Pouring Cold Water: Crypto Cards Might Have No Future

深潮Pubblicato 2025-12-13Pubblicato ultima volta 2025-12-13

Introduzione

Crypto cards are merely a temporary solution to bridge cryptocurrency into mainstream adoption and global payments, but they fundamentally contradict core crypto values of decentralization and permissionless access. These cards are not true crypto products; they rely on traditional banking infrastructure (like Visa/Mastercard) and add abstraction layers that introduce extra fees, compliance risks, and centralization. They lack privacy, require KYC, and do not enable direct spending of cryptocurrencies like stablecoins or ETH. Instead, they convert crypto to fiat, reinforcing the existing financial gatekeepers. While useful short-term for user convenience, crypto cards are not the end goal. The future should enable direct crypto payments without intermediaries. Most crypto card companies simply white-label services from providers like Rain, rather than building innovative infrastructure. Notably, EtherFi offers a more crypto-native approach by using crypto as collateral for loans instead of selling assets, thus avoiding taxable events. In summary, crypto cards are a transitional tool that may eventually become obsolete as the industry moves towards truly decentralized, direct payment systems.

Author:Pavel Paramonov

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Crypto Cards Have No Future: Why Are They Just a Stopgap?

My overall view is that crypto cards exist only as a temporary solution to two well-known problems: one is to bring cryptocurrency into the mainstream, and the other is to ensure that cryptocurrency can be accepted as a payment method globally.

However, crypto cards are still cards after all. If someone truly embraces the core values of cryptocurrency but still believes in a future dominated by cards, they may need to rethink their vision.

All Crypto Card Companies Will Eventually Die Out

In the long run, crypto card companies are likely to die out, but traditional bank cards will not. Crypto cards actually add an abstraction layer: they are not a true cryptocurrency use case. The issuer of the cards is still a bank. Although these cards may have different logos, designs, or user experiences (UX), they are essentially just an extension of abstraction. Abstraction does make the user experience more convenient, but the underlying process remains unchanged.

Currently, various Layer 1 blockchains (L1) and Rollup solutions are keen to compare their transactions per second (TPS) and infrastructure with Visa and Mastercard. For years, their goal has been to "replace" or even more aggressively "overthrow" the positions of Visa, Mastercard, American Express (AmEx), and other payment processors.

But this goal cannot be achieved through crypto cards—crypto cards do not replace existing payment networks; instead, they add more value to Visa and Mastercard.

Traditional payment networks like Visa and Mastercard remain critical "gatekeepers," holding the power to set rules and define compliance standards.

More importantly, they always retain the option to ban your card, block your company, or even block the bank you work with.

Therefore, crypto cards are not the ultimate solution for the future payment revolution but rather a transitional tool that will eventually be replaced by purer, more decentralized technologies.

Why is the crypto industry, which has always pursued "permissionlessness" and "decentralization," now willing to hand all this over to payment processors?

Your card is Visa, not Ethereum;

Your card is a traditional bank, not MetaMask;

You are still spending fiat currency, not cryptocurrency.

In fact, most of your favorite "crypto card" companies have done almost nothing except print their own logo on the card. They are just riding the narrative hype and may disappear in a few years. Moreover, even the digital cards issued now may not be usable by 2030.

Making Crypto Cards Is Becoming Easier

Today, it is very easy to make your own crypto card—and in the future, you might even be able to make one yourself!

Same Problems + More Fees

The most apt analogy I can think of is "App-Specific Sequencing" (ASS). Yes, the idea of applications autonomously processing transactions and profiting from them sounds cool, but this is only temporary: infrastructure costs are decreasing, communication technology is maturing, and economic issues exist at a higher level, not a lower one.

Crypto cards are the same: yes, you can deposit cryptocurrency and let the card convert it into fiat for payment, but the problems of centralization and permissioned access remain.

It is undeniable that crypto cards are useful in the short term: retailers do not need to adopt new payment methods, and spending cryptocurrency becomes "invisible." However, this is only a transitional stage toward the true goal of cryptocurrency believers:

Goal: Pay directly with stablecoins, Solana, Ethereum, Zcash, etc. No need for indirect payment methods like USDT → crypto card → bank → fiat.

Each additional layer of abstraction means an extra layer of fees: exchange rate spreads, withdrawal fees, transfer fees, and even a share of custody earnings. These fees may seem insignificant, but they accumulate over time—"a penny saved is a penny earned."

Crypto cards may be a short-term solution, but in the long run, they are not the ultimate answer to achieving decentralized payments.

Using Crypto Cards Does Not Mean You Are "Unbanked" or "Bankless"

There is a popular belief that people who use crypto cards are "unbanked" or "bankless." But this is not true. There is still a bank behind the crypto card, and the bank needs to report some user details to the government of its country. Of course, not all data, but at least some information.

If you are an EU citizen or resident, the government will know about your bank account interest income, large suspicious transactions, certain investment income, account balances, etc. If the underlying bank is in the U.S., they know even more.

From a cryptocurrency perspective, this situation has both good and bad aspects. Good aspect: Transparency and verifiability are improved, but these rules also apply to standard debit or credit cards issued by your local bank. Bad aspect: It is neither anonymous nor pseudonymous: the bank still sees your real name, not an EVM or SVM address. At the same time, you still need to complete KYC (Know Your Customer).

Limitations Still Exist

Some might say that the advantage of crypto card lies in its convenience: download the app, complete KYC, wait 1-2 minutes for verification, top up with cryptocurrency, and then it's ready to use. Indeed, this convenience is a major highlight, but it is not available to everyone.

Russia, Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Myanmar, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and half of Africa—citizens of these countries cannot use cryptocurrency for daily spending without residency status in other countries.

But you might say, this is only 10-20 countries where most crypto cards are unavailable, what about the other 150+ countries? The issue is not whether "most people" can use it, but the core values of cryptocurrency: a decentralized network, equal nodes, equal financial access, and equal rights for all. Crypto cards do not align with these values because they are not真正的 cryptocurrency products.

Max Karpis provided an excellent analysis of why "neobanks" are doomed to fail.

In fact, the only time I truly used cryptocurrency for payment was when booking a flight on Trip.com. They recently added the option to pay with stablecoins, where you can pay directly from your wallet, and this payment method is available to everyone globally.

My sincere recommendation: Don't use Booking, use Trip.com to experience真正的 crypto payment. Here, you will find a true cryptocurrency use case and payment experience. I believe the final form of the future will be like this: wallet user experience (UX) will be optimized for payments and spending, or (less likely) they will evolve into crypto cards (if crypto payments become popular in some way).

Crypto Cards Function Similarly to Cross-Chain Liquidity Bridges

Another interesting observation is that self-custodial crypto cards function very similarly to cross-chain liquidity bridges.

This point only applies to self-custodial cards: cards issued by centralized exchanges (CEX) are not self-custodial, so exchanges like Coinbase are not obligated to mislead users into thinking they have full control over their funds.

A useful scenario for CEX cards is providing proof of funds for government, visa applications, or similar activities. When you use a crypto card linked to your CEX balance, technically, you are still within the same ecosystem.

But self-custodial crypto cards are different: they function like liquidity bridges. In this model, you lock funds (cryptocurrency) on chain A (crypto balance) and unlock them as fiat on chain B (real world).

The role of this bridging mechanism in the crypto card space is like the shovel during the California Gold Rush—a valuable link between crypto-native users and businesses hoping to issue their own cards.

@stablewatchHQ conducted an in-depth analysis of this bridging mechanism, essentially defining it as a "Card-as-a-Service" (CaaS) model. This is a key point that many people最容易 overlook when discussing crypto cards. These CaaS platforms provide the infrastructure for issuing branded cards.

Rain: The Core Protocol Behind Crypto Cards

You may not know this, but half of your favorite crypto cards are likely powered by @raincards. Rain is one of the most fundamental protocols in the neobank system because it handles almost all the technical support behind crypto cards. What those crypto card companies do is simply add their brand logo to the card (although it sounds harsh, this is the truth).

To help you understand how Rain works and how easy it is to set up a crypto card, I特意 made this chart.

(Zoom in to see more clearly.)

Rain enables businesses to issue their own crypto cards, and frankly, Rain's execution model could even extend beyond the cryptocurrency space to become broader infrastructure. Therefore, do not mistakenly think that teams need to raise tens of millions of dollars to launch a crypto card. They don't need that; they just need Rain.

I mention Rain multiple times because people generally overestimate the effort required to issue a crypto card. Maybe in the future, I will write a dedicated article about Rain, as this technology is severely underestimated.

Crypto Cards: No Privacy, No Anonymity

The lack of privacy and anonymity in crypto cards is not a problem with the cards themselves but rather with those promoting them who overlook this issue under the guise of so-called "crypto values."

Privacy is not a widely applied feature of cryptocurrency. Pseudonymity (pseudo-anonymity) does exist because we see addresses, not names. However, if you are someone with strong on-chain analysis skills like ZachXBT, Wintermute's Igor Igamberdiev, or Paradigm's Storm, you can significantly narrow down the association between an address and its real identity.

Of course, the situation is worse with crypto cards—they don't even have pseudonymity. Because when you open a crypto card, you need to complete KYC, and in reality, you are not opening a crypto card but a bank account.

If you are in the EU, your crypto card provider will still submit some data to the government for tax or other government-related purposes. Now, you have given the government an additional opportunity to track you: directly linking your crypto address to your real identity.

Future Currency: Personal Data?

Cash still exists (currently the only anonymous payment method, aside from the seller seeing you) and will continue to exist for a long time. But eventually, everything will become digital. And the current digital payment system offers no benefits to consumer privacy: the more you spend, the higher the fees you pay, and in exchange, they know more about you. What a "great" deal!

Privacy has become a luxury today, and in the crypto card ecosystem, this situation will continue. An interesting idea is that if we can achieve truly good privacy protection, to the extent that businesses and institutions are willing to pay for it (not like Facebook exploiting user data, but based on our voluntary consent), then privacy could become a form of currency in the future, or even the only form of currency in a jobless, AI-driven world.

If the Future of Crypto Cards Is Bleak, Why Develop Tempo, Arc Plasma, and Stable?

The answer is simple—to lock users into the ecosystem.

Most non-custodial cards choose to use L2 networks (like MetaMask on @LineaBuild) or independent L1 networks (like Plasma Card using @Plasma). Due to high fees and long transaction confirmation times, Ethereum and Bitcoin are generally unsuitable for such operations. Although there are also cards using Solana, it is still a minority currently (not intending to start another debate here).

Of course, businesses choose different blockchains not only for infrastructure reasons but also for economic benefits. For example, MetaMask chose to use Linea not because Linea is the fastest or most secure, but because Linea and MetaMask are part of ConsenSys' larger ecosystem.

I specifically use MetaMask as an example here because it chose Linea. As most people know, almost no one actually uses Linea, and it lags far behind other L2s like Base or Arbitrum in competition.

But ConsenSys made a smart decision to use Linea as the underlying support for its card because this can lock users into the ecosystem. By providing a good user experience (UX), users gradually become accustomed to using it without needing to use it every day. Linea naturally attracts liquidity, transaction volume, and other metrics, rather than through liquidity mining activities or begging users to bridge.

This strategy is similar to what Apple did when it launched the iPhone in 2007, keeping users in the iOS system and gradually habituating them to the point where they cannot easily switch to other ecosystems. Never underestimate the power of habit.

EtherFi: The Only Crypto Card That Truly Embodies the Crypto Spirit

After some thought, I concluded that @ether_fi is probably the only viable crypto card that most aligns with the core理念 of cryptocurrency. (This research was not sponsored by EtherFi, but even if it were, I wouldn't mind.)

In most crypto cards, the cryptocurrency you deposit is sold, and the balance is topped up as cash (similar to the liquidity bridge model I mentioned earlier).

EtherFi is different: It never sells your cryptocurrency; instead, it uses your cryptocurrency as collateral to provide you with a cash loan while earning yield on your crypto assets.

EtherFi's model is similar to Aave. Most DeFi users hope to seamlessly obtain cash loans through crypto assets, and EtherFi has achieved this. You might ask: "How is this different from a regular crypto card? I can also top up with cryptocurrency and use the crypto card like a regular debit card; this extra step seems unnecessary."

Simply put, the difference lies in taxation: Selling your cryptocurrency is a taxable event, sometimes with higher tax burdens than daily spending. For most crypto cards, every operation is taxed, and eventually, you end up paying more taxes to the government. (Again, using crypto cards does not mean "bankless.")

EtherFi improves on this because you are not actually selling your cryptocurrency but obtaining a loan against it.

Just this point (plus no foreign exchange fees for USD, cashback, and other benefits) makes EtherFi the best example of the convergence of DeFi and TradFi (traditional finance).

Most crypto cards try to伪装成 "crypto-native," but in reality, they are just a liquidity bridge. EtherFi's goal is first to serve crypto users, not to push cryptocurrency to the masses. Their strategy is to bring cryptocurrency to native users and let native users spend it in front of the masses until the masses realize how cool this method is.

Among all crypto cards, EtherFi is probably the only one that can withstand the test of time.

I prefer to see crypto cards as an experimental field, but unfortunately, most teams只是利用 narrative hype without giving due recognition to the underlying systems and actual developers.

We will wait and see where technological progress and innovation lead us. Currently, the crypto card field is indeed expanding in a "globalized" (horizontal growth) manner, but it lacks substance in "vertical growth." And for early-stage technologies like crypto cards focused on consumer payments, vertical growth is crucial.

Domande pertinenti

QAccording to the article, why are crypto cards considered a temporary solution rather than the future of payments?

ACrypto cards are a temporary solution because they merely add an abstraction layer and rely on traditional banking systems like Visa and Mastercard, which act as gatekeepers with the power to ban cards or companies. They do not achieve the core crypto values of decentralization, permissionless access, or replacing fiat with direct cryptocurrency payments.

QWhat key issue does the author highlight regarding the privacy and anonymity of crypto cards?

ACrypto cards lack privacy and anonymity because they require KYC (Know Your Customer) verification, linking users' real identities to their transactions. Unlike pseudonymous blockchain addresses, crypto cards expose personal data to banks and governments, eliminating any form of financial privacy.

QHow does the article describe the role of companies like Rain in the crypto card ecosystem?

ACompanies like Rain provide 'Card-as-a-Service' (CaaS) infrastructure, making it easy for businesses to issue branded crypto cards without significant development effort. Many crypto card companies simply white-label Rain's technology, adding their logo but contributing little innovation.

QWhat makes EtherFi's crypto card different from most other crypto cards, according to the author?

AEtherFi's card does not sell users' cryptocurrencies for fiat. Instead, it uses crypto assets as collateral to provide cash loans, allowing users to spend without triggering taxable events from selling crypto. This aligns better with DeFi principles and reduces tax burdens.

QWhy does the author argue that crypto cards fail to achieve true 'unbanked' or 'bankless' status?

ACrypto cards still rely on traditional banks for issuance and compliance, requiring KYC and submitting user data to governments. They do not eliminate banking intermediaries or provide equal financial inclusion globally, as many countries are excluded from using these services due to regulatory restrictions.

Letture associate

Base Under Pressure

**Title: The Pressure Mounts for Base** Base, the Ethereum Layer 2 scaling solution backed by Coinbase, is facing significant pressure and public scrutiny from its leadership following the launch of Robinhood Chain. Base co-founder Jesse Pollak recently acknowledged strategic missteps, admitting that the chain's past focus on social and creator tokens (e.g., through Farcaster, Zora) failed to deliver sustainable adoption. He has refocused on core infrastructure, handing leadership of the Base App back to Coinbase's Cobie. While Base remains a top L2 contender alongside OP Mainnet and Arbitrum, and boasts the highest TVL (nearly $12B), its weaknesses are being highlighted by the new competitor. Key criticisms include its slow progress on decentralization. Base has faced issues with its single sequencer causing block production halts, and L2BEAT is reportedly considering downgrading its decentralization rating from Stage 1 to Stage 0. This contrasts sharply with the rapid initial success of Robinhood Chain, whose DEX quickly entered the top five by volume. The leadership styles of the parent companies are also being compared: Robinhood's CEO actively engages with new projects, while a recent incident where Coinbase's Brian Armstrong briefly changed his profile picture—sparking and then crashing a related meme token—drew community ire and mockery. Pollak stated Base is working with Coinbase on tokenized stocks backed 1:1 by real equity, differentiating it from Robinhood's derivatives model. However, the article argues that Base's most urgent task is to address its long-standing technical and trust issues. With more traditional finance players likely to emulate Robinhood's path, Base must use this competitive pressure to solidify its position as long-term financial infrastructure.

Foresight News13 min fa

Base Under Pressure

Foresight News13 min fa

White House Concession Removes Ethical Hurdle, Clarity Act Races Against Final Window Before Recess?

On July 21st, industry sources reported that the Trump administration has agreed to include an ethics provision in the "Clarity Act" (Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025). This concession addresses the long-standing conflict-of-interest concerns regarding government officials and the crypto industry, potentially removing the final major obstacle to the bill's progress. Additionally, Patrick Witt, the executive director of the White House's Digital Asset Advisory Committee, confirmed he will remain in his role to help finalize the bill, alleviating previous concerns about his potential departure. The Clarity Act aims to establish a unified federal regulatory framework for the U.S. digital asset market. Its core objective is to resolve regulatory ambiguity by defining different types of digital assets (digital commodities, investment contract assets, and permitted payment stablecoins) and clarifying the respective oversight roles of the SEC and CFTC. This would end the long-running jurisdictional dispute between the two agencies and provide clearer compliance paths for the industry. With the ethics issue moving toward resolution, the most urgent challenge now is time. The U.S. Congress is set to begin its August recess in mid-August, leaving only a few working weeks to finalize the text and advance the bill through the Senate. Industry advocates, like the Blockchain Association's Kristin Smith, stress that this is a critical moment. If negotiations conclude successfully in the coming weeks, the Clarity Act could pass a key hurdle before the recess; otherwise, it may face significant delays. If enacted, the Clarity Act could mark a historic turning point in crypto regulation. By providing a clearer and more predictable legal framework, it aims to reduce uncertainty for businesses, developers, and traditional financial institutions looking to enter the digital asset space, potentially setting a global benchmark for market structure regulation.

Odaily星球日报19 min fa

White House Concession Removes Ethical Hurdle, Clarity Act Races Against Final Window Before Recess?

Odaily星球日报19 min fa

AI Era, Industrial Revolution, and Future Civilization Interview — Zhang Dingwen: The Future Does Not Belong to Chasers

"AI Era, Industrial Revolution and Future Civilization: An Interview with Zhang Dingwen – The Future Does Not Belong to Those Who Chase" In this interview, entrepreneur Zhang Dingwen reflects on his entrepreneurial journey and philosophy, moving beyond discussions of financing or success to emphasize understanding the "era" itself. He argues that true entrepreneurs should not chase short-term trends ("winds"), but position themselves in the direction of long-term technological and societal evolution. Zhang shares key lessons from his early days, including the realization that user value does not automatically translate to commercial value. For him, the core of entrepreneurship is not building a company but constantly upgrading one's own "cognition" – the ability to interpret information, ask the right questions, and understand the underlying "causes" behind business outcomes, not just the effects. His thinking has evolved from a focus on creating good products to a strategic focus on building "entrances" – platforms that naturally connect users to digital services. He sees smart wearables, like watches, not merely as hardware but as potential future gateways combining technological, financial, social, and even fashion attributes to create sustained user relationships and ecosystems. Ultimately, Zhang's vision transcends individual products or companies. He discusses business competition in three stages: product, platform, and finally, "civilization" – where the greatest companies influence how society operates by defining new rules and ways of life. He believes the mission of a truly great enterprise is to solve problems of its time, build enduring trust, and contribute lasting value, leaving behind not just wealth but a positive impact on how the world works. The future, he concludes, belongs not to the fastest, but to those with the correct long-term direction and a commitment to continuous learning and evolution.

marsbit30 min fa

AI Era, Industrial Revolution, and Future Civilization Interview — Zhang Dingwen: The Future Does Not Belong to Chasers

marsbit30 min fa

Cryptocurrency & Stock Market Barometer丨Strategy Cash Reserves Increase to $3.23 Billion, Halting BTC Purchases; Vanguard and Other Asset Managers Increase Holdings in Strategy Stock (July 21)

Market Overview & Warnings: The article warns of high volatility in South Korean stocks and continued dependence on U.S. stocks on geopolitics. Chinese A-shares remain under pressure. It advises against using leverage in current equity markets. For crypto-linked stocks, most have limited growth except Robinhood, with caution advised. U.S. Stock Market: Bearish bets on U.S. stocks, particularly targeting AI-related companies, have reached record highs since 2010, signaling deep skepticism about the sustainability of the AI-driven rally. Tech and chip stocks led a market decline, with the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index potentially entering a bear market. Increased expectations for Federal Reserve interest rate hikes and geopolitical tensions contributed to the negative sentiment. Bitcoin Treasury Company Updates: * Strategy: Increased its cash reserves to $3.23 billion and paused Bitcoin purchases. Several major asset managers, including Vanguard Group and Capital Group, increased their holdings of Strategy (MSTR) stock. * Global corporate Bitcoin buying slowed significantly to just $1.33 million last week. * Other notable activity: Strive purchased 21 BTC; ORANGE JUICE raised $40 million for Bitcoin acquisitions; Bitcoin Japan Corp. raised $60 million, allocating $4.08 million for its first BTC purchase. Other Crypto Treasury Holdings: * Ethereum: BitMine increased its ETH holdings to 5.78 million, nearing its 5% of supply goal. Its total crypto assets, cash, and securities are valued at $11.5 billion. * Solana: No significant corporate treasury activity reported. * Altcoins: HypeStrat made no adjustments to its treasury; its mNAV ratio fell to a long-term low. (Note: This summary is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.)

marsbit31 min fa

Cryptocurrency & Stock Market Barometer丨Strategy Cash Reserves Increase to $3.23 Billion, Halting BTC Purchases; Vanguard and Other Asset Managers Increase Holdings in Strategy Stock (July 21)

marsbit31 min fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片