Stablecoins as banking complements: why banks should stop being afraid

When stablecoins exploded onto the scene in 2019, the global financial system panicked. The prevailing narrative was simple: consumers would massively withdraw deposits from traditional banks to hold “digital dollars” directly on their phones, completely bypassing financial intermediaries. It was a reasonable fear, at least in theory. But economic reality proved to be more complex.

The “stickiness” no one had considered

The modern banking model relies on a fundamental principle often overlooked: friction itself is a feature, not a bug. Checking accounts remain central to financial life not because they offer the best returns, but because they represent a gravitational node. Mortgages, credit cards, direct deposits, recurring transfers — everything converges in one place. This phenomenon, which Professor Will Cong of Cornell University has called “sticky deposits,” creates an extraordinary gravitational force.

For most users, completely abandoning their bank account means facing enormous logistical complexity. It’s not just about earning a few extra basis points: it means completely reorganizing the infrastructure of their daily financial life. The economic friction, measured in terms of time and complexity, far exceeds the marginal benefit.

And what does empirical reality say? Despite the market capitalization of stablecoins exploding in recent years, rigorous academic research has found no significant correlation between the emergence of these tools and massive outflows of bank deposits. The data speak for themselves: the “apocalyptic rush” many predicted did not occur.

Stablecoins not as substitutes, but as complements to the traditional system

This does not mean stablecoins are irrelevant. On the contrary: their mere existence exerts extraordinary competitive pressure on the banking system. When depositors have a credible alternative, even just theoretically available, the cost of inertia skyrockets for banks.

They can no longer passively rely on customer inertia. They are forced to offer more competitive interest rates, more sophisticated operational interfaces, and services truly aligned with user needs. In this sense, stablecoins act as complements to the banking system — they do not destroy it, but force it to evolve.

Cornell University’s study highlights a crucial aspect: rather than “shrinking the pie,” the introduction of stablecoins promotes an overall expansion of credit and financial intermediation, with net benefits for the end consumer. Banks should not see them as enemies, but as catalysts for forced innovation.

The enabling role of regulation

Regulatory authorities were rightly concerned about specific risks: especially the possibility of “bank runs” on stablecoin issuers in case of market loss of confidence. But these are not new risks in finance. The same dynamics occur regularly in other forms of financial intermediation, and established frameworks already exist to manage them.

The “GENIUS Act,” signed by President Trump in July 2025, embodies exactly this approach: not inventing new physical laws of economics, but applying existing financial engineering to an innovative technological form. The law requires stablecoins to be fully backed by cash, US short-term government securities, or insured deposits — a minimum standard addressing the main vulnerabilities identified by academic research.

Requiring full reserves and the right of redemption, the regulatory framework transforms what was seen as a shadow banking activity into a transparent and solid extension of the national financial infrastructure. The Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency will oversee practical implementation, ensuring issuers adequately address operational risks, custodial complexities, and integration with blockchain systems.

The true dividend: cross-border efficiency

This is where the real economic potential emerges. The “basic pipes” of the modern financial system are built on outdated technologies and layered processes spanning decades. The true value of stablecoins is not just 24/7 availability, but “atomic settlement”: the instant cross-border transfer of value without counterparty risk, a problem that the current financial system has never fully solved.

Currently, international transfers remain slow and costly. Funds pass through a chain of correspondent intermediaries, taking days for final settlement. Stablecoins compress this entire process into a single on-chain, irreversible, and instant transaction. For global liquidity management, this presents an extraordinary opportunity: capital previously “locked in transit” for days is freed and made immediately available.

Even in domestic markets, the same settlement efficiency offers significantly faster and cheaper payment pathways for merchants. For the banking sector, this is a rare opportunity to modernize settlement infrastructure maintained with temporary solutions and legacy code.

The strategic choice for the United States

The US faces a crossroads: actively lead the development of this technology, or watch the future of finance take shape in offshore jurisdictions. The dollar remains the most used financial instrument worldwide, but the supporting infrastructure is becoming increasingly outdated.

The “GENIUS Act” is not just a regulatory reform: it represents a strategy of competitive modernization. By including stablecoins within clear regulatory boundaries, the United States transforms a potentially disruptive innovation into a central component of the national financial architecture. This is what a true “global upgrade of the dollar” means.

The imperfect parallel of the music industry

Banks today are in a position similar to the recording industry in the early 2000s. Initial resistance to streaming models seemed rational — protecting revenues from a past era. But those who ultimately understood the transition discovered new sources of value and fully re-monetized business models.

Stablecoins do not represent the disappearance of the banking sector, but its transformation. When banks stop earning from “payment delays” and start monetizing “speed” and efficiency, they will find that this transition was actually a gold mine of opportunities. The banking complements that stablecoins are do not pose a threat, but serve as catalysts for an evolution that the financial system, if resisted, would have had to face anyway.