Stablecoin volumes surge to $35 trillion, but real-world payments still lag at 1%?

ambcryptoPublicado a 2026-01-25Actualizado a 2026-01-25

Resumen

Stablecoin supply has grown 76x since 2020, surpassing $300 billion, yet real-world payments remain a small fraction of total activity. A report by Artemis and McKinsey reveals that while stablecoin volumes reached $35 trillion in 2025, only $390 billion (about 1%) was used for real-world transactions like remittances and payroll. The remaining 99% was tied to crypto trading and speculation. Key drivers of real-world stablecoin payments include B2B transactions, which grew 733% YoY to $226 billion, and card-linked spending, which surged 673%. However, these volumes are still minimal compared to the $2 quadrillion global payment market. Tether’s USDT led supply growth, increasing by $48 billion, while Circle’s USDC also saw significant expansion. The report suggests that stablecoin payments could surpass legacy systems within a decade due to their cost and speed advantages.

Since 2020, stablecoins have grown 76x and crossed $300 billion in supply. However, their volumes are still far from rivalling traditional payments.

According to a recent report by Artemis and McKinsey, on-chain dollars are “barely” scratching the surface of broader traditional payment volumes, accounting for less than 1%.

The report stated that global annual payment volumes totalled $2 quadrillion in 2025. Over the same period, stablecoin volumes hit $35 trillion, but real-world payment volumes (remittances, payroll, etc) was $390 billion or about 1% of global share.

The remaining 99% of the stablecoin volume was linked to crypto trading, speculation, internal transfers, and other activities rather than real-world transactions.

Sectors driving stablecoin growth

Even so, stablecoin payments have been growing rapidly, especially across business-to-business (B2B) and card-linked spending.

On a year-on-year (YoY) basis, B2B stablecoin payments climbed to $226 billion or a 733% growth rate. This has been the top driver for real-world stablecoin payment volumes.

Alas, this was just 0.01% compared to the global share of B2B transactions.

Peer-to-peer payments (P2P) or consumer-to-consumer transfers ranked second with $77 billion, followed closely by consumer-to-business (C2B) transactions at $76 billion.

On the contrary, business-to-consumer (B2C) activities such as payrolls, creator rewards, etc, were ranked last with a paltry $10 billion.

However, card-related spending in stablecoins exploded by 673% in 2025, making it, alongside B2B, one of two sectors seeing massive growth and likely opportunities for payment integrators.

Overall, the $390 billion figure differs from Visa’s $11 trillion figure. Finally, the report claimed that strong stablecoin payment traction could surpass legacy transfers in less than a decade due to cost and speed benefits.

Tether’s USDT leads supply growth

Meanwhile, the stablecoin supply has increased by over $100 billion over the past year, with the market size rising from $204 billion to $307 billion.

Nearly half of the new growth was driven by Tether’s USDT, which increased by $48 billion to $186 billion.

Circle’s USDC increased by $26 billion too, bringing its market supply to $76 billion. Sky Protocol’s (formerly Maker) USDS, PayPal’s PYUSD and World Liberty Financial’s USD1 made it to the top five outliers.

In particular, USDS and PYUSD offer yield and may be the growth catalyst behind their 2025 expansion. Overall, 99% of the stablecoins remain denominated in U.S dollars, reinforcing their dominance against other global currencies.


Final Thoughts

  • Real stablecoin payments hit $390 billion in 2025, representing less than 1% of global volumes of $2 quadrillion.
  • B2B and card-related stablecoin payments saw explosive triple-digit growth of 733% and 673%, respectively.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the total global annual payment volume in 2025, and what percentage of this do real-world stablecoin payments represent?

AThe total global annual payment volume in 2025 was $2 quadrillion. Real-world stablecoin payments, at $390 billion, represent less than 1% of this total.

QWhich two sectors saw the most explosive growth in stablecoin payments in 2025, and what were their growth rates?

ABusiness-to-business (B2B) and card-related stablecoin payments saw the most explosive growth. B2B grew by 733% and card-related spending grew by 673%.

QWhat was the primary driver for the $100 billion increase in the stablecoin supply over the past year, and what is its current market size?

ATether's USDT was the primary driver, increasing by $48 billion. The total stablecoin market size grew from $204 billion to $307 billion.

QAccording to the report, what is the main use case for the vast majority (99%) of stablecoin volume, as opposed to real-world transactions?

AThe remaining 99% of stablecoin volume was linked to crypto trading, speculation, internal transfers, and other activities rather than real-world transactions.

QWhat potential does the report claim for stablecoin payments in comparison to legacy transfer systems, and why?

AThe report claims that strong stablecoin payment traction could surpass legacy transfers in less than a decade due to their cost and speed benefits.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Breaking: OpenAI Undergoes Major Reorganization, President Brockman Assumes Command

OpenAI has announced a major internal reorganization just months before its anticipated IPO. The company is merging its three flagship product lines—ChatGPT, Codex, and the API platform—into a single, unified product organization. The most significant leadership change involves co-founder and President Greg Brockman moving from a background technical role to take full, permanent control over all product strategy. This follows the indefinite medical leave of AGI Deployment CEO Fidji Simo. Additionally, ChatGPT's longtime lead, Nick Turley, has been reassigned to enterprise products, with former Instagram executive Ashley Alexander taking over consumer offerings. The consolidation, internally framed as a strategic move towards an "Agentic Future," aims to break down internal silos and create a cohesive "Super App." This planned desktop application would integrate ChatGPT's conversational abilities, Codex's coding power, and a rumored internal web browser named "Atlas" to autonomously perform complex user tasks. The reorganization occurs amid significant internal and external pressures. OpenAI has recently seen a wave of high-profile departures, including Sora co-lead Bill Peebles and other senior technical leaders, leading to concerns about a thinning executive bench. Externally, rival Anthropic recently secured funding at a staggering $900 billion valuation, surpassing OpenAI's own. Google's upcoming I/O developer conference also poses a competitive threat. Analysts suggest the dramatic restructure is a pre-IPO move to present a clearer, more focused narrative to Wall Street—streamlining operations and demonstrating decisive leadership under Brockman to counter internal turbulence and intense market competition.

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Breaking: OpenAI Undergoes Major Reorganization, President Brockman Assumes Command

marsbitHace 1 hora(s)

Two Survival Structures of Market Makers and Arbitrageurs

Market makers and arbitrageurs represent two distinct survival structures in high-frequency trading. Market makers primarily use limit orders (makers) to profit from the bid-ask spread, enjoying high capital efficiency (nominally 100%) but bearing inventory risk. This "inventory risk" arises from passive, fragmented, and discontinuous order fills in the limit order book (LOB). This risk, while a potential cost, can also contribute to excess profit if managed within control boundaries, allowing for mean reversion. Market makers essentially sell "time" (uncertainty over execution timing) to the market for price control and low fees. In contrast, cross-exchange arbitrageurs typically use market orders (takers) to exploit price differences or funding rates, resulting in lower nominal capital efficiency (requiring capital on both exchanges) and higher transaction costs. Their risk exposure stems from asymmetries in exchange rules (e.g., minimum order sizes), execution latency, and infrastructure risks (e.g., ADL, oracle drift). These exposures are active, exogenous gaps that primarily erode profits rather than contribute to them. Arbitrageurs essentially sell "space" (capital sunk across venues) for localized, immediate certainty. Both strategies engage in a trade-off between execution friction and residual risk. Optimal systems allow for temporary, controlled risk exposure rather than enforcing zero exposure at all costs. Their evolution converges towards hybrid models: arbitrageurs may use maker orders to reduce costs, while market makers may use taker orders or hedges for risk management. Ultimately, both use different forms of risk exposure—market makers exposing inventory, arbitrageurs immobilizing capital—to extract marginal, hard-won certainty from the market.

链捕手Hace 1 hora(s)

Two Survival Structures of Market Makers and Arbitrageurs

链捕手Hace 1 hora(s)

Who Will Define the Rules of the AI Era? Anthropic Discusses the 2028 US-China AI Landscape

This article, based on Anthropic's analysis, outlines the intensifying systemic competition between the U.S./allies and China for AI leadership by 2028. It argues that access to advanced computing power ("compute") is the critical bottleneck, where the U.S. currently holds a significant advantage through chip export controls and allied innovation. However, China's AI labs remain competitive by exploiting policy loopholes—via chip smuggling, overseas data center access, and "model distillation" attacks to copy U.S. model capabilities—keeping them close to the frontier. The piece presents two contrasting scenarios for 2028. In the first, decisive U.S. action to tighten compute controls and curb distillation locks in a 12-24 month AI capability lead, cementing democratic influence over global AI norms, security, and economic infrastructure. In the second, policy inaction allows China to achieve near-parity through continued access to U.S. technology, enabling Beijing to promote its AI stack globally and integrate advanced AI into its military and governance systems, altering the strategic balance. Anthropic contends that maintaining a decisive U.S. lead is essential for shaping safe AI development and governance. The core recommendation is for U.S. policymakers to urgently close compute and model access loopholes while promoting global adoption of the U.S. AI technology stack to secure a lasting strategic advantage.

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Who Will Define the Rules of the AI Era? Anthropic Discusses the 2028 US-China AI Landscape

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片