concludes that stablecoins will reinforce the dominant position of the US dollar in the short term, posing risks to the monetary sovereignty of emerging markets and developing economies (EMDEs). Their long-term trajectory will depend on adoption patterns, regulatory responses, and synergy within the digital finance ecosystem.

Stablecoin Market: Rapidly Expanding, USD Dominance

Stablecoins are privately issued blockchain tokens pegged to fiat currencies or assets to maintain stable value, combining payment and store-of-value functions. Since the first stablecoin emerged in 2014, the industry has experienced exponential growth; by 2026, there were over 300 active stablecoins globally, with a total market capitalization surpassing $300 billion.

In terms of market structure, stablecoins exhibit high concentration and US dollar dominance. In quantity, USD-pegged stablecoins account for approximately 64%; in market value, USD stablecoins represent as high as 98%, with USDT and USDC dominating the market, while stablecoins pegged to other currencies remain extremely small in scale. Regarding reserve assets, major fiat-backed stablecoins primarily hold US short-term Treasury bonds, reverse repurchase agreements, and cash equivalents as core reserves. However, some issuers lack transparency and insufficient auditing, posing potential redemption risks.

Current stablecoin applications remain predominantly within the crypto ecosystem, serving as trading and settlement media for crypto assets, and as collateral in Decentralized Finance (DeFi) lending and liquidity protocols. After excluding automated wash trading and high-frequency trading, the actual transaction volume is only 1% of the nominal volume. Retail scenarios (single transactions below $250) account for less than 0.9%. Real-economy applications like cross-border remittances and retail payments are still in early pilot stages. However, in emerging markets with high inflation and volatile exchange rates, cross-border stablecoin flows continue to rise, becoming a hidden channel to avoid currency depreciation and circumvent capital controls.

Operational Mechanisms: A New Form of Offshore Dollar Carrier

Stablecoins operate on a "on-chain circulation, off-chain reserves" model: the issuer collects fiat currency at a 1:1 ratio and mints tokens, users hold them via digital wallets, enabling 24/7 global transfers via public blockchains, with reserve assets used for redemptions to maintain the peg. This model combines features of 19th century private banknotes, the Eurodollar market, and Money Market Funds (MMF). Essentially, they are private on-chain claims on offshore dollars, extending dollar liquidity through financial innovation.

Unlike the traditional Eurodollar market, stablecoins lack bank credit elasticity and central bank liquidity support. Their stability relies entirely on the quality of reserve assets and market arbitrage mechanisms. The collapse of TerraUSD in 2022 and the temporary de-pegging of USDC in 2023 demonstrated that stablecoins without sufficient high-liquidity reserves are highly prone to losing their peg under stress. A global regulatory consensus has emerged: focus on regulating fiat-collateralized stablecoins and reject algorithmic stablecoins.

In terms of risk transmission, stablecoins' reserves are heavily concentrated in US short-term Treasuries, creating a transmission chain of "global demand → stablecoin issuance → increased US Treasury holdings," directly affecting US Treasury yields and the transmission efficiency of Federal Reserve monetary policy.

Global Impact: Intensifying Monetary Hierarchy, Challenging Emerging Markets' Monetary Autonomy

Using the Cohen-Kenen international monetary function framework, the report systematically assesses the impact of stablecoins on the international monetary system across three functions (unit of account, medium of exchange, store of value) and two sectors (private and official). The conclusion indicates that stablecoins have the most direct impact on the private sector's store-of-value and medium-of-exchange functions, with limited impact on the unit of account and official sector functions, but they implicitly constrain monetary policy autonomy.

  • 1. Store of Value: The Core Channel of Digital Dollarization In high-inflation emerging markets, USD stablecoins, requiring no foreign currency accounts and allowing anonymous cross-border holding, have become residents' preferred safe-haven asset, leading to "hidden dollarization". Stablecoin inflows are highly correlated with local currency depreciation and widening exchange rate gaps, squeezing local currency deposits and weakening central bank control capabilities.

  • 2. Medium of Exchange: Enhancing Cross-Border Payment Efficiency Stablecoins offer advantages like real-time settlement, no operational hour restrictions, and low fees, leading to rapid penetration in scenarios like cross-border remittances and e-commerce. Their development further reduces friction in using the US dollar, expanding its share in retail cross-border payments and e-commerce transactions.

  • 3. Unit of Account: Limited Impact, Hard to Break Commercial Inertia Trade invoicing and contract pricing exhibit strong path dependence. Stablecoins have not yet altered the global trade pattern dominated by the US dollar and euro. They are only sporadically used in some retail scenarios in high-inflation economies, not forming a systematic substitute.

  • 4. Official Sector: Indirect Constraints, No Direct Substitution Central banks have not yet included stablecoins in foreign exchange reserves or as exchange rate intervention tools; official unit-of-account and intervention functions have not been directly impacted. However, widespread private-sector use of stablecoins can render capital controls ineffective and hinder monetary policy transmission, exacerbating the "trilemma": financial openness is passively increased, intensifying conflicts between exchange rate stability and monetary policy autonomy.

Three Future Scenarios: From Limited Penetration to Systemic Change

Based on adoption scale, regulatory environment, and cross-border impact, the report constructs three mutually exclusive yet parallel future scenarios, covering possible paths from marginal influence to reshaping the system.

  • Scenario 1: Niche Adoption (Baseline Scenario) Stablecoins remain confined within the crypto ecosystem, with limited penetration into the real economy. Localized holdings emerge in high-inflation countries, but retail payments and trade settlements remain primarily in local currencies. Regulation focuses on anti-money laundering and consumer protection. Capital flow spillover is small, monetary sovereignty and financial stability in emerging markets remain largely controllable, and central banks retain full policy autonomy. This scenario aligns most closely with current market characteristics and is the most likely short-term trajectory.

  • Scenario 2: Digital Dollarization (High-Risk Scenario) USD stablecoins become the de facto standard for cross-border retail payments and domestic pricing in emerging markets, with banks offering related services, accelerating deposit dollarization. Local currency policies become ineffective, capital controls are rendered meaningless, domestic savings flow into US Treasuries via stablecoins, and local credit markets shrink. Exchange rate transmission effects intensify, stablecoin run risks directly impact emerging market financial stability, leading to irreversible digital dollar dependency. This scenario's impact on monetary sovereignty far exceeds traditional dollarization and is an extreme risk emerging markets must prioritize preventing.

  • Scenario 3: Integration of Local Currency Stablecoins (Ideal Scenario) Emerging markets, through regulatory authorization, allow licensed institutions to issue local currency stablecoins, interoperable with domestic fast payment systems and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). Reserve assets are restricted to local currency government bonds and central bank deposits, balancing technological efficiency with policy autonomy. Stablecoins are used for government payments, e-commerce settlements, and securities clearing, enhancing payment efficiency and financial inclusion while avoiding foreign currency substitution risks. However, this scenario requires robust regulatory capacity, financial infrastructure, and macroeconomic stability, conditions currently lacking in most low-income emerging markets.

Regulatory Challenges and Policy Implications: Global Coordination is Key

The cross-border nature of stablecoins makes single-country regulation ineffective. The report proposes four core policy directions::

  • 1. Unify Global Regulatory Standards: Implement the Financial Stability Board's (FSB) recommendations on stablecoin regulation, clarifying reserve requirements, disclosure rules, and redemption mechanisms to avoid regulatory arbitrage.

  • 2. Strengthen Cross-Border Collaboration: Establish regulatory information sharing and risk management mechanisms between issuing and using countries to address cross-border runs and capital flow shocks.

  • 3. Upgrade Domestic Defenses: Emerging markets should improve macroeconomic stability, optimize domestic payment systems, and advance CBDC development to counter the appeal of foreign currency stablecoins.

  • 4. Prevent Illicit Activities: Leverage blockchain traceability technology to combat money laundering, terrorist financing, and other abuses, balancing innovation and risk.

In summary, stablecoins are not simple financial innovations but structural forces reshaping the international monetary hierarchy. In the short term, they may reinforce dollar hegemony and exacerbate financial subordination in emerging markets; in the long term, the outcome depends on global regulatory coordination, innovation in local currency digital tools, and market adoption paths. For emerging markets, stablecoins are a double-edged sword offering both opportunities and risks: they can enhance payment efficiency and promote financial inclusion but may also trigger digital dollarization and erode monetary sovereignty.

The future global monetary system will enter a new stage of coexistence between public digital currencies (CBDCs) and private digital currencies (stablecoins), with competition between fiat currencies and digital dollars. Only through sound macroeconomic policies, robust regulatory frameworks, and international coordination can we embrace technological benefits while safeguarding financial security and monetary sovereignty, avoiding new forms of digital financial subordination.

Original Link

Related Questions

QAccording to the BIS report, what are the three potential future scenarios for stablecoins, and which one is considered the most likely in the short term?

AThe three potential future scenarios are: 1) Niche adoption (baseline scenario), where stablecoins remain confined to the crypto ecosystem with limited real-economy penetration. 2) Digital dollarization (high-risk scenario), where USD stablecoins become a de facto standard in emerging markets. 3) Local currency stablecoin integration (ideal scenario), where licensed entities issue local currency stablecoins linked to national payment systems. The report considers the niche adoption scenario as the most likely in the short term.

QHow does the BIS report describe the current market structure of stablecoins in terms of currency dominance and concentration?

AThe report describes the stablecoin market as highly concentrated and dominated by the US dollar. By quantity, USD-pegged stablecoins account for about 64% of all stablecoins. By market capitalization, USD stablecoins represent a staggering 98% share, with USDT and USDC dominating the market. Stablecoins pegged to other currencies remain negligible in size.

QWhat is the core mechanism of fiat-collateralized stablecoins, and how does the BIS report characterize their economic nature?

AThe core mechanism is an 'on-chain circulation, off-chain reserves' model. Issuers create tokens on a 1:1 basis with fiat currency received, which users hold in digital wallets. The reserves are used for redemption to maintain the peg. The BIS characterizes this as essentially a private, on-chain claim on offshore US dollars, combining features of 19th-century private banknotes, the Eurodollar market, and money market funds, extending dollar liquidity through financial innovation.

QWhich functions of an international currency are most directly impacted by stablecoins, according to the report's analysis based on the Cohen-Kenen framework?

AAccording to the analysis using the Cohen-Kennen international currency functions framework, stablecoins most directly impact the store of value and medium of exchange functions for the private sector. Their impact on the unit of account function and official sector functions (like foreign exchange reserves) is currently limited, but they can indirectly constrain monetary policy autonomy.

QWhat are the four core policy directions proposed by the BIS report to address the regulatory challenges posed by stablecoins?

AThe four core policy directions are: 1) Unify global regulatory standards (e.g., implement FSB recommendations on reserves, disclosure, and redemption). 2) Strengthen cross-border collaboration for information sharing and crisis management. 3) Upgrade domestic defenses in emerging markets by improving macroeconomic stability, payment systems, and CBDCs. 4) Prevent illicit activities by using blockchain analytics to combat money laundering and terrorist financing.

Related Reads

Bitcoin Miners Are Waving the White Flag, But Their Stocks Are Soaring

Bitcoin miners are capitulating as evidenced by a sustained drop in network hash rate and a record-steep 19.9% decline in mining difficulty, signaling the shuttering of unprofitable machines. However, in a significant divergence from historical patterns, the stocks of publicly traded mining companies have soared, with one major player gaining over 430% in the past year, even as BTC's price fell roughly 46%. This surge is largely attributed to these companies pivoting toward the more lucrative AI narrative. Simultaneously, miners face a structural squeeze. Daily block reward revenue in BTC terms has hit a new all-time low following the latest halving, with current dollar-denominated daily revenue around $30 million compared to a longer-term average of ~$40 million. Fee revenue remains negligible, covering less than one block's subsidy over a 28-day average and accounting for only about ten minutes of the network's daily security budget. This capitulation cycle is unique: miner stress and crypto price weakness have decoupled due to alternative revenue streams (AI), while the long-term reliance on increasing bitcoin prices to offset shrinking subsidies continues, with fee income still far from filling the impending gap.

marsbit5m ago

Bitcoin Miners Are Waving the White Flag, But Their Stocks Are Soaring

marsbit5m ago

Will the Fed Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Crypto and U.S. Stocks Withstand the Pressure?

The market's expectation for a September Fed rate hike surged dramatically in early August, jumping from under 50% to over 80% within a week. This shift followed a contentious July FOMC meeting, where a 9-3 vote to hold rates revealed growing dissent from hawkish members advocating for an immediate hike to combat persistent inflation. The primary catalyst for this repricing is rising oil prices, driven by renewed geopolitical tensions around the Strait of Hormuz, which threaten global supply. Energy costs directly influence inflation metrics, making the upcoming July CPI report (due August 12th) a critical data point. If it shows inflation reaccelerating, the probability of a September hike will solidify. For Bitcoin and crypto assets, this is typically bearish news. Bitcoin continues to behave as a high-beta, liquidity-sensitive risk asset. A rate hike raises the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding assets and could drive capital toward money markets, pressuring crypto prices in the short term. However, historical patterns suggest that if a hike is perceived as the end of a tightening cycle rather than the start, any negative price impact may be brief. U.S. stocks, particularly crypto-linked equities like Coinbase and growth-oriented tech stocks, are also vulnerable. Higher rates increase discount rates in valuation models, putting pressure on high-multiple companies. This coincides with a pivotal tech earnings season where investor focus has shifted from massive AI capital expenditure to tangible revenue and cash flow generation. Companies with negative cash flow and weak growth narratives could face heightened volatility if borrowing costs rise in September. In summary, a September Fed hike has evolved into a mainstream market scenario. Key factors to watch are oil prices, the July CPI report, and Fed communications, which will determine the final decision and its impact on volatile crypto and equity markets.

marsbit5m ago

Will the Fed Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Crypto and U.S. Stocks Withstand the Pressure?

marsbit5m ago

A 'Overlooked' Market Event: Joint US-Japan-South Korea Intervention, Rare US Treasury Involvement, and Bessent's Quiet 'Market Rescue'?

Summary: The United States, Japan, and South Korea executed their largest coordinated foreign exchange intervention in nearly 30 years. The action targeted depreciation pressure on the Japanese yen and South Korean won. This move is seen as a significant effort by the US to stabilize the financial markets of its key allies and prevent the spillover of risks. Key details: * Japan reportedly intervened on July 30 using approximately 8.45 trillion yen (about $52.8 billion). South Korean authorities also intervened that day, selling dollars to support the won. * Notably, the US Treasury Department intervened directly in yen markets for the first time in roughly 30 years. The New York Fed, reportedly acting on behalf of the Treasury, sold euros to buy yen via Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley on July 31. Analysts view the use of the euro-yen pair as a way to alleviate yen pressure without adding selling pressure to the US dollar. * Prior to the action, the New York Fed conducted "rate checks" on both USD/JPY and EUR/JPY, a newer signaling tool that falls between verbal and physical intervention. The intervention is interpreted as going beyond traditional currency stabilization. Analysts, such as Michael Hartnett of Bank of America, suggest it resembles a "Price Keeping Operation" for the AI era. The core US objectives are perceived to be: 1. Preventing rapid yen depreciation from triggering a sharp rise in Japanese government bond yields. 2. Containing financial stress from spreading across Asian markets like South Korea and Japan. 3. Reducing the risk of disorderly capital flows impacting the US bond market. This coordinated action underscores the importance of Japan and South Korea as critical partners in the US semiconductor and AI supply chain. Stabilizing their financial markets is seen as vital to mitigating risks to the broader tech industry and the US market itself. The intervention coincides with market pressures, including the KOSDAQ index hitting a low since October 2022. While seen as a move to control volatility, some analysts caution it may not fundamentally reverse existing market trends.

marsbit9m ago

A 'Overlooked' Market Event: Joint US-Japan-South Korea Intervention, Rare US Treasury Involvement, and Bessent's Quiet 'Market Rescue'?

marsbit9m ago

Will the Federal Reserve Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Cryptocurrencies and US Stocks Bear the Pressure?

In early August 2024, market expectations for a September Federal Reserve rate hike surged dramatically, from below 50% to over 80%, driven by renewed inflation concerns. This shift followed a contentious July FOMC meeting where a 9-3 vote to hold rates revealed a growing hawkish faction advocating for an immediate hike, citing prolonged above-target inflation. The key catalyst is escalating conflict near the Strait of Hormuz, which has pushed oil prices up approximately 20% in July, threatening to reignite inflation. The next critical data point is the July CPI report on August 12th; a hot reading could solidify hike expectations. For crypto assets, particularly Bitcoin, this represents near-term pressure. Bitcoin continues to exhibit high-beta, risk-on characteristics, making it sensitive to tightening liquidity and higher opportunity costs. However, historical precedent suggests that if a hike is perceived as the cycle's end rather than its start, the negative impact may be brief, with markets quickly pivoting to anticipate future rate cuts. U.S. stocks, especially crypto-linked equities like Coinbase and high-valuation tech stocks, face amplified volatility. Higher rates increase discount rates in valuation models, pressuring growth stocks. This coincides with a pivotal tech earnings season where investor focus has shifted from massive AI capital expenditures to demonstrable revenue and cash flow generation. Companies with negative cash flows and weak growth narratives could see severe pressure if a September hike materializes, as financing costs would rise. Key indicators to watch include oil prices, upcoming inflation data, and Fed commentary at events like the Jackson Hole symposium.

Odaily星球日报9m ago

Will the Federal Reserve Definitely Raise Interest Rates in September? How Will Cryptocurrencies and US Stocks Bear the Pressure?

Odaily星球日报9m ago

How Likely is it for TradeXYZ to Go Solo from Hyperliquid?

The article analyzes the possibility of TradeXYZ, a dominant project on Hyperliquid's HIP-3 real-world asset (RWA) perpetual contracts market, splitting off to build its own independent trading platform. With TradeXYZ commanding over 90% of HIP-3 volume and over 35% of Hyperliquid's total open interest, its leverage and influence are significant. The primary motive for a split is seen as capturing the underlying protocol fees, of which TradeXYZ currently receives only half. However, several factors strongly discourage such a move. First, replicating Hyperliquid's high-performance infrastructure would be challenging and could degrade TradeXYZ's product quality. Second, Hyperliquid serves as a crucial distribution channel, with most users accessing TradeXYZ's liquidity through its frontend. Third, the close, trusting relationship between the founders of both projects makes a hostile "betrayal" unlikely. The conclusion is that a split would likely result in a lose-lose scenario. Hyperliquid would lose its main growth narrative and see its valuation impacted, while TradeXYZ would face immense technical hurdles, lose its primary user channel, and damage its reputation. Instead of a full separation, the more probable path is for TradeXYZ to negotiate better terms while deepening integration, focusing on enhancing its own brand and user ownership.

marsbit59m ago

How Likely is it for TradeXYZ to Go Solo from Hyperliquid?

marsbit59m ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片