Circle moves toward privacy-focused stablecoin with USDCx project

cointelegraphPublished on 2025-12-09Last updated on 2025-12-09

Abstract

Circle is developing a privacy-enhanced version of its USDC stablecoin, called USDCx, in partnership with blockchain firm Aleo. Aimed at banking and enterprise users, USDCx will offer "banking-level privacy" by concealing transaction details onchain, while still allowing compliance with regulatory requests. This addresses a key hurdle for institutional adoption, as many financial firms hesitate to use public blockchains due to transparency concerns. The move comes amid growing corporate interest in stablecoins following the US GENIUS Act, with major players like Citigroup, JPMorgan, and Visa expanding their stablecoin initiatives. USDC and USDT currently dominate the dollar-pegged stablecoin market.

Stablecoin issuer Circle is developing a privacy-enhanced version of its US dollar-pegged USDC token, aiming to spur institutional adoption by offering greater confidentiality than traditional public blockchains allow.

The new stablecoin, called USDCx and targeting banking and enterprise users, is being built in partnership with the privacy-focused blockchain company Aleo, Fortune reported on Tuesday, citing Aleo co-founder Howard Wu.

Unlike most existing stablecoins, which have wallet addresses and transaction details fully visible onchain, USDCx is designed to provide “banking-level privacy.” Circle would still be able to provide a compliance record if law enforcement or regulators request information on specific transactions, according to the report.

The initiative aims to address a key hurdle for major financial institutions, many of which have been hesitant to utilize blockchain-based payment rails because their transaction flows would be publicly visible.

Source: Circle

Aleo has long argued that privacy is essential for the next phase of stablecoin adoption. In a May post, the company wrote that while transparency is often promoted as a core blockchain advantage, “it becomes a liability when dealing with sensitive, confidential payment data.”

Aleo isn’t the only company pushing for privacy in stablecoins. As Cointelegraph reported, digital asset infrastructure provider Taurus has developed a private smart-contract system for stablecoins, designed to enable anonymous transactions. This approach aims to boost the use of stable assets for intracompany payments and employee payrolls.

Related: Bank lobby is ‘panicking’ about yield-bearing stablecoins

Stablecoins take center stage in corporate America

Circle’s move into privacy-focused stable assets comes as more major institutions begin exploring stablecoins in the wake of the US GENIUS Act, the new regulatory framework governing US dollar–pegged tokens.

As Cointelegraph reported, a corporate stablecoin race is emerging in the wake of GENIUS. Citigroup has partnered with Coinbase to test stablecoin-based payment rails for its clients, while other Wall Street companies, including JPMorgan and Bank of America, are reportedly in the early stages of experimenting with similar technologies.

Global remittance provider Western Union is also building a digital asset settlement system on Solana, with plans to introduce a US Dollar Payment Token as part of its infrastructure overhaul. Meanwhile, global payments giant Visa has expanded its stablecoin offerings amid growing competition in the space.

Average stablecoin supply by issuer. Source: Visa Onchain Analytics

The US dollar underpins the vast majority of global stablecoin activity. USDC (USDC) and Tether’s USDt (USDT) together account for roughly 85% of the market, while other dollar-linked tokens, including synthetic dollars and PayPal USD (PYUSD), also rank among the largest.

Related: Crypto Biz: Wall Street giants bet on stablecoins

Related Reads

Dragonfly Partner Haseeb: The Fastest-Growing Companies of the Future May All Get Stuck at 149 Employees

Dragonfly partner Haseeb explores the distorted economics of AI model pricing, drawing parallels to tax policy. He notes that startups and small teams (under 150 users) enjoy heavily subsidized, fixed-price AI subscriptions (like Claude Code), where the marginal cost of an additional token is effectively zero. This creates a powerful incentive for them to maximize token usage ("token-maxxing") and innovate aggressively with AI automation. In contrast, large enterprises (over 150 users) are forced onto "Enterprise" plans, paying per-token API fees with high (~75%) markups. This acts like a steep "tax" on AI-powered labor, disincentivizing marginal automation and experimental use, and encouraging them to retain more human workers. Haseeb argues this pricing creates a "150-person cliff," a regulatory notch similar to labor laws in France that discourage firms from growing past 50 employees. He predicts the fastest-growing future companies may deliberately cap their headcount at 149 to avoid the punitive enterprise pricing. This would foster an "AI-first" management philosophy obsessed with automation and outsourcing to stay lean. While not intentionally designed, this bifurcated pricing could become one of the most influential de facto tax policies, shaping how AI replaces labor—not through mass layoffs at big firms, but through agile, AI-native startups outcompeting them.

marsbit3m ago

Dragonfly Partner Haseeb: The Fastest-Growing Companies of the Future May All Get Stuck at 149 Employees

marsbit3m ago

How xBubble Breaks Through in the VC-Heavily-Backed OPC Economy

xBubble: Addressing the Structural Gap in the VC-Backed OPC Economy The concept of OPC (One Person Company) is evolving from a buzzword to a significant AI-driven market. While AI coding tools like Replit and Lovable have validated demand from non-technical users wanting to build applications, a key gap remains: the leap from creating a demo to running a stable, evolving business. These tools still require users to manage the development process, including technical judgments for integrations, modifications, and deployments—a major hurdle for OPCs. xBubble, by DAPPOS, tackles this by shifting from "Prompt-to-Code" to "SOP-to-Business." Instead of generating code from instructions, its core is a system of pre-organized SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) that translate business goals—like "sell World Cup merchandise"—into complete, executable workflows. This includes generating cohesive assets, pages, payment systems, and backend logic. The platform is augmented by a network of third-party service providers who handle infrastructure (hosting, domains, payment setup), acting like "on-site service engineers." Users can pay for these services directly with xBubble credits, simplifying onboarding. This ecosystem aims to deliver not just an app, but a complete, modifiable business launch path. xBubble targets a clear OPC segment: small commercial nodes (e.g., creators, merchants) with existing products, customers, or channels, but for whom a full tech team is unjustifiable. Its potential lies in SOPs accumulating expertise from real cases, improving reliability and reducing delivery costs over time. Additionally, its native support for crypto payments caters to global or digital-native OPCs. In summary, as AI democratizes software creation, xBubble's opportunity is to prove that "SOP-to-Business" provides more immediate value for launching a real, operational business than a powerful but unstructured AI coding tool.

链捕手6m ago

How xBubble Breaks Through in the VC-Heavily-Backed OPC Economy

链捕手6m ago

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

**"Invest Only When Certain": A Nine-Year Retrospective from a VC Across Four Cycles** IOSG founder Jocy shares hard-earned lessons from nine years and over a hundred investments in Web3. The core challenge isn't identifying successful founders, but understanding why talented founders with solid ideas still fail. Through building a "failed founder database," IOSG identified six recurring failure patterns. **Founder Trait Red Flags:** 1. **Emotionally Unstable:** Founders who react defensively to criticism or publicly lash out under pressure (e.g., 80% drawdowns) often fail. Resilience is key. 2. **Lacking Hunger / Having a Fallback:** Founders with significant safety nets (family wealth, cushy fallback jobs) may lack the "do-or-die" commitment needed to survive crypto's brutal cycles. 3. **Unchecked Ego:** Includes "polished execution machines" who excel in known frameworks but struggle when paradigms shift, and "professor-types" who are technically brilliant but resistant to commercial feedback or coaching. **Project Structure Red Flags:** 4. **Token-First, Not Product-First:** Treating the token solely as a fundraising tool with no real utility or connection to product value is a major warning sign. The project should have value even if the token goes to zero. 5. **No Day-1 Exit Thesis:** Founders must have a clear, staged capital strategy from the start, understanding what each funding round needs to prove to unlock the next. "Exit before entry" is crucial. 6. **No Full-Cycle Experience:** Founders who haven't lived through a complete crypto bull/bear cycle (e.g., 2018, 2022) often underestimate their vulnerability. IOSG limits initial checks for such teams to $250k, sizing for risk. **The Positive Flipside: Desirable Founder Traits** The ideal candidate exhibits: obsessive problem-depth, being a second-time founder with a non-consensus vision, strong communication skills with *controlled* ego, relentless perseverance, and a global perspective with agency and taste (increasingly vital in the AI era). **Three Survival Tips for Founders:** 1. **Cash Flow Over Narrative:** Real revenue is what sustains projects, not vanity metrics. 2. **Tokens Are a Liability:** Avoid issuing a token unless absolutely necessary. The hidden costs (market making, liquidity, compliance) are immense, often a multi-million-dollar burden. 3. **Respect Liquidity:** Sell during peaks to build treasury, buy back to support the protocol during troughs. Be realistic about valuations and your ability to deliver for the next round. The final principle is simple yet paramount: **"If it's a borderline 'yes' or 'no,' don't invest."** In an industry that reinvents itself every few years, the discipline to consistently say "no" is the ultimate secret to longevity.

Foresight News31m ago

If It's Not a Clear Yes, It's a No: A Nine-Year Retrospective by a VC Who Survived Four Cycles

Foresight News31m ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片