Value Distribution of Stablecoins

Author: @0xjiawei

The previous chapters discussed the general direction: stablecoins are transitioning from mere trading tools to a broader channel for US dollars.

In this chapter, let's take a look at how the stablecoin pie is divided.

I will categorize stablecoins into four layers:

1. Issuance Layer: Minting stablecoins, holding reserve assets, and earning interest differentials. Representatives are Tether and Circle;
2. Infrastructure Layer: Integrating stablecoins into the real financial system—fiat currency deposits and withdrawals, bank connections, asset management, and compliance. Representatives: Bridge (acquired by Stripe), BVNK (acquired by Mastercard), Bitso, Yellow Card, etc.
3. Acquiring/Distribution Layer: Embedding stablecoins into merchant systems, managing payment processes, and enterprise financial software. Representatives: Stripe, Infini, Coinbase.
4. Application Layer: Users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlements, and value storage.

The issuance layer captures user funds and takes the largest interest differentials; the middle two layers rely on traffic, distribution commissions, and underlying infrastructure; the application layer enjoys convenience but lacks bargaining power.

I think the infrastructure layer is currently not favored by many.

It does the dirty and labor-intensive work: connecting banks, performing KYC/AML, handling local fiat deposits and withdrawals, onboarding merchants, connecting APIs, connecting card organizations, and solving settlement and regulatory issues across different countries.

But conversely, this is also where the moat lies. Because the technology of stablecoins, to put it simply, is not difficult to transfer USDC on-chain; the real challenge is penetrating the real world, getting a Latin American company, an African payment provider, or an overseas platform to be willing to incorporate stablecoins into their daily cash flow. These dirty and labor-intensive tasks must be done by someone.

The on-chain part is the simplest, the part between the chain and reality is the hardest

At first glance, one might think: transferring on-chain is quick, confirmations are fast, transaction fees are low, isn't the rest just about distributing products to users?

But the real difficulty with stablecoins lies in the large segment between the chain and the real financial system. Enterprises have decision-making and migration costs; they won't switch their well-functioning workflows just because they hear that stablecoins arrive in one second.

There will be a series of questions: How do you convert fiat to stablecoins? How do you convert back? How do you handle reconciliation and taxes? Will banks block me in the future? Do users still need to learn how to use wallets?

The core work of the infrastructure layer is to connect both sides: one side connects to the chain and wallets, while the other connects to banks, local payment networks, enterprise systems, and compliance.

Stripe acquired Bridge in 2025, buying a stablecoin orchestration system from Bridge—helping enterprises integrate stablecoin capabilities into their business systems. Mastercard announced the acquisition of BVNK in March 2026 for similar reasons.

In other words, traditional payment companies are competing for the entry point of who can become the default channel for enterprises to use stablecoins.

Whether stablecoin payments can scale hinges on this.

Paving the Way

Taking a step further, let's look at the infrastructure layer:

1. Deposits + Currency Exchange. Most enterprise scenarios must go through the process of "local currency → stablecoin → local currency." This involves issues like banking relationships, compliance, liquidity, etc.
2. API + Account Layer. Enterprises need a set of funding capabilities embedded in their business processes—account opening, payment collection, revenue sharing, clearing, reconciliation. This is somewhat like financial SaaS, similar to the Neobank concept.
3. Payment Network Connections. The more payment rails, banks, and regions connected, the more customers will form dependencies, and the switching costs will gradually increase.
4. Capital Efficiency. Helping enterprises reduce idle money, wait times, and currency exchange losses.

I believe it has three characteristics that determine it will be bitter before it gets sweet.

• Hard and dirty work. Connecting banks country by country, ensuring compliance, obtaining licenses, and building local teams.
• Need to burn money to seize entry points. Enterprises will not easily change their payment infrastructure. Whoever first secures major clients, banking relationships, compliance pathways, and local fiat rails will have the network effect later. These companies are currently more like in the "land grab" phase, far from reaping the rewards.
• Sandwiched between upstream and downstream. Upstream issuers take the interest differentials first, while downstream platforms want to control user entry. The infrastructure stands in the middle, in a somewhat awkward position, easily becoming "everyone needs you, but no one wants you to earn too much."

Currently, it is in the middle stage of moving towards "forming bargaining power."

If we only look at today, the issuance layer takes the largest profits, while the infrastructure layer is thinner and heavier.

But if we really talk about investing in stablecoins, the logic of the issuance layer's seigniorage has already been clearly understood by the market, and pricing will increasingly revolve around interest rates, regulations, and yield returns. The infrastructure layer may not be very eye-catching today, often simply because it is still in the early investment phase, and bargaining power and user habits have not yet fully formed.

Once stablecoins further become the default funding channel for enterprises, those who have integrated stablecoins into real business systems over the years will truly sit comfortably.