Coinbase’s USDC Revenue Jumps as Stablecoin Debate Heats Up

TheNewsCryptoPublicado a 2026-02-24Actualizado a 2026-02-24

Resumen

Coinbase's stablecoin revenue, primarily from its USDC share with Circle, surged to $1.35 billion in 2025, accounting for 19% of its total revenue. This growth occurred despite a net loss of $667 million in Q4 2025. USDC transaction volume reached $18.3 trillion last year, though Tether leads in market cap. The stablecoin sector's expansion has intensified regulatory debates, particularly around yield payments. The GENIUS Act prohibits issuers from paying interest, and proposed legislation may further restrict platforms like Coinbase from offering rewards on stablecoin balances, amid concerns over competition with traditional banks.

Bloomberg Intelligence reported that the stablecoin revenue of Coinbase associated with its USDC revenue share with Circle was 19% of overall revenue in 2025 and may surge two to sevenfold if USDC adoption in payments intensifies.

This comes regardless of witnessing a net loss of about $667 million in Q4 of 2025. As per the Q4 2025 shareholder letter of Coinbase, the firm earned about $1.35 billion in stablecoin revenue in 2025.

The figure was up from $911 million in its previous year, with $364 million in stablecoin revenue in just Q4 2025 solely, as interest income on USDC balances became a high-margin line for the exchange, contrasted with volatile trading fees.

The Significant Surge

Talking about stablecoins, they have also gone mainstream in usage terms. Overall stablecoin transaction volume hit a record $33 trillion in the last year, with USDC accounting for around $18.3 trillion of that, ahead of Tether’s USDT by transaction. However, Tether leads in market capitalisation.

The growth is the reason why the politics revolving around stablecoin yield have become so upset. The Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins, commonly known as the GENIUS Act, signed by President Trump last year, made a federal regime for payment stablecoins and specifically restricts issuers from paying interest or yield to holders.

That provision is supported by the banking lobby, as yield-bearing stablecoins could drain deposits from the traditional system. Banks and their associates now want to go further in the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 of the Senate negotiations by shutting what they witness as a loophole that still permits non-issuer affiliates, like exchanges like Coinbase, to pass some of the interest on reserves back to customers as “rewards”.

Draft Senate language of the market structure bill could go beyond the yield restriction and stop Coinbase from offering any rewards associated with the stablecoin balances.

Highlighted Crypto News Today:

Step Finance and SolanaFloor Shut Down After Treasury Hack Drains Millions in SOL

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat percentage of Coinbase's overall revenue in 2025 came from its USDC revenue share with Circle?

A19% of Coinbase's overall revenue in 2025 came from its USDC revenue share with Circle.

QWhat was the total stablecoin revenue Coinbase reported for the year 2025?

ACoinbase reported earning about $1.35 billion in stablecoin revenue in 2025.

QWhich stablecoin had a higher transaction volume in the last year, USDC or USDT?

AUSDC had a higher transaction volume, accounting for around $18.3 trillion of the total $33 trillion, ahead of Tether's USDT.

QWhat is the name of the US law that restricts stablecoin issuers from paying interest or yield to holders?

AThe law is called the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins, commonly known as the GENIUS Act.

QWhat potential new legislation could stop Coinbase from offering rewards on stablecoin balances?

AThe draft Senate language of the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 could stop Coinbase from offering any rewards associated with stablecoin balances.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbitHace 23 min(s)

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbitHace 23 min(s)

Hyperliquid ETF Claim Draws Attention As HYPE Narrative Builds On X

A social media claim has brought attention to Hyperliquid (HYPE) and the growth of its related ETF products. According to a June 20 post on X by AlphaOnChain, three Hyperliquid ETFs launched in May 2026 have collectively amassed $158 million in assets under management, led by a Bitwise fund with $88 million and a 21Shares fund with $66 million. The article notes this claim is from social media and not verified by official issuer data, advising caution. Nonetheless, the report highlights that HYPE is gaining traction as a notable altcoin narrative. Its focus on on-chain perpetual trading and exchange infrastructure places it at the intersection of DeFi and derivatives, attracting traders looking for high-conviction plays beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum. The key takeaway is that while social momentum can influence short-term markets, sustainable growth for HYPE would require confirmed demand, liquidity, and continued ecosystem development.

bitcoinistHace 1 hora(s)

Hyperliquid ETF Claim Draws Attention As HYPE Narrative Builds On X

bitcoinistHace 1 hora(s)

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

For years, the semiconductor equipment industry followed an unwritten "iron rule": suppliers offered steep discounts for new tool introductions (Design-in) and faced consistent price pressure during repeat orders, especially during market downturns. This long-standing buyer's market dynamic is now being upended. Recently, SK Hynix's primary equipment suppliers have reportedly requested a 3-4% price *increase*, a nearly unprecedented move. This shift is driven by a severe supply-demand imbalance fueled by the AI compute boom. Securing equipment has become an urgent arms race as chipmakers' expansion speed dictates their ability to fulfill massive AI chip orders. Key areas feeling the strain include: **TCB (Thermal Compression Bonding) Equipment:** Demand is exploding, driven by the simultaneous needs of HBM4 memory stacking, AI chip Chip-on-Substrate (C2S), and logic Chiplet Chip-on-Wafer (C2W) packaging. Players like Hanmi Semiconductor, Hanwha Semitech, and ASMPT are receiving major orders. While hybrid bonding is seen as the future, TCB remains the pragmatic choice for HBM4 mass production, with its lifecycle extended by relaxed specifications and ongoing technological upgrades. **Test Equipment Bottlenecks:** Ironically, AI-driven shortages are now crippling test equipment manufacturing. Critical components like FPGAs, Driver ICs, and CPUs face severe shortages and extended lead times (up to 52 weeks for FPGAs), as AI data center and server vendors prioritize supply. This creates a paradoxical cycle: AI chip shortages drive fab expansion, which requires more test equipment, whose production is delayed because its key parts are diverted to make AI chips. The industry is entering a broad, AI-powered upcycle. SEMI forecasts global semiconductor equipment sales to hit a record $156 billion by 2027, fueled by investment in advanced logic/foundry, HBM-driven DRAM, and advanced packaging (like CoWoS). Major players like TSMC, SK Hynix, and Micron are aggressively ramping capital expenditure. In conclusion, leading equipment vendors are no longer just selling tools; they are selling the critical capability to deliver AI-era capacity. Pricing power is shifting decisively to those with indispensable technology in key process nodes like advanced logic, HBM, and advanced packaging, rewriting the industry's traditional power structure.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Weekly Token Unlock: XPL to Release Millions in Token Value

Weekly Token Unlocks: XPL and SoSoValue Tokens Worth Over $10 Million Set for Release This week sees significant token unlocks for two projects. SoSoValue, an AI-powered crypto investment research platform, will unlock 13.03 million tokens, valued at approximately $3.87 million. The project aims to merge CeFi efficiency with DeFi transparency. Separately, Plasma, a Layer 1 blockchain designed for global stablecoin payments, will unlock 110 million tokens worth about $10.42 million. The network focuses on high throughput, stablecoin-native features, and full EVM compatibility. Both projects have provided their detailed token release schedules.

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Weekly Token Unlock: XPL to Release Millions in Token Value

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Trading

Spot

Futuros