The Stablecoin Surge: A $500 Billion Threat to Traditional Banking
When Standard Chartered warns that stablecoins could drain $500 billion from developed market banks by 2028, the banking industry listens. When Bank of America's CEO suggests that $6 trillion—roughly 35% of all U.S. commercial bank deposits—could migrate to stablecoins, the alarm bells ring louder. What was once dismissed as a niche crypto experiment is now being treated as an existential threat by the institutions that have dominated global finance for centuries.
The $500 Billion Warning
Standard Chartered's January 2026 report delivered a stark assessment: stablecoins pose "a tangible threat to bank deposits" globally. With the stablecoin market projected to reach $2 trillion by 2028, the bank estimates that $500 billion will exit developed market banks over the next three years, while approximately $1 trillion could leave emerging market banks.
The math is straightforward. Currently, about two-thirds of stablecoin demand originates from emerging markets, with one-third from developed economies. As adoption accelerates and the market expands from its current $300 billion to a projected $2 trillion, the deposit displacement will scale proportionally.
Geoff Kendrick, Standard Chartered's global head of digital assets research, identified U.S. regional banks as the most vulnerable. Institutions like Huntington Bancshares, M&T Bank, Truist Financial, and CFG Bank face outsized risk because their revenues depend disproportionately on net interest margin (NIM)—the spread between what they earn on loans and pay on deposits.
For these banks, deposits aren't just a funding source; they're the foundation of their business model. Lose the deposits, lose the ability to lend. Lose the ability to lend, lose the revenue. The cascade is merciless.
Why Banks Can't Compete on Their Own Terms
The fundamental challenge facing banks is structural: stablecoin issuers don't play by the same rules.
Tether holds just 0.02% of its reserves in bank deposits. Circle keeps approximately 14.5% in banking system deposits. The rest flows into Treasury bills and money market instruments. This means very little "re-depositing" is happening—stablecoin growth doesn't recycle capital back into the banking system.
Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan articulated the concern plainly: if large volumes of deposits move into stablecoins, banks face reduced lending capacity. Community and regional banks, which rely heavily on local deposits to fund small business and housing loans, would be particularly devastated.
The deposit disintermediation creates a three-headed threat:
- Funding erosion: Banks lose their cheapest and most stable source of capital
- Lending contraction: With fewer deposits, banks must either raise rates or reduce loan volumes
- Competitive pressure: Fintechs and crypto platforms capture the customer relationship
Traditional banking's profit model—borrow low (deposits) and lend high (loans)—breaks down when the "borrow low" side disappears into stablecoin wallets.
The GENIUS Act: Banks Fight Back
The GENIUS Act, signed into law in July 2025, represents the banking industry's legislative response to the stablecoin threat. The landmark legislation created a federal regulatory framework for payment stablecoins while including a critical provision: issuers cannot pay interest directly to holders.
Banks lobbied hard for this restriction. JPMorgan Chase's CFO Jeremy Barnum has publicly expressed concerns over yield-bearing stablecoins as a threat to the traditional banking system. The logic is simple: if stablecoins paid 4-5% interest while offering instant global transfers, why would anyone keep money in a savings account earning 0.5%?
In a joint letter to Congress, over 40 banking associations urged lawmakers to extend the interest ban to affiliates and exchanges, warning that "unchecked yield programs could destabilize the banking system by draining deposits used for lending."
But the GENIUS Act's interest prohibition hasn't stopped innovation—it's merely redirected it.
The Yield Loophole Battle
Crypto platforms have found creative workarounds to deliver value to stablecoin holders without technically paying "interest."
Coinbase introduced a rewards program offering USDC holders returns on their balances, structuring payments as "platform incentives" rather than direct interest. PayPal implemented a similar model, offering PYUSD holders a 4% annual rewards rate on balances within the PayPal ecosystem.
These workarounds allow compliant stablecoin issuers to compete with yield-bearing alternatives while maintaining technical adherence to regulatory restrictions on direct interest payments.
JPMorgan's executives have labeled this an "unregulated parallel banking system" and continue lobbying to close what they call the "Yield Loophole." The bank argues that if crypto platforms can effectively pay interest through third-party reward programs, the GENIUS Act's deposit protection mechanism is meaningless.
Meanwhile, yield-bearing stablecoins have exploded regardless of regulatory intent. The category grew from $9.5 billion at the start of 2025 to over $20 billion by year's end. Ethena's USDe alone surged from below $6 billion to over $14 billion, capturing nearly 5% of the stablecoin market.
Major Banks Join the Race
Faced with the "if you can't beat them, join them" calculus, major U.S. banks are now developing their own stablecoin products.
In May 2025, executives from JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo began discussions on a cooperative token project. SoFi Technologies launched SoFiUSD, a fully reserved dollar stablecoin issued by SoFi Bank, initially on Ethereum.
JPMorgan's JPMD represents the bank's tokenized deposit approach—combining digital token convenience with traditional banking's regulatory protections. Citigroup's CEO Jane Fraser indicated the bank is exploring stablecoin issuance for digital payments. Bank of America's Moynihan revealed early-stage investigations into stablecoins as payment and settlement mechanisms.
The irony is palpable: banks spent years dismissing stablecoins as speculative toys, then lobbied to restrict their growth, and are now racing to issue their own versions before they lose the deposit war entirely.
The Utility Argument
Some analysts argue the deposit threat is overstated because stablecoins win on utility, not yield.
As one American Banker analysis noted: "These platforms win not by paying higher yield, but by offering faster settlement, simpler onboarding, better design and tighter integration across financial activities. They iterate quickly, bundle services seamlessly and meet customers where they already are."
Stablecoins, in this view, are infrastructure rather than the value proposition. Users don't hold USDC because they want 4% yield—they hold it because they want to move money instantly across borders, access DeFi protocols, or transact in jurisdictions where traditional banking is unreliable.
This perspective suggests the banking industry may be fighting the wrong battle. Restricting yield might slow stablecoin adoption among yield-seekers, but it won't stop adoption among those who simply want faster, cheaper, more programmable money.
The $2 Trillion Future
The stablecoin market is on track to reach $2 trillion by 2028, according to Standard Chartered's projections. Other estimates suggest $4 trillion by 2030, with transaction volumes already approaching $1 trillion monthly.
USDT and USDC remain dominant, holding approximately 82% market share, though that figure has declined from 88% as new competitors enter. Circle's USDC grew 73% in 2025, outpacing Tether's growth for the second consecutive year—driven partly by increased demand for regulatory-compliant tokens following the GENIUS Act.
Industry experts predict that more than 20% of all active stablecoins will offer embedded yield or programmability features by end of 2026, accelerating the shift from "static stablecoins to yield-bearing stablecoins and synthetic dollars backed by real assets."
If these projections hold, the banking industry's existential concern becomes a mathematical certainty. Whether $500 billion or $6 trillion ultimately exits the banking system depends on how quickly adoption spreads beyond crypto-native users to mainstream consumers and businesses.
What This Means for Traditional Finance
The stablecoin threat exposes a fundamental truth about modern banking: its competitive advantages are increasingly regulatory rather than operational.
Banks don't offer faster settlement. They don't offer 24/7 availability. They don't offer programmability or composability with other financial services. They offer FDIC insurance, regulatory compliance, and the inertia of customer relationships built over decades.
For now, those advantages remain substantial. But each year brings more users who grew up with Venmo and Cash App, who expect instant transfers and intuitive interfaces, and who won't accept "wait 3-5 business days" as an answer.
The $500 billion warning from Standard Chartered isn't about stablecoins specifically—it's about the declining relevance of twentieth-century financial infrastructure in a twenty-first-century economy.
Banks can lobby for restrictions. They can launch competing products. They can acquire fintech startups. But unless they fundamentally reimagine how financial services are delivered, the deposit erosion that keeps their executives awake at night will only accelerate.
The question isn't whether stablecoins will disrupt banking deposits. The question is whether banks will adapt quickly enough to remain relevant when they do.
BlockEden.xyz provides enterprise-grade blockchain infrastructure for developers building on Ethereum, Solana, Sui, Aptos, and other leading networks. As stablecoins become foundational financial infrastructure, reliable API access becomes essential for building the next generation of payment and financial applications. Explore our API marketplace to access production-ready blockchain infrastructure.