Visa Expands Stablecoin Network Across More Blockchains

TheCryptoTimesPublicado em 2025-10-29Última atualização em 2025-10-29

Visa plans to widen its use of stablecoins after seeing a sharp rise in demand from banks, fintech firms, and users sending money across borders. The payments company said it will soon support four additional stablecoins across four different blockchains, although it has not yet disclosed which ones. 

The move comes as the company reported its fourth-quarter earnings for fiscal 2025 and noted higher usage of stablecoins for everyday and cross-border payments.

More usage across Visa’s network

Speaking on Visa’s fourth-quarter earnings call, CEO Ryan McInerney said stablecoins are becoming a more important part of the firm’s settlement network. He noted that Visa has already processed about $140 billion in crypto and stablecoin-related flows since 2020, including purchases made using Visa credentials.

McInerney told investors the company sees “particular momentum with stablecoins,” pointing to a sharp rise in usage across Visa-linked cards and payment services. 

Visa now has more than 130 stablecoin-linked card issuing programs operating in over 40 countries, and stablecoin-linked card spending in the fourth quarter was four times higher than the same period last year. Monthly stablecoin volume on Visa’s network has now reached a $2.5 billion annualized run rate.

The company did not name the four new stablecoins or which blockchains they will run on, but McInerney said, “We are adding support for four stablecoins, running on four unique blockchains, representing two currencies, that we can accept and convert to over 25 traditional fiat currencies.” 

Visa currently supports USDC, Euro Coin, PayPal USD, and Global Dollar on networks including Ethereum, Solana, Stellar, and Avalanche. The new expansion would add more options for banks and financial institutions that use Visa to send and receive digital payments.

Focus on faster cross-border settlement

One area of focus for the company is cross-border transactions, where stablecoins can transfer funds more quickly than banking rails. Visa just introduced a pilot program that lets banks pre-fund cross-border transactions with tokens such as USDC and EURC.

McInerney said the next step is to allow banks and institutions to mint and burn stablecoins using Visa’s tokenized asset platform, effectively letting them issue and settle digital tokens directly rather than relying solely on external stablecoin issuers.

Visa’s stablecoin expansion follows a strong quarter financially. The company reported $10.7 billion in Q4 and $40 billion for the year, with payment volume at $14 trillion.

Also Read: Australia Expands Oversight to Stablecoins and Wrapped Tokens

Mobile Only ImageMobile Only Image

Leituras Relacionadas

Same $5 Rate, Bill Differs by 30%, OpenAI Exec: Token Pricing Is Never Directly Comparable

Here is a summary of the article in English: **Title: Priced at $5, Bills Vary by 30%. OpenAI Executive: Token Prices Are Not Directly Comparable** A key takeaway from OpenAI's Codex lead, Tibo, is that a "token" is not a standardized unit for comparing AI model costs, akin to grams or kilowatt-hours. He uses an analogy: two identical pizzas priced per slice can yield different total costs depending on how they're cut. Similarly, different models use different "tokenizers" to segment text, meaning the same input text can produce vastly different token counts. For instance, the same text was tokenized as 766 tokens by GPT-5.6 Sol and 1170 tokens by Claude Opus 5—a 34.5% difference—despite both models advertising the same input price of $5 per million tokens. This discrepancy arises because each company trains its own tokenizer based on its training data, affecting how common or rare word combinations are split. The problem isn't cross-vendor only. Even Anthropic warns that its newer models (Claude 4.7+) use a different tokenizer, producing roughly 30% more tokens for the same text than earlier versions, so cost estimates shouldn't be reused across model generations. Bill differences stem from four main factors: 1) Tokenizer efficiency (input token count), 2) Caching (e.g., GPT-5.6 Sol offers a much lower cache input rate), 3) Output pricing (which can outweigh input savings in agent workflows), and 4) Context length pricing tiers (e.g., GPT-5.6 Sol charges double the input rate for entire requests exceeding 272K tokens). Tibo also addressed user reports of GPT-5.6 Sol's context window being limited in practice, sharing configuration code to manually expand it to 1 million tokens. However, he cautioned that larger windows increase the risk of hitting higher pricing tiers as longer session histories are processed repeatedly. The article concludes that the true metric should shift from "price per million tokens" to "price per successful outcome." The most accurate way to compare costs is to run identical real-world tasks (with the same prompts, tools, and data) through different models, accounting for all variables like tokenization, caching, output length, and context pricing. Ultimately, what matters is the total cost to complete a specific job, not the nominal token price.

marsbitHá 2m

Same $5 Rate, Bill Differs by 30%, OpenAI Exec: Token Pricing Is Never Directly Comparable

marsbitHá 2m

Are Big VC Funds Monopolizing the Seed Round, Leaving Small VCs with No Choice but to Give Up?

**Title: Are Big VCs Monopolizing Seed Rounds? Is Giving Up the Only Path for Small VCs?** In a frank and critical commentary, the author argues that the venture capital landscape has shifted dramatically: large, multi-stage funds are aggressively moving into seed-stage investing, leveraging their brand recognition, massive capital, and resources to dominate deals. They outcompete smaller, specialized funds for stakes in even the earliest startups, as founders increasingly prefer established names. The piece asserts that success in VC now hinges almost entirely on securing a position in the handful of globally transformative companies each year (e.g., OpenAI, Anthropic). For funds that miss these "winner-takes-most" opportunities, relevance fades. The author sarcastically suggests small fund managers should advise their portfolio companies to seek acquisition by such giants and then invest via SPVs, or abandon early-stage investing altogether to chase less ambiguous growth rounds. Further, the author claims the "best" founders—those from elite backgrounds—command premium valuations and align with top-tier funds, leaving little room for others. The relentless focus on AI is presented as another pressure point; not dedicating a fund entirely to AI is deemed a path to irrelevance, akin to missing prior cycles like SaaS or crypto. Ultimately, the letter delivers a cynical conclusion: with capital and power concentrating, true differentiation is nearly impossible. It suggests that for many small VCs, surrendering to this new reality—rather than evolving, competing, or trying something different—might be the most rational, if grim, course of action. The piece serves as a stark warning about capital concentration and the existential challenges facing smaller investment firms.

marsbitHá 3m

Are Big VC Funds Monopolizing the Seed Round, Leaving Small VCs with No Choice but to Give Up?

marsbitHá 3m

Bank of Russia: 12 Largest Banks to Connect Digital Ruble from September 1, 2026

The Central Bank of Russia (CBR) announced that all 12 of the country's systemically important banks will be ready to offer clients digital ruble accounts and transactions starting September 1, 2026. According to Alla Bakina, director of the CBR's national payment system department, these banks cover over 80% of the domestic payment market. The digital ruble is described as a new form of the existing currency, functioning as a cashless payment method but held directly in a user's wallet on the CBR platform. Nine other banks designated as significant payment market participants are also expected to provide access, with most aiming to complete integration by autumn 2026. Starting from the September launch date, major retail chains with annual revenue exceeding 120 million rubles will be required to accept digital ruble payments, though adoption for citizens remains voluntary. The rollout follows a delayed pilot phase, with mass implementation postponed from 2025. The CBR's model currently offers basic account functionality without interest accrual, unlike China's digital yuan, which began paying interest in early 2026. The announcement positions Russia among dozens of countries testing Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), though the digital ruble's potential role in cross-border settlements, particularly within BRICS, remains an open question for its future international relevance.

cryptonews.ruHá 8m

Bank of Russia: 12 Largest Banks to Connect Digital Ruble from September 1, 2026

cryptonews.ruHá 8m

Trading

Spot
活动图片

Categorias popularesright-arrow

Etiquetas Popularesright-arrow