Institutional players are up to new tricks. Recently, a blockchain financial company’s move to apply for a federal trust bank license has sparked heated discussions. Their core business targets the institutional stablecoin ecosystem—issuance, custody, and exchange in one seamless process. Over the past year, they secured $3.3 billion in institutional orders. What’s behind this operation?



Simply put, it’s about transforming stablecoins from the "gray area" into the "mainstream." Institutional funds have a strong demand for stablecoins, focusing on efficiency and compliance. But the problem is that traditional banks are generally reluctant to engage with crypto assets. So, some players have decided to obtain their own banking licenses to seamlessly connect stablecoins with traditional finance—b bypassing middlemen.

The logical chain is quite clear. First, compliance licenses have become a hard requirement for institutional entry, giving stablecoin services a legal framework and directly lowering barriers to entry. Second, Wall Street and traditional financial institutions’ funds may shift massively toward the crypto market, with stablecoins serving as the most convenient transition channel. Third, this custody and exchange model could potentially unlock cross-chain ecosystems in the future, making stablecoin applications on public chains like Solana, Polkadot, and Avalanche even more attractive.

But risks must also be clearly understood. U.S. regulators’ attitudes toward "crypto banks" are often unpredictable, and the outlook for license approval remains uncertain. Meanwhile, there are many competitors—various stablecoin issuers have long been eyeing institutional orders, and this company's moat may not be very deep. Ordinary investors should be especially cautious; the volatility of institutional-grade stablecoins could be much more sensitive than expected. Don’t follow the trend blindly.

This indeed seems like a new battleground between traditional finance and the crypto world. Ultimately, it all depends on how regulators decide.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 9
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
LightningClickervip
· 17h ago
Ha, 3.3 billion in orders is not a small number, but is this moat really a fortress? --- Regulators turn hostile and licenses are gone, gambling on national fortune is too risky --- Bypassing middlemen to become a bank directly? That idea is really clever --- Wait, institutional-level stablecoins still fluctuate a lot? Isn't that just a casino? --- If Wall Street were to enter on a large scale, they would have done it already. Whether it succeeds this time is another story --- When the Solana ecosystem can't run smoothly, stablecoins still remain popular—what's the big deal? --- Again, institutional players are making moves, and I, as a retail investor, just watch the show --- Honestly, they just want to use compliance as a cover to hide the essence of crypto. Will regulators agree? --- 3.3 billion last year, can it be preserved this year? I doubt it --- Traditional finance suddenly recognizing stablecoins? The level of this act is a bit over the top
View OriginalReply0
DAOdreamervip
· 17h ago
A $3.3 billion order sounds great, but this moat is really fragile. It could all be over if regulators turn hostile.
View OriginalReply0
FlashLoanKingvip
· 01-10 01:05
It's the same trick again—opening your own bank to bypass regulations? That's naive, my friend. Americans are very unpredictable.
View OriginalReply0
MoonBoi42vip
· 01-09 08:51
Wow, 3.3 billion in orders? This moat is really shallow; it'll be wiped out sooner or later.
View OriginalReply0
MetaMiseryvip
· 01-09 08:43
It's another new trick for institutions to harvest retail investors. The 3.3 billion order sounds impressive, but in the end, it's still retail investors who get burned.
View OriginalReply0
MoodFollowsPricevip
· 01-09 08:37
It's the same old story again. A $3.3 billion order sounds impressive, but if regulators turn hostile, it's all for nothing.
View OriginalReply0
MEVHuntervip
· 01-09 08:30
nah the real play here is watching the mempool for regulatory arbitrage spreads... they're literally building the bridge while the sec is asleep lol
Reply0
PuzzledScholarvip
· 01-09 08:28
3.3 billion orders sound impressive, but can this moat really hold up? Once regulators turn hostile, it's all over.
View OriginalReply0
NFTRegrettervip
· 01-09 08:22
3.3 billion USD order sounds impressive, but can the moat really block these competitors?
View OriginalReply0
View More
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
English
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)