Stablecoins as Financial Infrastructure — the $33T Story | EBC12

Okay, thank you very much. Wonderful presentation, as always . It's fantastic to be here again at the European Blockchain Convention. And today we discuss stablecoins as financial infrastructure: a $ 33 trillion story. So, what does this indicate?

This refers to a study released earlier this year that said that last year, in 2025, the volume of transactions in stablecoins was 33 trillion, which is almost double the amount in 2024. So the question that arises from this figure is: are stablecoins already financial infrastructure? Is n't that right? We, we did it, right? We have achieved this.

33 trillion this. 33 trillion is more than Visa and Mastercard combined. Well, let's dig deeper into this number. We will explore what it indicates and what it does not, but we do not want to stop at just the numbers. We want to really understand the stablecoin market today and where it’s going, because we have the perfect panel to discuss all of this.

We have an issuer perspective with AllUnity. We have a payment processor perspective with Token, a Fireblocks perspective as an infrastructure provider, and a banking perspective with Unicaja. So, first I want to ask our panelists to introduce themselves, but not just tell their life stories. Also a question: what do you do? Where does your role in this market begin and end?

Who do you depend on among other participants or categories of players in this market? So, let 's start with Simon. So, let's get started. Yes, thank you for the introduction. Simon, I'm the CFO of AllUnity.

We are the CFO of AllUnity. We are the first licensed German issuer of stablecoins, we have issued the euro, the Swiss franc and the Swedish krona. Another currency will likely Another currency will likely appear at the end of the month. And so, where does my role begin and where does it end? Good question.

Um, very simple: my role starts with the reserves. So, whatever I have in volume, I hand over to asset management companies or banks, who hold it in reserves for me. And it ends with the customers who ultimately distribute the stablecoin. Why does it end there? Because after that it is in free circulation.

And I think that's the key difference for this type of asset, which many people in the financial industry may not have fully realized yet, is that it's a freely convertible instrument that's driven solely by ownership. Yes, we do not conduct transactions ourselves. We, so to speak, sell the stablecoin or issue it for our clients, and they freely distribute it on the market. And that's where it all ends when we hand it over to distributors. Hello everyone.

I am Benoit Courtois, Head of Compliance and Digital Assets at Unicaja, a Spanish bank, a purely Spanish player Spanish player , listed on the IBEX 35. What is our responsibility, I would say, as a bank? She is huge. We have many products. I will move on immediately to my own area of responsibility.

As a bank, we have to offer our customers something new. So, from an innovation perspective, the best product they can access in the crypto market. This is our goal, at least for this year. As in most Spanish banks today. And this responsibility means that our clients trust us.

So they want something regulated that seems safe, because any investment is by definition not safe. Cryptocurrency can also be an investment, and as a bank—and not just for retail clients, because we are a Spanish retail bank— retail bank— we are also building the infrastructure behind the bank. So it's not just for our clients, but also for Unicaja as an entity and a financial group, to be able to transfer money and interact with the banking system in Europe, but also around the world. So, my name is John Galloran, I represent Fireblocks. I lead our business solutions team, which effectively means I manage the work with strategic clients that we have in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

For those unfamiliar with Fireblocks: we are one of the largest infrastructure providers for digital assets. To provide context, as we mentioned the 33 trillion story: last year, Fireblocks clients processed about 6.5 trillion on our platform, of which about 40% were stablecoins. So, based on the figure we gave at the beginning, every tenth stablecoin transaction goes through a Fireblocks wallet. So, when it comes to our systemic role in the stablecoin space, I think that's a pretty fair assessment.

I have divided what we are doing with stablecoins into three different directions. We work with crypto-native providers to allow them to store and transfer stablecoins. These are crypto exchanges, over-the-counter (OTC) desks over-the-counter (OTC) desks , market makers, liquidity providers— mainly from the crypto industry. For example, companies like Wintermute and BC2. We are working with payment companies to add stablecoins as a new payment channel to enable different use cases.

Think of WorldPay, which handles payments with its merchants, Bridge, which provides deposit and withdrawal services, or Western Union, for example, in the area of money transfers. We are now increasingly working with banks that are essentially using stablecoins as a defensive mechanism. They are introducing them for corporate clients, and some banks are even starting to issue them. Perhaps the most notable example in Europe is our collaboration with the stablecoin consortium Kivalis. So, this consortium of 37 banks will issue a stablecoin, using our infrastructure to issue the asset, and many banks will also use it to interact with it.

So I look forward to discussing this in more detail today. Hello everyone. My name is Hugo Gorton. I lead the Sokin partnership team in the UK. Sokin UK.

Sokin is, in essence, a global platform for business banking. We work with other fintech companies, payment platforms, cross-border payment systems, and platforms that seek to transfer money internationally. Historically, we have worked closely with direct clients, that is, businesses that trade internationally. Over the last couple of years, we have focused significantly on embedded finance. We offer banking as a service and registered accounts that businesses can provide to their end customers.

I am also fortunate to report fortunate to report that if you look at the back of your badges, you can find a little more information about Sokin. Perfectly. Fantastically. Thank you for the introduction. I have a question for all of you.

I urge you not to be shy about interrupting and expressing your opinion openly. I want to start with John, since you have direct visibility into this 33 trillion story. More than six pass through you, as you said. Can you tell me what this number means? What doesn't it talk about?

Can you detail it? What stage are we at? Yes, of course. I think a lot of the reports on stablecoin transactions imply that all of these payments are related to payment cases, when in fact a significant portion of the flows we see from our clients are related to market making. People are filling crypto exchanges with various assets where crypto markets are popular right now , right?

So that's a large number of large market makers. What we really see, especially in payment companies, are three main areas they focus on. We see that B2B payments are increasingly becoming a top priority for many payment companies. So, a lot of the flows that we will see will be in this area. Think, for example, about a company like Zodia Markets.

They provide liquidity services and foreign exchange transactions for large corporations transferring funds abroad. So I think this is a very good example of how stablecoins can be used in this context. The second use case that we see a lot of interest in is money transfers. This can be done by traditional crypto exchanges, as well as deposit and withdrawal providers. I mean companies like MoonPay and others.

Think Bitso in Latin America. But now we are seeing traditional remittance market players increasingly entering this area. We work with both MoneyGram and Western Union on their stablecoin and cross-border initiatives . So, this is a flow of retail money transfers. And the third major category, which includes stablecoins, as well as other types of digital forms of money, is asset-based settlements.

We recently observed DTCC’s trials in the US on collateral mobility. One of the assets used in these tests for calculations was USDCX. That is, stablecoins are used for transactions in capital markets. We see, for example, 21X in Europe for example, 21X in Europe . Now we are seeing offers from other types of exchanges as well.

So I think that payments with tokenized assets—whether it's a stablecoin or a tokenized deposit—is the third type of use that we're seeing. Right. We discussed the story of 33 trillion. I think we need to clean up this data a bit from DeFi activity, but it would still be a significant amount of trillions amount of trillions , right? 11 trillion.

And then the actual payments come. But the story is probably about 400 billion last year. But it's not just about payments. It's all about trends, right? This is not an absolute value.

This is a doubling compared to the previous year. I want to come back to this because I also want to ask Simon what his thoughts are on where we're going. You also mentioned use cases, right? What do you think stablecoins are used for ? And on this occasion, I also want to ask Hugo: what is your perspective?

What do you think are the main areas of application for stablecoins today? Supporting John's point, I believe that a significant part of what is being used now and is growing significantly is cross-border payments. Many in this room are probably familiar with the term “ stablecoin sandwich,” where you obtain fiat currency through domestic channels within a country. This is converted into a stablecoin, which is then sent to another country, where it is withdrawn into the local currency through domestic payment systems. The obvious advantage of this is speed and cost, i.

e. improving the efficiency of cross-border payments. When companies previously had to wait two or more days for funds, they lost working capital, which can also be solved with the help of stablecoins. stablecoins. Firstly, this is the speed of the transaction to the destination, and destination, and secondly, having received stablecoins, the company can withdraw them or invest them in instruments with a return.

So, this increases working capital for the business as a whole. Clarification on cross-border payments: at what stage of this value chain does conversion occur? It depends on the currency, that's how you should look at it in the end . Typically, three conversions occur, although there may be more. The first is the conversion of local currency into a stablecoin, i.

e. exchanging pounds, euros, or dollars for a stablecoin. This is one conversion, then the payment occurs, and after that, another conversion on the other side into the recipient's local currency. That is, currencies of Latin American countries, the Asia- Asia- Pacific region, or any other. Usually these are two conversions, between which payment is made using a stablecoin.

There's a reason I'm asking others and leaving Simon for last because I want to hear other opinions before he answers. Benoit, in your opinion, what is the competitive advantage of stablecoins? Does this also apply to cross-border payments? Yes, I think a stablecoin is one solution, and I want to add something since we mentioned stablecoins. But that's only part of the story, because we have tokenized assets, as well as a digital euro in Europe, that is, money from the central bank.

There are several use cases here, and the question is what will we use in the future? I can't give an answer, I'm already summing up, but I will note that stablecoins for cross-border payments are advisable. It all depends on whether it will be euros, pounds, or perhaps dollars, which currently dominate international transactions. So I believe we can significantly reduce friction, meaning time and cost. But you also see that due to regulation, we may face some difficulties in using stablecoins for some cases.

So for me, number one for me, number one is cross-border payments. Next come the calculations for the banks. And for tokenized assets, we want to tokenize everything, which is great, and you hear about tokenization everywhere, but how do we provide the monetary component of tokenization component of tokenization ? So, if we tokenize an asset, we need to pay with something, and that “ pay with something, and that “ something” could be a stablecoin, or a tokenized deposit, or digital money controlled by any central bank in the world. Let me get back to the topic of stablecoins vs.

tokenized money tokenized money , because I think one of the key questions is: you say it could be any of them, but which one exactly and in what context? But before that, Simon, finally, have you heard other perspectives on whether stablecoins have evolved into financial infrastructure? Hmm, both yes and no. I think if you look at the numbers, first of all I completely agree about cross-border transfers. This is perhaps the most obvious and easiest way, as it combines not only cheap and efficient transfer, but also storage of value, making access to currencies much more convenient than before.

For us Europeans, maybe not. We have access to very, very easy money storage. Virtually free and with good interest rates. If you complicate it a bit, you can even easily access other currencies that are safe havens. But for most of the rest of the world, it's a whole different game, and we often forget that.

On the other hand, if we talk about the huge numbers that consulting companies often quote to sell projects, which is quite understandable, yes. Of course, this is obviously untrue. I mean, it's just numbers, right? Each of us has our own numbers. When you make a business case, you also roll the dice.

I can say this as a CFO, right? Everything is fine. But that's not reality, right? So, if we say it's like MasterCard and Visa combined, well, guys. Where do you get your salary?

To a bank account, right? Most people, some get it in stablecoins, rightly so, but very few. And then, how do you pay at the butcher shop? Yes? At the bakery, at the restaurant, at the local store.

So we have to be a little realistic too, right? And for me, that's an indicator that if reality is very far from the published research, I wouldn't distrust reality. Let's say this. I wouldn't trust the research, would I? So, we should be careful when considering the use of stablecoins to see how they are actually implemented in the world.

Because, of course, we see implementation where existing payment systems create great inconveniences, and that's great, although we often forget about it. And this is forget about it. And this is certainly a significant part. So it would be very arrogant of Europeans not to notice this. On the other hand, the stablecoin industry is doing pretty poorly so far, including all of us, including me, in terms of implementing what I mentioned, for example, at points of sale.

And this is exactly the moment when we will get true mass adoption. And of these 33 trillion, there is And of these 33 trillion, there is a lot of worthless trading, completely useless DeFi transactions; It's not that DeFi is useless, it's just a lot of unnecessary transactions with transfers back and forth, with fictitious trading. We all know this. We, uh, sometimes don't really want to talk about it , right? But in the end, that's what this volume is all about.

I think we should be careful about what we create as an industry . Are we creating a bunch of worthless transactions worthless transactions that are actually a waste, right? Because that also makes our product worse, right? It's like, uh product worse, right? It's like, uh , I write a lot of stuff that nobody reads, right?

Uh, transactions that don't actually move value move value , but just look like they do , right? On the other hand, where are we actually able to move value? And there are great examples for stablecoins in this. To name just a few: financing. If a company needs funding at a certain point in time, sending funds via stablecoins offers a huge advantage over other methods, including bank payments.

And this is especially important for large corporations with many branches. Even at the point of sale level. If, and we're running projects here, uh running projects here, uh , if you asked me 2 years ago, I would have said it was stupid, right? Now I'll say, " right? Now I'll say, " Hey, I've talked to merchants.

They pay huge fees for credit cards. There's a huge advantage for them to implement this." This sounds like " This sounds like " [ __ ] bingo," but it's a real case that's becoming reality. And we do this at AgentiPayments, right? Where access to content must be paid for instantly and you must have settlement finality immediately in very small installments , just so the agent can pay for the content.

Yes, and so these are very, very real use cases use cases that, in my opinion, are becoming relevant. Some kind of reaction to this, because I have additional questions, but I want to see if there are any more . I think one area that Hugo mentioned, but that we have n't talked about maybe a little bit yet , is corporate treasury. So I think this is probably the same real-world use case where there 's a pretty good flow that we're definitely seeing. And by corporate treasury, I mean that an international company operates in many different locations, they need to finance those locations, and they unfortunately have to use a correspondent banking system.

When was the last time the correspondent banking system was updated, you know when Swift ended, in 1973? So there's a reason why cross-border transactions are such a flow, because it's the most cumbersome flow, and it's the one with the highest fees. So we see a lot of corporate treasuries turning to stablecoins, partnering with stablecoin issuers, using providers like us to access stablecoins, transfer them across borders, withdraw them, and then settle with suppliers. And the reason we see the dominance of the US dollar in this space is because many of these markets where there are inflationary currencies want access to the dollar and are perfectly happy to hold a stablecoin. So I think corporate treasury is probably the area, apart from B2B payments, that apart from B2B payments, that I would say has the biggest impact on the corporate side corporate side , and a lot of banks have already understood that and are looking to launch tokenized deposit services as a defensive measure.

If you look at what JP Morgan did with their Conexus platform their Conexus platform , or what Citi did with Citi Token services, it's Citi did with Citi Token services, it's purely a defensive play for their deposits. The types of customers who use cross-border payments with stablecoins are exactly the type of customers they are targeting, so this is a standoff of stablecoins versus tokenized deposits. Hugo, two questions for you. First: do you also see this trend in corporate treasury? And second treasury?

And second : regarding cross-border payments, in your experience, should the client know that stablecoins are used on the backend , and does this happen in practice? Yes, good question Yes, good question . So, for the first one, I'll just repeat, essentially, what John said. So, you know, the key thing when it comes to corporate treasury, and I think this has been mentioned but not necessarily directly said, is transparency. So, the ability to see the assets or values that a company has in different structures, for example, using a platform like Fireblocks.

So, the ability to transfer these funds, as John said, instantly between entities, while having a complete overview of where everything is. Similarly is. Similarly , in the area of cross-border payments, such as on the Swift network, many customers may request an MT103 without fully understanding where the funds are. They go through intermediary banks, with a lot of invisible or unexpected fees unexpected fees . Whereas with stablecoins, everything happens more or happens more or less instantly, and everyone knows where these funds are at any given time .

Regarding the second question you asked: does the end user or customer need to know that a stablecoin is being used? I think the answer to this question—"it depends on the situation"—would probably be the most correct. So, in many cases, customers don't need it, but sometimes they want to know. So many of the clients that work with us at Sojourn, and I think around the world, want their payments to be as fast as fast , secure, and compliant as possible compliant as possible . Using stablecoins, like Sojourn, or simply stablecoins on the blockchain, is a perfect example of how it can be cheap, fast, transparent, and secure, depending on who you use.

But as for what customers don't necessarily need to know— necessarily need to know— they just want the money to get where it's needed, as quickly and cheaply as possible. So if a provider like Sojourn or another payment service uses stablecoins to do this to reduce the time it takes for a cross-border payment to reach a recipient or company, then so be it, because they just want it to be fast. I did notice one point you mentioned earlier in your answer regarding profitability, right? This is also important. So you can not only get your money faster, but also invest it in an asset that quickly generates income.

And I'll just give you a quick example of this. Fireblocks is a company where we get over 50% of get over 50% of our revenue in stablecoins. So, in order for us to generate income, we need to log into the Fireblocks platform, invest in a tokenized money market fund, and they instantly start generating income. So, it's probably a reduction from two to three days for the funds to reach us to two to three days for them to hit our brokerage account. That's six days of additional revenue for the corporation.

Here, in fact, is an example right here. You started to answer what I wanted to ask, but let me clarify, because you were talking about speed. Um, well, we're talking about financial infrastructure, and banks don't work 24/7. Well, blockchain works. Well Well, blockchain works.

Well , how can we reconcile this? Well , how can we reconcile this? Well , I think you've touched on this a little bit, but how close are we to a truly 24/7 financial infrastructure? That's a good, good question. Um, I honestly don't think we're that close to 24/7 infrastructure.

So I think it's a gradual process for different institutions. You will see that banks are interested in implementing a regime, perhaps 24/5, initially. Um, if they're offering crypto assets to be competitive competitive , they need to offer something closer to 24/7. Um, so I think from a market infrastructure perspective to expect all of our FMIs and exchanges to instantly move to T0, just from a reporting, risk, or cloud perspective— cloud perspective— I don't think that's realistic. But I believe that the competitive pressure on such institutions from new players is due to two forces: on the one hand, these are fintechs that can operate 24/7, do not have outdated infrastructure, and can work with these assets.

On the other hand, there are all those crypto institutions that are now getting banking licenses and registering in the US and registering in the US , which creates additional risk. So I think banks will move first, and market infrastructure will naturally move a little slower behind them. But I would say that we are still quite far from 24/7 markets. Well, since we're talking about what banks need, Benoit, I'm curious about your thoughts on this . Besides, you left us in a state of some intrigue.

You said we have tokenized money, maybe tokenized deposits and stablecoins. Both options can be used. Well, which one , or when do they complement each other, or do they compete with each other? The first question is—we are still in the early stages, we are building, so I cannot disclose the details disclose the details , but I know that some in this room and colleagues from other banks already have ready-made solutions for cryptocurrency as a retail product. When it comes to infrastructure, we have many options.

Of course, there are deposits in banks today . You have profits related to deposits. And, of course, we can ask ourselves: is it worth using a stablecoin that is not controlled by a bank controlled by a bank ? We may not have that kind of income. Or should we use tokenized deposits issued by the bank?

Or maybe it's worth using central bank money. I don't have an answer. I think it depends on the specific case. Cross-border payments may be such a case. This could be settlements based on our tokenized assets, meaning paying for assets in cash, and it also depends on which region you are in.

If we are in Europe, we already have the SEPA zone, where there are instant payments for retail customers, so it is quite easy between banks. You know that the ECB is also testing new blockchain-based solutions for interaction between banks. So in the future we may have something based on blockchain, but the truth is today that this number seems big, but if you clean it up, it's not that big. And again, the option of using a stablecoin for a bank could be attractive, I would say, but there are always pros and cons, and I didn't mention regulation, but because we are regulated, we are really dependent on the regulator. But we have a regulator, we have compatibility with other players.

What stablecoin do you use? Do they want to use tokenized assets? There may be money from the ECB. Again, I think time will tell which solution is best depending on the issue or problem we are facing. So, stablecoins are very popular today, but I believe that in the future we will be able to combine this with other solutions depending on the situation.

So you're talking about use cases, and when we discuss use cases for stablecoins, sometimes we abstract away from the currency, right? But conversations about stablecoins are sometimes dominated by the US dollar, and for other currencies the considerations may be different. Simon, how do you see the map changing as we introduce the euro and other stablecoins in different currencies, and what do we need to achieve that kind of network effect in this niche? I think the market structure we are seeing is a structure that grew out of the crypto business. And in the crypto business, everything is heavily tied to US dollars.

Yes? Dollar stablecoins are still unregulated still unregulated . This means that they have it in their hands, they can do whatever they want. And if they can do whatever they want, then in the short term it looks good for customers. Yes, I think this applies to applies to any financial instrument.

Yes? Until the big bang happens. And then customers cry, you introduce regulation, it gets better, but, for example, there are much fewer incentives. So right now it's driven by huge incentives in the crypto industry, and as long as unregulated flows are allowed through multi-issuance in Europe, and this loophole is not closed, the entire crypto industry in Europe will trade in US dollars. There is no incentive to change anything.

However, we see, and we have noticed this too, that the euro is not working very well. The Swiss franc has worked really, really well. This is quite strange. I think when we move to cases where we move away from purely crypto scenarios. Yes?

And I mean real corporate treasury, as you mentioned. For these cases, a corporate treasurer won't say, " treasurer won't say, " Hey, I'll buy a dollar stablecoin dollar stablecoin ." This doesn't make sense. It doesn't fit into his briefcase, so to speak. Yes?

So the closer we get from this 33 trillion in cryptocurrency to a realistic 15-20 trillion in the real economy— real economy— and I don't mean asset tokenization, I mean the real economy. Yes? Then we will also move to the same currency distribution that we are currently seeing in the market. Yes? I am sure of this because, ultimately, we Europeans do not want to be paid in US dollars.

We want to receive our salary in euros. We want to pay in euros want to pay in euros . We don't want to pay in US dollars like Europeans. It's very, very simple and clear. So the situation will change, but we have to go beyond crypto and start creating solutions that ordinary people can use.

And using MetaMask using MetaMask is not something that ordinary people would do . Yes, that's not the answer. Yes? You need something that you can use to pay at the point of sale without any problems. Good.

So, since we're short on time, I want to talk about the realistic projections that realistic projections that you just mentioned. I would like to ask a final question to each of the panelists, briefly if possible. What will be your definition of success in 3 years? It doesn't necessarily have to be ahead of Visa or MasterCard by any real metric real metric . What is success for you?

If there was an indicator that you were aiming for, what would you like to see in 3 years? Friends, who wants to start first? Uh, Hugo. Uh , yeah, I'll start. Um, I think further growth is, after all, the simplest answer.

Um, that is, the steady growth of stablecoin volumes in the future, especially in the context of use cases. Obviously, there was a lot of controversy surrounding the 33 trillion figure. Visa appears to have released adjusted volume for last year, which was around 10 trillion. So I guess another way to answer the question is to get to 33 trillion for real use cases, the real value that is used for stablecoins. I think we as an industry are fixated on numbers and percentages relative to current financial flows, and I don't think that's helpful to us in the long run.

So success probably has two sides, right? Stablecoins, tokenized deposits, and other forms of tokenized money should become part of everyday infrastructure. We don't need to know whether you are using a stablecoin issued by a specific organization or a tokenized deposit from Deutsche Bank. It is important to know that you have a digital form of the euro that can make calculations. I think this is number one.

And secondly number one. And secondly , we need to focus on the value that these financial flows bring. We focus on volume, but it's not necessarily related to value. If we can say that corporate treasurers have cut funding in certain markets by X% or that as a PSP I get paid in T0 instead of T+4. These are the stories we should be talking about on the panel in 3 years.

So less about numbers, more about value, I suppose. I will be brief on this matter. I think the first two points. The first point is the number of users, of course. So, retail, but also wholesale, right?

That is, institutional users and retailers. And maybe something we didn't mention, but as a crypto enthusiast, I'd be happy to see people's level of knowledge. Everyone here in the room and people outside, in Barcelona, in Spain, all over the world—knowledge about stablecoins. What do they think about stablecoins? What is a stablecoin?

How do we use stablecoins? Because it means that if they've heard about stablecoins and are using them every day with the help of all the players in this room, not just us, but everyone here, the entire industry, that's a great achievement. So, knowledge. I came into this industry through financial services. And the financial services industry tends to forget that it is a service industry.

So it's something that helps people, right? Something that helps in the real economy. This is how I define the financial industry for myself. So I want to be successful in 3 years with stablecoins, where they help real companies and people solve real world problems. Yes?

And I'm here with John to create value. Whatever the number, if stablecoins are really used to solve real problems, then as a CFO I can say: thanks to stablecoins it is faster and cheaper. I can do things I couldn't do before. As a private individual, I can buy here more profitably. The entire economy benefited because efficiency increased significantly.

This is what I would call success in what I am working on. I'm so glad I asked that last question. It was really interesting, we'll see in 3 years. Please join me in giving a round of applause to all of our wonderful speakers.