Author: Artemis
Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow
Deep Tide Guide: Last week, ARK Invest's Lorenzo Valente discussed in a podcast why the market is undervaluing Circle. This week, Artemis's Thesis pushes this logic to its conclusion: the market thinks Circle has a weak moat, that stablecoins are a commodity, and that the Open Standard alliance composed of over 140 companies will seize most of the market share. However, Artemis believes Circle's first-mover advantage and network effects are severely underestimated. Three core statements: stablecoins will grow at a 40% CAGR to exceed 1 trillion dollars by 2030; winner-takes-all liquidity makes it difficult for alliances to steal market share; the market mistakenly prices Circle as an 'issuer' rather than a 'full-stack money platform'. When the 'shock' from Open Standard pushed CRCL to historic lows, it might be the moment of greatest market mispricing.
Core Drivers
There are three core drivers supporting this view:
- Stablecoins will expand at a 40% compound annual growth rate (CAGR), surpassing 1 trillion dollars by 2030.
- In a market dominated by liquidity and network effects, the winner takes all. Alliances like OUSD will struggle to capture significant share.
- The market anchors Circle's valuation as a 'stablecoin issuer,' not a 'full-stack money platform.'
Why Now? The 'Shock' from Open Standard
Circle's second-worst trading day in history occurred precisely on the day Open Standard announced its formation. The launch of this alliance stablecoin project, backed by over 140 companies including giants like Stripe, Visa, Mastercard, and Google, sent Circle's stock price tumbling 17%. The market's reaction was telling: Stripe is restructuring the 'band' to overthrow the duopoly of Circle and Tether and distribute stablecoin revenue among members proportionally. This news pushed CRCL's stock price near its all-time low.
Stablecoin Growth: Decoupled from the Crypto Cycle
We believe many investors doubt stablecoins can reach 1 trillion dollars by 2030, pointing to stagnation in stablecoin growth. But for the first time ever, stablecoin supply has decoupled from crypto prices. While crypto assets are down 50%–70% from their highs, stablecoin supply remains steady, indicating it has become an independent asset class. If stablecoin supply continues its growth rate of the past 3 years, global supply will surpass 1 trillion dollars by 2030 (projected).
Winner Takes All: Deep Moats Built on Liquidity and Network Effects
Over the past few years, dozens of issuers have tried to dismantle the Circle and Tether duopoly. Despite hundreds of stablecoins being issued today, these two giants still control over 80% of the supply share. The first-mover advantage is extremely difficult to overcome—building cross-chain, cross-application, cross-exchange liquidity from scratch is a monumental task, and Circle has already left challengers far behind.
Can the OUSD Alliance Succeed?
Specifically regarding OUSD, the market clearly sees it as a major threat to Circle's business. However, history shows that alliances rarely succeed. A successful alliance requires:
- Aligned Member Incentives — OUSD has this to some extent through interest income sharing;
- Clear Governance — Open Standard appears weak here, with several 'announced partners' disclosing they were not consulted and their stance is unclear;
- Existential Pressure — I believe most institutions do not yet view stablecoins as a matter of survival, although Stripe might.
Based on current information, Open Standard meets only about one-third of the necessary conditions.
Market Misjudgment: Circle is Not an Issuer, but a Full-Stack Money Platform
The market views Circle merely as the issuer of USDC, because almost all its revenue comes from interest income dictated by the Federal Reserve, leading to a discounted valuation.
In reality, Circle is building a full-stack suite of monetary products for the future of the internet; at its core, it is a technology company.
A comparison of Circle's valuation with its payment peers clearly shows the valuation gap between card networks and other players. If Circle truly builds the next-generation full-stack payment system, its market cap and valuation should align more closely with card networks—charging fees based on transaction volume (bps), not profiting from float spreads.
Imagining a $50 Billion Circle
Currently, Circle's revenue run rate is approximately $2.8 billion, with a market cap of about $18 billion, giving it a price-to-sales (P/S) ratio of only 6.7x. This is far below payment networks (14x) and high-growth fintech companies like HOOD (17x).
Its multiple is almost identical to Coinbase's—which the market primarily views as a crypto exchange.
The market prices Circle as a business correlated with the crypto cycle and sensitive to interest rates. But Circle will outperform both of these labels and those fragile revenue sources, earning a higher multiple—10x is conservative and reasonable.
If our judgment is correct, and liquidity and network effects are indeed solid moats, then under a scenario where stablecoin supply reaches 1 trillion dollars by 2030, USDC holds a 20% share, and interest rates are at 2%, CRCL could generate approximately $4 billion in interest income.
Regarding revenue diversification, Circle is already seeing results from key growth products like the Circle Payments Network. Despite ongoing pressure on crypto prices and flat stablecoin supply, transaction volume on the Circle Payments Network is exploding—latest disclosure as of end-July 2026 shows an annualized scale of $23 billion, a 6.8x year-over-year increase (albeit from a small base) and a 70% quarter-over-quarter growth. If growth maintains a 60%–65% CAGR, transaction volume could approach $200 billion by 2030; at a 20 basis point take rate, this would contribute an additional $400 million in revenue.
Looking at the Arc blockchain: if it can achieve the scale of another stablecoin-focused chain like Tron, Arc could generate around $500 million in fee revenue.
The above calculations push CRCL's revenue to roughly $5 billion, with 20% coming from rapidly growing payment/settlement-related business lines. Investors can fully understand and assign a higher multiple to such a mix. Combining revenue growth and multiple expansion, we get $5 billion × 10 = $50 billion. A $50 billion CRCL is not far-fetched.
