Why P2P and Exchangers Are Becoming Obsolete, and What Will Replace Them

cryptonews.ruОпубліковано о 2026-07-28Востаннє оновлено о 2026-07-28

Анотація

Titled "Why P2P and Exchanges Are Becoming Obsolete, and What Will Replace Them," this article discusses the evolution of stablecoins, particularly USDT, from a trading tool to a global payment method. However, converting crypto back to fiat for daily expenses remains a challenge. The process of using P2P platforms or crypto exchanges has become increasingly risky and complex due to stricter banking anti-fraud measures, new legislation in Russia, and rampant fraud schemes like "triangles," where sellers can inadvertently receive stolen funds. The article highlights that while P2P was convenient, banks now scrutinize frequent peer-to-peer transfers, often freezing accounts. Exchanges also pose risks like unfavorable rates and unclear compliance. The market is therefore shifting towards integrated services that eliminate the manual conversion step. It cites OneSix as an example—a crypto wallet accessible via Telegram and web that embeds currency conversion directly into payment and withdrawal scenarios. Users can pay bills or send money as if using a bank app, with the crypto-to-fiat exchange happening seamlessly in the background. It also offers invoicing for freelancers and conducts AML checks, returning suspicious transactions instantly instead of freezing them. In conclusion, as crypto integrates into everyday finance, the demand for manual, risky exchange methods is declining. The future lies in unified platforms that combine storage, compliance, conversion, and payment...

Over the past few years, $USDT has transformed from a cryptocurrency trading tool into a universal means for international settlements. Freelancers and IT specialists receive payments in stablecoins, relocants use them for transfers between countries, and for many entrepreneurs, $USDT is the most convenient and fastest way to settle payments with foreign counterparties for deliveries of components from abroad.

Transfers in $USDT and other cryptocurrencies are fast, the coins are credited to wallets. However, users then face the problem of how to convert the cryptocurrency into fiat, as most routine payments in a person's life are conducted in fiat money. For example, rubles are needed to pay utility bills, send money to relatives, buy plane tickets, or order home delivery of groceries. Most often, the user has to go through the same chain: find an exchanger or a cryptocurrency buyer on a P2P platform, sell $USDT, wait for the rubles to arrive, and only then make the necessary payment.

However, over recent years, the process of exchanging cryptocurrency for rubles has become noticeably more complicated. Increased bank anti-fraud measures, crackdowns on money mules, a rise in fraudulent schemes, and the development of compliance procedures have made the cryptocurrency exchange process riskier than before. The situation will worsen in the coming year, as the State Duma has passed in the second and third readings a bill tightening the rules for handling digital currencies in Russia.

What's Wrong with P2P

For many users, P2P was the easiest way to exchange cryptocurrency for rubles at the market rate. The model seemed quite convenient: one user transfers rubles, the other sends cryptocurrency. The exchange acts as a guarantor of the transaction and holds the assets until the exchange is completed.

The problem lies in the fact that the bank does not see the cryptocurrency part of the deal. It only sees a transfer from an unknown individual. If there are many such operations, they can trigger internal monitoring systems.

The reason is the increase in cryptocurrency-related fraud and, as a consequence, changes in legislation, primarily in Federal Law No. 161-FZ "On the National Payment System," as well as requirements for combating money laundering (Law 115-FZ).
According to the Central Bank of Russia, the volume of operations without the voluntary consent of clients in 2025 exceeded 27 billion rubles, and a significant portion of the stolen funds passed through the accounts of individuals used as money mules.

Now banks analyze:

  • the number of incoming transfers;
  • the number of senders;
  • the speed of subsequent withdrawal of funds;
  • matches with known fraudulent patterns;
  • links to details from the Central Bank of Russia's database.

If a transaction seems atypical or raises questions, the bank may request additional explanations and documents.

The Main Risk: "Triangles"

One of the most common problems in the P2P market remains the fraudulent scheme known as the "triangle" or "triangulation." It works as follows: a fraudster simultaneously negotiates with a victim and a cryptocurrency seller. The seller is confident they are selling $USDT to an ordinary buyer. At the same time, the fraudster convinces a third person to transfer money to the seller's card under any pretext: a transfer to a "safe account," helping a relative, buying goods, or another common ruse.

After the seller receives the transfer, they send the cryptocurrency to the fraudster's wallet, considering the deal complete.

Problems arise later, often months after the transaction. When the victim realizes they have been part of a fraud scheme, they contact the bank and law enforcement. The only known details are the card to which the money was sent—that is, the cryptocurrency seller's card.

As a result, the person who themselves became part of the fraudulent scheme and never communicated with the victim may find that they become a subject of a criminal case, their accounts are frozen, and their data is included in the Central Bank of Russia's database of suspicious transactions.

Exchangers allow users to avoid direct contact with unfamiliar counterparties but do not eliminate the risk of being drawn into dubious schemes.

But risks remain here too:

  • users need to choose a reliable service;
  • rates can differ significantly from exchange rates;
  • delays are possible during transaction verification;
  • some exchangers operate without clear jurisdiction and compliance procedures.

The user does not know who is sending money to their card, has no guarantee that the exchanger is not using money mule cards for settlements. The main issue is that the user is still forced to manually solve the exchange problem every time.

This is precisely why the market has started moving towards services that combine cryptocurrency storage, conversion, and payment operations in one interface. This principle is the foundation of services trying to eliminate the very need to "go exchange cryptocurrency." One such example is OneSix.

How OneSix Solves This Problem

OneSix is a cryptocurrency wallet operating via a Telegram MiniApp and a web interface. Users have access to $USDT on the TRC-20, ERC-20, and BEP-20 networks, as well as BTC, ETH, BNB, TRX, and LTC.

The main feature of OneSix is that cryptocurrency exchange is built into the user scenario and ceases to be a separate operation. For the user, everything looks like paying for a product or service with cryptocurrency, although that is not the case: the process of exchanging cryptocurrency for fiat is simply "embedded" inside and invisible to the user.

For the user, the process looks much like paying through a regular banking app.

The withdrawal process works similarly. If it's necessary to send money to relatives or withdraw part of the income in fiat, the user can exchange $USDT within the wallet, for example, for rubles, and send the funds to a bank card without searching for exchangers and facing the risks associated with P2P platforms.

In addition, through OneSix, users can create invoices and payment links to receive cross-border transfers in digital assets. This can be convenient for freelancers, developers, and small companies working with foreign clients.

In OneSix, incoming transactions undergo verification. However, unlike other services, if assets do not comply with the service's AML policy requirements or carry a high risk, they are not credited to the balance and are immediately returned to the sender instead of being frozen.

P2P and exchangers were an important stage in the development of the crypto market, but today they no longer solve the user's main task: to safely and conveniently use digital assets in everyday life. The more cryptocurrency becomes part of real financial scenarios, the fewer people are willing to independently search for counterparties, verify the origin of funds, and understand the risks of each transaction. Therefore, the market is gradually moving from manual exchange to services where storage, verification, conversion, and payments are combined in one place.

end-content

Пов'язані питання

QAccording to the article, why are P2P platforms and exchanges becoming more problematic for converting cryptocurrency to fiat?

AThe process has become more risky and complex due to increased bank anti-fraud measures, the fight against money mules ('drops'), a rise in fraudulent schemes, stricter compliance procedures, and the adoption of new laws in Russia tightening rules on digital currencies.

QWhat is the major fraudulent risk associated with P2P exchanges described in the text?

AThe major risk is the 'triangle' fraud scheme, where a scammer simultaneously negotiates with a victim and a crypto seller. The victim is tricked into sending fiat to the seller's card, the seller then sends crypto to the scammer, and later the victim reports the fraud, making the seller a suspect.

QHow does the service OneSix, mentioned in the article, aim to solve the problem of cryptocurrency exchange?

AOneSix integrates the exchange of cryptocurrency into the user's payment flow, making it invisible. It combines crypto storage, conversion, and payment operations in one interface, allowing users to pay for goods or send money as if using a regular bank app, without manually finding an exchange counterparty.

QWhat are the key factors that banks in Russia now analyze regarding user transactions, as per the article?

ABanks analyze the number of incoming transfers, the number of senders, the speed of subsequent fund withdrawals, whether operations match known fraudulent patterns, and any connections to details in the Bank of Russia's database of suspicious operations.

QWhat is a key advantage of OneSix's transaction verification process compared to some other services?

AIf incoming assets do not meet the service's AML policy requirements or are high-risk, OneSix does not freeze them on the user's balance. Instead, the assets are immediately returned to the sender, reducing risk and potential inconvenience for the receiver.

Пов'язані матеріали

Cardano Price Forecast: Can Hoskinson's $1B RealFi Bet Stop ADA's Fall to $0.14?

Cardano Price Forecast: Can Hoskinson's $1B RealFi Bet Halt ADA's Drop to $0.14? Cardano (ADA) gained 1% on July 28, testing a key Fibonacci support level at $0.1618 after breaking below a consolidating triangle. Technical analysis shows a descending trend line from May's peak maintaining resistance, with the 20-day and 50-day EMAs also capping upside moves. A daily close below $0.1618 could see ADA fall towards the June low of $0.1386. During a recent AMA, founder Charles Hoskinson identified RealFi as Cardano's most likely product to achieve $1 billion in Total Value Locked (TVL) within a year, citing the operational independence of the Real5 Foundation and its team's microfinance experience. Other development updates included the beta launch of 'Midnight City,' the public testnet for Ouroboros Leios, and commentary on the unlikely passage of the CLARITY Act in the US. Following a June exploit that drained 16.1 million ADA, SecondFi launched a recovery roadmap featuring a ZK-proof-based fund return portal, allowing users to claim compensation without exposing private keys. Derivatives data shows a 159% surge in trading volume as ADA tested support, accompanied by a drop in open interest. The liquidation ratio was 58:1 in favor of longs, indicating leveraged long positions were being washed out. Retail traders are net short, creating potential for a short squeeze if a price rebound occurs. The bullish scenario targets a rebound to the 20-day EMA at $0.1650 and the 0.382 Fibonacci level at $0.1762. The bearish case envisions a breakdown below $0.1618, leading to a test of the June low at $0.1386.

cryptonews.ru6 хв тому

Cardano Price Forecast: Can Hoskinson's $1B RealFi Bet Stop ADA's Fall to $0.14?

cryptonews.ru6 хв тому

Stablecoin Market Sees Significant Contraction for First Time in Four Years

For the first time in four years, the stablecoin market's total capitalization has contracted significantly, dropping by over $10 billion from its May peak to around $310 billion in late July. This represents the largest monthly outflow since the collapse of Terra in May 2022. Paradoxically, while the supply shrank, adjusted transaction volume in June 2026 surged to a record $1.79 trillion, a 63% monthly increase. A key driver of this divergence is the **$GENIUS Act**, passed in July 2025, which prohibited stablecoin issuers from paying interest on payment-focused stablecoins. This did not eliminate the demand for yield but redirected capital towards alternatives like tokenized U.S. Treasury funds, DeFi lending protocols, and offshore stablecoin issuers. The shift is evidenced by the rapid growth of the Real-World Asset (RWA) sector, where tokenized Treasury funds grew from $11 billion to $16 billion in five months. The changing dynamics have reshaped the competitive landscape. **$USDC** has become the dominant instrument for institutional transactions, accounting for approximately 70% of transaction volume in the first half of 2026 and $1.21 trillion in adjusted transfer volume for June. Meanwhile, **$USDT** retains its lead in overall market capitalization, serving as a "savings account" in developing economies. The industry's fundamental economics are transforming: the old issuer model reliant on yield from reserves is diminishing; revenue is shifting towards infrastructure providers like payment networks and blockchains that charge transaction fees; and corporate (B2B) payments, while still a small fraction of total volume, are experiencing explosive growth.

cryptonews.ru6 хв тому

Stablecoin Market Sees Significant Contraction for First Time in Four Years

cryptonews.ru6 хв тому

LeCun Continuously Endorses, New Work VISReg Tackles the Core Challenge of 'Representation Collapse' in JEPA World Models

"VISReg: A New Self-Supervised Learning Method Tackles Representation Collapse in JEPA World Models" Yann LeCun has highlighted the new self-supervised learning (SSL) work VISReg (Variance-Invariance-Sketching Regularization), which addresses the core challenge of "representation collapse" in JEPA-based world models. SSL often collapses, mapping different inputs to similar vectors, losing discriminative power. While methods like VICReg and SIGReg attempted to regularize the representation distribution, they suffered from issues like vanishing gradients during collapse or coupled scale and shape optimization. VISReg overcomes these by decoupling the regularization into independent "scale" and "shape" objectives. It uses a variance term to prevent amplitude collapse (providing constant gradient even during collapse) and a sliced Wasserstein distance (SWD) based sketching target with stop-gradient to align the distribution shape to an isotropic Gaussian, without interfering with scale. This approach, requiring only ~15 lines of PyTorch core code, offers linear computational complexity and scales efficiently across multiple GPUs. Evaluated across 15 datasets (in-domain, out-of-distribution/OOD, dense prediction), VISReg outperforms 7 mainstream SSL methods (MoCoV3, DINO, iBOT, I-JEPA, MAE, data2vec) without relying on heuristic tricks like EMA or stop-gradient. Key results include: superior average OOD accuracy; matching DINOv2's OOD performance using only ~1/10 of the data (ImageNet-22K vs. LVD-142M); better transfer learning fine-tuning results across multiple datasets; and competitive performance in semantic segmentation and generative guidance. VISReg also demonstrates robustness on low-quality data like long-tailed or low-rank datasets where other methods fail. The work provides a more stable, efficient, and generalizable regularization solution for SSL and JEPA models.

marsbit16 хв тому

LeCun Continuously Endorses, New Work VISReg Tackles the Core Challenge of 'Representation Collapse' in JEPA World Models

marsbit16 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
活动图片