How USDC, PYUSD are challenging USDT’s stablecoin dominance

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-03-02Last updated on 2026-03-02

Abstract

The stablecoin market has expanded significantly, with total supply growing from $140 billion to around $266 billion. While Tether (USDT) remains the largest issuer with $193 billion in supply, its dominance is gradually weakening, especially within EVM ecosystems, where it holds only 47% of the supply compared to its global 59% share. Over a 30-day period, USDT's supply decreased by 1.02%, while USD Coin (USDC) grew 7.42% and PayPal USD (PYUSD) expanded 16.66%. This shift reflects a market increasingly favoring compliant, regulated issuers with transparent reserves. Stablecoins are increasingly used for real-world payments, with annual payment volume reaching nearly $390 billion, including significant remittance flows. Activity on networks like Polygon and growing DeFi usage further highlight this trend toward utility. Regulatory clarity is accelerating institutional adoption, benefiting transparent issuers like USDC and PYUSD, indicating that future competition will be shaped by compliance and infrastructure as much as liquidity.

Stablecoin liquidity expanded sharply as total circulating supply increased from about $140 billion in early 2024 to roughly $266 billion recently.

During this period, Tether [USDT] remained the largest issuer, rising from nearly $110 billion to about $193 billion in supply.

However, deeper network-level data suggests its dominance is gradually weakening across EVM ecosystems.

Stablecoins across major EVM networks collectively account for roughly $190.7 billion in supply.

Ethereum [ETH] leads with $159.9 billion, while Solana [SOL] and BNB Chain [BNB] trail with 15.4 billion and 14.4 billion, respectively, within this ecosystem.

Tether [USDT] represents about $90.4 billion, or nearly 47% of the total.

This share sits below USDT’s broader global dominance of around 59%, largely because a substantial portion of its supply still operates on non-EVM networks, particularly TRON [TRX].

Issuer-level supply trends mirror this rotation. USDT’s overall supply slipped 1.02% over thirty days, while USDC grew 7.42% and PYUSD expanded 16.66%.

As compliant issuers scale, the market gradually tilts toward regulatory-aligned infrastructure rather than liquidity dominance alone.

Stablecoins evolve into global payment rails

Stablecoin activity increasingly reflects payment demand rather than pure trading flows. Monthly payment volume reached about $10.2 billion by late 2025, annualizing above $120 billion.

Meanwhile, peer-to-peer transfers add roughly $19 billion annually, while crypto card spending approaches $18 billion. This spending segment has grown 106% compounded since 2023, signaling rising real-world adoption.

Once exchange-related noise is removed, actual payments reach nearly $390 billion yearly. Within this total, remittances account for around $90 billion, reflecting stablecoins’ growing role in cross-border settlement.

At the same time, small transfers appear more frequently on networks such as Polygon. Rising micro-payment activity increases USDC velocity and reinforces stablecoins as transaction infrastructure.

Supply distribution further confirms this shift. Centralized exchanges hold about $80 billion, or 26% of the $304 billion supply. Meanwhile, DeFi balances expand as yield protocols reach $9.3 billion.

Alongside this, decentralized exchange volume averages $8.23 billion daily. Bridge flows, including $91.65 million USDC moving to Arbitrum in 24 hours, highlight growing cross-chain liquidity demand.

Regulatory clarity fuels institutional shift

Regulatory clarity is reshaping stablecoin competition as institutions favor transparent, compliant issuers. Circle’s USD Coin [USDC] reflects this trend.

Backed by $75.5 billion in reserves, USDC circulation increased by $3.6 billion over 30 days, signaling institutional inflows.

Meanwhile, PayPal USD [PYUSD] reached a $4.19 billion market cap, highlighting rising demand for regulated alternatives. Tether still dominates with $192.88 billion in reserves and about 59% market share.

As regulation tightens globally, stablecoin competition is increasingly shifting toward issuers that combine transparent reserves, compliance, and institutional-grade infrastructure.


Final Summary

  • Tether [USDT] remains the dominant stablecoin by supply, yet shrinking EVM market share and slower growth highlight rising competition from regulated issuers.
  • USD Coin [USDC] and PayPal USD [PYUSD] growth signals a stablecoin market increasingly driven by payments, DeFi utility, and compliance-focused infrastructure.

Related Questions

QWhat is the current total circulating supply of stablecoins and how has it changed since early 2024?

AThe total circulating supply of stablecoins has expanded sharply from about $140 billion in early 2024 to roughly $266 billion recently.

QWhich stablecoin is the largest issuer and what is its current supply?

ATether (USDT) is the largest issuer, with its supply rising from nearly $110 billion to about $193 billion.

QHow does Tether's (USDT) dominance differ between the global market and the EVM ecosystem specifically?

AGlobally, USDT has a dominance of around 59%. However, within the EVM ecosystem, its share is lower at about 47% of the total $190.7 billion supply, largely because a substantial portion of its supply operates on non-EVM networks like TRON.

QWhat recent growth trends were shown by USDC and PYUSD, and what does this signal?

AOver a thirty-day period, USDC's supply grew by 7.42% and PYUSD expanded by 16.66%. This growth signals a market shift towards regulated, compliant issuers and stablecoins driven by payments and institutional demand.

QWhat is the key factor reshaping stablecoin competition according to the article?

ARegulatory clarity is reshaping stablecoin competition, as institutions increasingly favor transparent and compliant issuers like USDC and PYUSD over liquidity dominance alone.

Related Reads

You Bet on the News, the Pros Read the Rules: The True Cognitive Gap in Losing Money on Polymarket

The article explains that the key to profiting on Polymarket, a prediction market platform, lies not just predicting real-world events correctly, but in meticulously understanding the specific rules that govern how each market will be resolved. It illustrates this with examples, such as a market on Venezuela's 2026 leader, where the official rules defining "officially holds" the office overruled the intuitive answer of who was in practical control. Other examples include debates over the definition of a "token" or what constitutes an "agreement." The core argument is that a "reality vs. rules" gap creates pricing discrepancies that savvy traders ("车头" or "whales") exploit. The platform has a formal dispute resolution process managed by UMA token holders to settle ambiguous outcomes. This process involves proposal submission, a challenge window, a discussion period, and a final vote. However, the article highlights a critical flaw in this system compared to a traditional court: the lack of separation between the arbiters (UMA voters) and the interested parties (traders with financial stakes in the outcome). This conflict of interest undermines the discussion phase, leads to herd mentality, and results in opaque final decisions without explanatory rulings. Consequently, the system lacks a body of precedent, making it difficult for users to learn from past disputes. The ultimate takeaway is that success on Polymarket requires a lawyer-like scrutiny of the rules to identify and capitalize on the cognitive gap between how events appear and how they are contractually defined for settlement.

marsbit45m ago

You Bet on the News, the Pros Read the Rules: The True Cognitive Gap in Losing Money on Polymarket

marsbit45m ago

Will the Fed Still Cut Interest Rates? Tonight's Data Is Crucial

The core debate surrounding the Federal Reserve's potential interest rate cuts is intensifying amid geopolitical conflict and rebounding inflation. The key question is whether high energy prices will cause persistent inflation or weaken consumer demand enough to force the Fed to cut rates. Citigroup presents a bullish case for cuts, arguing that oil supply disruptions from the Strait of Hormuz are temporary and will not lead to lasting inflationary pressure. They point to receding bond yields and oil prices as evidence the market is pricing in a short-lived shock. Citi's data also shows tightening financial conditions, a stabilizing labor market, and healthy tax returns, supporting their view that the path to lower rates remains open. Conversely, Deutsche Bank offers a starkly contrasting, more hawkish outlook. They argue the Fed's current policy is already neutral and expect rates to remain unchanged indefinitely. Their view is based on stalled disinflation progress and a shift toward more hawkish rhetoric from key Fed officials like Waller, who cited risks from prolonged Middle East conflict and tariffs. Other officials, including Williams and Hammack, signaled rates would likely stay on hold for a "considerable time." The market pricing has shifted dramatically, now forecasting zero cuts in 2026. The imminent release of the March retail sales "control group" data is highlighted as a critical test. This metric, which excludes gas station sales, will reveal if high gasoline prices are eroding consumer spending in other areas. A weak reading could support the case for imminent rate cuts, while a strong one would bolster the argument for the Fed to hold steady. This data is pivotal for determining the near-term policy path.

marsbit1h ago

Will the Fed Still Cut Interest Rates? Tonight's Data Is Crucial

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of S (S) are presented below.

活动图片