Most people think stablecoins, CBDCs, and tokenized deposits are fighting to the death. They're not. They're building the same highway.
Here's what 99% of debate gets wrong:
These aren't competing technologies.
They're solving different problems for different people:
🧵
Think of it like this:
- Stablecoins = Highway for the unbanked (or global south x global south trade)
- Tokenized Deposits = On-ramp for Fortune 500s
- CBDCs = Settlement layer for central banks
All three go onchain.
All three win.
The GENIUS Act was an inflection point and I've noticed tier-1 banks completely flip their approach.
GSIBs like Deutsche Bank. Wells Fargo. JP Morgan is now actively becoming a partner bank to the stablecoin sector as off ramps (payments access).
It doesn't take a giant leap to see them go from supporting with Tokenized Deposits.
Why?
- Fortune 5000 companies will want their big banks to continue to support them
- But they'll also want access to this new cross-border rail
- Banks can make that easy
- And if they go onchain, they can also start bringing their balance sheet (lending) capacity onchain too
When a Fortune 500 company holds tokenized deposits from JP Morgan, they don't need to "off-ramp" to pay their stablecoin suppliers.
The off-ramp disappears.
TradFi becomes backward compatible with DeFi.
And I'm hopeful the presence of a law and the GSIB banks means we can avoid a 2020s BaaS like blow up.
That era's over.
GSIBs (Global Systemically Important Banks) are now the ones providing infrastructure to major stablecoin issuers.
Not because they're being nice.
Because they finally have regulatory clarity.
And because it's a massive commercial opportunity.
So here's my framework for stablecoins vs tokenized deposits
- Stop thinking about digital money as a winner-take-all battle.
- Start thinking about it as infrastructure that makes all money better.
Instant. 24/7. Global.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
While everyone is debating Stablecoins. Pay by Bank is quietly becoming a FORCE in payments.
TrueLayer just launched Pay by Bank with Stripe in Germany.
But here's the timeline that explains why this matters:
2019: "What's Pay by Bank?"
2021: "Interesting experiment in the UK"
2023: "We should probably test this"
2024: Every major PSP picks their dance partner
2025: The invasion begins
Stripe + TrueLayer aren't just expanding to Germany.
They're taking the fight directly to Adyen + Tink's strongest market.
The numbers that explain why this was inevitable:
→ TrueLayer processes €1.4B annually in Germany
→ Merchants see 42% conversion uplift with Pay by Bank
→ Card fees: 1.5-2.9% vs Pay by Bank: 0.1-0.3%
Why did Kalshi just raise $185m at a $2bn valuation more than DOUBLE Polymarket's recent reported $1bn?
- Polymarket dominated election coverage.
- Had 10X the volume.
- Every journalist quoted their odds.
- They owned the narrative.
- But they can't touch US users.
The biggest prediction market in history... banned from its biggest market.
Kalshi is CFTC-regulated and able to advertise to US customers.
But what about prediction markets generally? Isn't it just gambling?
When you can't afford a house, can't trust institutions, can't build wealth through traditional means... why not bet on elections?
This is financial nihilism pricing in.
The social contract broke.
Prediction markets filled the void.
Young Americans are gambling because the "legitimate" path to wealth feels rigged anyway. Same odds, different casino.
But institutions see something else entirely.
- Paradigm didn't invest in sports betting.
- They invested in the infrastructure for conditional finance.
- Prediction markets are just conditional settlement rails.
🚨 BREAKING: Revolut — the neobank with 50M customers — is quietly building its own stablecoin.
Does everyone need their own stablecoin? Can this threaten Circle and Tether's dominance?
Revolut has a distribution advantage:
- 50M active customers
- Full banking in 30+ countries (EU + UK + MX)
- Live crypto exchange already running (Revolut X)
- Crypto support in their core product
Is this a good business case?
If they got to $7.5B in stablecoin assets at current treasury yield that's ~$300M+ annual revenue
- Tether made $5.2B profit last year.
- Circle has to give away most of its profit for distribution
- Revolut *already has distribution*
Visa wants to give AI Agents "tokens" so they can pay without you ever seeing a checkout page.
Visa's CEO told investors this is their #1 priority.
Here's how it will work 👇
Imagine telling your Agent.
"I want a signed Pedro Pascal shirt from The Last of Us" don't spend more than $100" -
Then you tap your phone.
The next thing you know, the payment is complete.
Let's unpack the flow as I understood it 👀
1. Tap a card to a device to get a token for their AI Agent 2. The AI Agent registers with the network as a "trusted wallet" in the same way Apple Pay can register with networks and processors 3. The user gives the AI Agent a mandate (Find a Pedro Pascal shirt, don't spend more than $100) 4. The Auth instructions are finalized ($100 budget, Pedro shirt) 5. The Auth instructions define when step-up or biometric authentication is required (e.g. > $100, or some level of fraud risk detected) 6. The auth instructions are matched between the Agent, and the network at the Merchant (e.g. This agent has a mandate to buy for a max of $100 this SKU) 7. The payment is complete. BUT, Liability remains with the merchant for fraud (!!)