Stablecoins and FX Automation for a Multi-Currency World | EBC12

Executive summary

The panel argued that stablecoins and tokenized money are most valuable where they improve cross-border payment speed, collateral mobility, and automation—not simply where existing payment systems already work well. Adoption at scale depends on deep liquidity, interoperability, regulatory clarity, trusted reserves, and bank-grade custody.

For most businesses, the underlying payment rail should remain invisible: banks and providers can route transactions to the best option based on cost, speed, access, and risk.

Business strategies and operating models

• Prioritize difficult payment corridors. BBVA’s Gabriel Lera Campo said stablecoins may be most useful where traditional cross-border transfers are slow or inconvenient. One example discussed was African businesses buying euro stablecoins, sending them to Europe, converting them to euros, and paying through SEPA Instant.
• Use faster settlement to improve treasury and collateral operations. Deutsche Bank’s Immo Garlichs highlighted that moving collateral more quickly can help clients increase transaction capacity when they are constrained by funds held in the wrong place.
• Automate the full payment-and-FX process. Panelists said combining programmable stablecoin transfers with on-chain FX could automate payment timing and currency conversion, as well as move collateral across borders.
• Make the payment rail an intelligent routing decision. BBVA’s view was that most customers should not need to choose between SWIFT, SEPA Instant, stablecoins, or tokenized deposits. Banks should select the appropriate route—much like automated best execution in FX—according to the customer’s needs.
• Match solutions to customer segments. A bank-managed FX and payment service may suit a company with occasional international payments. Multinationals with large, recurring flows may want greater control through dedicated currency accounts or stablecoin corridors as part of treasury management.
• Build for distinct forms of money rather than assuming one will dominate. Stablecoins, tokenized deposits, and wholesale CBDCs have different access, risk, and settlement characteristics. The panel described them as complementary components of an emerging monetary stack.

Frameworks and practical playbooks

Choose a form of money using three criteria

1. Use case: What payment, settlement, or treasury task must be done?
2. Access: Can the organization legally and operationally use the instrument?
3. Risk profile: What settlement, issuer, collateral, and liquidity risks are acceptable?

Scale in stages

One proposed ordering of industry bottlenecks was liquidity → interoperability → distribution → regulation, with demand considered less of a constraint than the underlying “plumbing.” Other panelists stressed that regulation and trust are essential prerequisites for liquidity and adoption.

Develop institutional trust

Important operational foundations include transparent reserves, reliable liquidity management, sufficient market makers, and consistent valuation and accounting treatment.

Design for the end user

Banks should hide blockchain complexity behind familiar interfaces and adapt services to customers’ technical knowledge, rather than expecting corporate treasurers to manage blockchain transactions directly.

Treat technology investment as a long-term competitiveness decision

Digital-asset custody and transaction capabilities add costs before they produce scale benefits. Banks may still need to invest to preserve market share and modernize aging infrastructure.

Companies, products, and examples

• Qivalis: Jan-Oliver Sell described a planned euro stablecoin issuer backed by a consortium of 37 European banks. The company was applying for a license and hoped to launch later that year. Its stated goal was to put the euro on-chain with institutional-grade trust and liquidity.
• STBL: Sudeep Mehta described infrastructure for issuing stablecoins backed by different on-chain real-world assets. Its model aims to let institutions select collateral while providing liquidity and interoperability—described as “money as a service.”
• Deutsche Bank: Immo Garlichs announced that the bank expected to launch digital-asset custody for corporate and institutional clients “in a couple of weeks,” according to the panel. He framed stablecoins as a potential addition to the bank’s existing payments and FX services.
• BBVA: Gabriel Lera Campo described work on cryptocurrency, tokenized money and assets, and digital-asset trading services, alongside efforts to develop tokenized money within the banking system.
• Trade finance example: A panelist said trade-finance businesses using stablecoins had seen a multi-fold increase in the availability of supplies because funds could move in minutes rather than days. The panel presented this as an example of faster settlement potentially changing operating models, not just transaction speed.

Key metrics and targets

• The panel cited a BIS figure for the OTC FX market of $9.6 trillion for 2020–2025; the wording in the subtitles is unclear on the precise measurement period.
  • 41% swaps
  • 33% spot transactions
  • 19% forwards
• The euro was described as accounting for roughly 20–25% of cross-border payments and about 30% of global bond issuance—figures used to argue that euro-denominated stablecoins could have a significant role.
• A Deutsche Bank panelist said about 90% of the value sent through SWIFT arrives in under an hour, while the remaining portion may leave room for improvement.
• A panelist cited a survey indicating that only 15% of banks had a digital-asset custody solution and could move digital assets. He suggested that broader bank access would be a meaningful adoption indicator; the panel did not set a firm percentage target.
• 2030 outlook: Panelists said success would mean blockchain-based payment infrastructure becoming routine and largely invisible, banks and regional institutions participating as liquidity providers, and at least some payments moving over blockchain rails. They also called for genuinely new products and processes, not only existing systems replicated on-chain.

Risks and adoption barriers

• Liquidity and convertibility: Multiple stablecoins and currencies need deep, shared liquidity to enable competitive exchange. Stablecoin-to-stablecoin and non-European currency pairs may remain difficult without appropriate market infrastructure.
• Fragmented regulation: MiCA was described as providing a framework in Europe, but cross-jurisdictional differences can limit trading and create complications for foreign stablecoins and multi-issuer models. Panelists favored working toward regulatory equivalence or common minimum standards.
• Bank capital and accounting treatment: Stablecoins’ capital impact and their treatment as cash equivalents can constrain bank usage. Inconsistent valuation approaches may also make banks less competitive or less willing to hold them.
• Reserve and redemption risk: A stablecoin needs enough liquid assets to meet outflows, including during periods of market stress. Proof of reserves and credible liquidity planning were presented as fundamental requirements.
• Collateral risk and yield: STBL’s model separates principal from yield and allows different asset types, including money-market instruments and private credit. The panel noted that higher-yielding collateral carries greater risk and may not satisfy current regulatory requirements.
• Infrastructure and skills: Banks face the cost of adopting custody and transaction systems while maintaining legacy infrastructure. Business adoption also depends on making blockchain-based services usable for customers without specialist expertise.
• Foreign-currency effects: Panelists noted that importing foreign stablecoins could create economic risks for countries with weaker currencies, while inconsistent consumer-protection and collateral standards may undermine confidence.

Presenters and sources

• Aaron Sanchez — Director of Industry Engagement, MiCA Alliance (moderator; organization name is imperfectly rendered in the subtitles)
• Gabriel Lera Campo — BBVA
• Immo Garlichs — Deutsche Bank
• Sudeep Mehta — STBL
• Jan-Oliver Sell — Qivalis