IOSG Deep Dive into Stablecoin Public Chains: Plasma, Stable and Arc

Author: Sam @IOSG

Introduction

The Artemis research report for 2025 indicates that the economic scale settled by stablecoins in 2024 has reached approximately $26 trillion, which has achieved the level of mainstream payment networks. In contrast, the fee structure in the traditional payment sector is like an “invisible tax”: about 3% in handling fees, additional foreign exchange spreads, and ubiquitous wire transfer fees.

The payment with stablecoins compresses these costs to just a few cents or even lower. When the cost of transferring funds decreases dramatically, business models will be completely reshaped: platforms will no longer rely on transaction commissions for survival, but will instead compete on deeper value—such as savings yield, liquidity of funds, and credit services.

With the enactment of the U.S. GENIUS Act and the similar regulatory framework provided by Hong Kong's Stablecoin Ordinance, banks, card organizations, and fintech companies are moving from pilot phases to large-scale production applications. Banks are starting to issue their own stablecoins or establish close collaborations with fintech companies; card organizations are incorporating stablecoins into their backend settlement systems; fintech companies are launching compliant stablecoin accounts, cross-border payment solutions, on-chain settlements with built-in KYC, and tax reporting functions. Stablecoins are transforming from collateral within exchanges to standard payment “infrastructure.”

The existing shortcoming lies in user experience. The current wallet still presumes that users are well-versed in cryptocurrency knowledge; the fee differences across different networks are significant; users often need to hold a highly volatile token first to transfer a stablecoin pegged to the US dollar. However, the “no Gas fee” stablecoin transfers achieved through sponsored fees and account abstraction will completely eliminate this friction. Coupled with predictable costs, smoother fiat exchange channels, and standardized compliance components, stablecoins will no longer feel like “cryptocurrency”; their experience will truly converge with that of “currency.”

Core viewpoint: Public chains centered around stablecoins have already achieved the necessary scale and stability. To become a daily currency, they still need: consumer-level user experience, programmable compliance, and transactions with imperceptible fees. As these aspects—especially gas-free transfers and better fiat exchange channels—improve one by one, the focus of competition will shift from “charging for fund transfers” to “the value that can be provided around fund transfers,” including: yield, liquidity, security, and simple and trustworthy tools.

The following text will provide a quick overview of outstanding projects in the stablecoin/payment public chain space. This article will mainly focus on Plasma, Stable, and Arc, and delve into the issuers behind them, market dynamics, and other participants, which constitutes the panoramic view of this “stablecoin track war.”

Plasma

Plasma is a blockchain specially designed for USDT, aimed at becoming its native settlement layer, and optimized for high throughput and low latency stablecoin payments. It entered the private testnet in late May 2025, transitioned to the public testnet in July, and successfully launched the mainnet test version on September 25.

In the stablecoin payment public chain track, Plasma is the first project to conduct a TGE and has successfully launched in the market: it has captured strong mindshare, set records for first-day TVL and liquidity, and established partnerships with several blue-chip DeFi projects since its launch, laying a solid ecological foundation.

Since the launch of the autonomous network test version, its growth momentum is evident. As of September 29, deposits on the Plasma chain for Aave have exceeded $6.5 billion, making it the second-largest market; by September 30, more than 75,000 users have registered for its ecosystem wallet Plasma One. According to the latest data from DeFiLlama, the current Aave TVL on Plasma is $6 billion. Although it has retreated from its peak, it still firmly holds the position of Aave's second-largest market—second only to Ethereum ($53.9 billion) and significantly ahead of Arbitrum and Base (both around $2 billion). In addition, projects such as Veda, Euler, Fluid, and Pendle have also contributed considerable locked value.

▲ source: DeFiLlama

The early TVL growth of Plasma also benefited from the incentive budget: according to the official token economic model, 40% of the total XPL token supply is allocated to the ecosystem and growth fund. Of this, 8% (i.e., 800 million XPL) is immediately unlocked upon the launch of the mainnet test version for initiating DeFi incentives for partners, liquidity demand, and exchange integration; the remaining 32% (3.2 billion XPL) is gradually released monthly over three years. Currently, the main liquidity pools on the Plasma chain can still earn an additional return of about 2-8% through XPL rewards, beyond the base yield.

▲ source: Plasma

Of course, there is also commentary from the outside that believes its early growth was mainly driven by incentives, rather than being fully organic. As its CEO Paul emphasized, relying solely on crypto-native users and incentives is not a sustainable model; the real test lies in the practical application in the future - this will be a key focus for us to closely monitor.

Go-To-Market Strategy (Go-To-Market)

Plasma focuses on USDT. It emphasizes emerging markets, specifically targeting regions such as Southeast Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East. In these markets, the network effects of USDT are already the strongest, and stablecoins have become essential tools for remittances, merchant payments, and everyday peer-to-peer transfers. Implementing this strategic vision means a solid grassroots distribution will be required: advancing corridor by corridor, building an agency network, achieving localized user guidance, and accurately grasping regulatory opportunities in various regions. This also means establishing clearer risk boundaries than those of Tron.

Plasma views the developer experience as a moat and believes that USDT needs to provide a friendly developer interface like Circle has done for USDC. In the past, Circle invested heavily to make USDC easy to integrate and develop, while Tether has fallen short in this regard, leaving a huge opportunity for the USDT application ecosystem—provided that the payment rails can be properly packaged. Specifically, Plasma offers a unified API on top of the payment technology stack, allowing developers in the payment field to avoid assembling the underlying infrastructure themselves. Behind this single interface are pre-integrated partners, serving as plug-and-play foundational modules. Plasma is also exploring confidential payments—achieving privacy protection within a compliance framework. Its ultimate goal is very clear: “to make USDT extremely easy to integrate and develop.”

In summary, this market entry strategy dominated by payment corridors and the developer strategy centered around APIs ultimately converge on Plasma One—this is the consumer-facing front-end entry point that brings the entire plan to everyday users. On September 22, 2025, Plasma launched Plasma One, a “stablecoin-native” digital banking and card product designed for consumers, which integrates the functions of storing, spending, earning, and sending digital dollars into a single application. The team positions it as providing that missing unified interface for the hundreds of millions who have already relied on stablecoins but are still dealing with localized frictions (such as cumbersome wallets, limited fiat exchange channels, and reliance on centralized exchanges).

Access to this product is being phased open through a waitlist. Its main features include: direct payments from stablecoin balances that earn ongoing interest (target annualized over 10%), up to 4% cashback on spending, instant zero-fee USDT transfers within the app, and card services usable at over 150 countries and approximately 150 million merchants.

Business Model Analysis

Plasma's core pricing strategy aims to maximize daily usage while maintaining economic returns through other means: simple transfers of USDT are free, while all other on-chain operations incur fees. From the perspective of “blockchain GDP,” Plasma deliberately shifts value capture from the “consumption tax” (i.e., the Gas fee for basic USDT transfers) to application layer revenues. The DeFi layer corresponds to the “investment” segment in the framework: aimed at nurturing liquidity and yield markets. While net exports (i.e., USDT cross-chain bridging in/out) remain important, the economic focus has shifted from transaction fees to service fees for applications and liquidity infrastructure.

▲ source: Fidelity

For users, zero fees are not just about saving costs; they also unlock new use cases. When sending $5 no longer requires a $1 fee, micro-payments become feasible. Remittances can be received in full without deductions from intermediaries. Merchants can accept stablecoin payments without giving away 2-3% of their revenue to invoicing/billing software and card organizations.

On a technical level, Plasma operates a paymaster that complies with the EIP-4337 standard. The paymaster sponsors the Gas fees for the transfer() and transferFrom() function calls of the official USDT on the Plasma chain. The Plasma Foundation has pre-funded this paymaster using its native token XPL and employs a lightweight validation mechanism to prevent abuse.

Stable

Stable is a Layer 1 optimized for USDT payments, aimed at addressing the inefficiencies of the current infrastructure—including unpredictable fees, slow settlement times, and overly complex user experiences.

Stable positions itself as a payment-specific L1 “born for USDT”, with a market strategy of establishing direct partnerships with payment service providers (PSPs), merchants, business integrators, suppliers, and digital banks. PSPs favor this approach as Stable eliminates two operational challenges: managing the volatility of Gas tokens and bearing transfer costs. Given that many PSPs face high technical barriers, Stable is currently operating in a “service workshop” model—independently completing various integration tasks—while in the future, it will solidify these models into an SDK for PSPs to achieve self-service integration. To provide production-level guarantees, they have introduced “enterprise-level block space,” a subscription service that ensures VIP transactions are prioritized for packaging at the top of the block, thereby guaranteeing certain settlement within the first block and enabling smoother cost forecasting during network congestion.

In terms of regional strategy, its market entry closely follows the existing usage trajectory of USDT, implementing a “Asia-Pacific first” approach - and will subsequently expand to other USDT-dominant regions such as Latin America and Africa.

On September 29, Stable launched a consumer-facing application (app.stable.xyz) aimed at new, non-DeFi users. The app is positioned as a simple USDT payment wallet that meets daily needs (P2P transfers, merchant payments, rent, etc.), offering instant settlement, gas-free peer-to-peer transfers, and transparent, predictable fees paid in USDT. The app is currently only accessible through a waiting list. Promotional activities in South Korea have initially demonstrated its market appeal: Stable Pay attracted over 100,000 user registrations directly through offline booths (data as of September 29).

Stable achieves gas-free USDT payments by using EIP-7702. This standard allows users' existing wallets to temporarily become “smart wallets” in a single transaction, enabling them to run custom logic and settle fees without any separate gas tokens—all fees are priced and paid in USDT.

As shown in the flowchart by Tiger Research, the process is as follows: the payer initiates the payment; the EIP-7702 wallet applies for a Gas fee exemption from the Stable Paymaster; the Paymaster sponsors and settles the network fees; finally, the payee receives the full amount without any deductions. In practice, users only need to hold USDT.

▲ source: Tiger Research

In terms of business model, Stable adopts a strategy of prioritizing recent market share expansion, with revenue as a secondary consideration, using gas-free USDT payments to attract users and establish payment flow. In the long term, profitability will mainly come from within its consumer applications, supplemented by a selection of on-chain mechanisms.

In addition to USDT, Stable has also seen significant opportunities brought by other stablecoins. With PayPal Ventures investing in Stable at the end of September 2025, as part of the deal, Stable will natively support PayPal's stablecoin PYUSD and promote its distribution, allowing PayPal users to “directly use PYUSD” for payments, with Gas fees also paid in PYUSD. This means that PYUSD will also be gas-free on the Stable chain—this will extend the ease of operation of USDT payment tracks that attract PSPs to PYUSD.

▲ source:

Architecture Analysis

The architectural design of Stable begins with its consensus layer—StableBFT. This is a proof-of-stake protocol developed based on a customized CometBFT, aimed at providing high throughput, low latency, and high reliability. Its development path is pragmatic and clear: in the short term, it focuses on optimizing this mature BFT engine, while the long-term roadmap points towards a shift to a directed acyclic graph (DAG) design in pursuit of higher performance scalability.

Above the consensus layer, Stable EVM seamlessly integrates the core capabilities of the chain into the daily work of developers. Its dedicated precompiled contracts allow EVM smart contracts to safely and atomically call core chain logic. In the future, with the introduction of StableVM++, performance will be further enhanced.

Throughput also depends on data processing capabilities. StableDB effectively addresses the storage bottleneck issue after block generation by separating state commitments from data persistence. Finally, its high-performance RPC layer abandons the monolithic architecture and adopts a sharding path design: lightweight, specialized nodes serve different types of requests, thereby avoiding resource contention, improving long-tail latency, and ensuring real-time responsiveness even during significant increases in chain throughput.

The key point is that Stable positions itself as L1 rather than L2. Its core idea is that real-world business applications should not have to wait for upstream protocol updates to launch payment functions. By having full-stack control over the validator network, consensus strategy, execution layer, data layer, and RPC layer, the team can prioritize ensuring the core guarantees needed for payment scenarios, while maintaining EVM compatibility, allowing developers to easily migrate existing code. The final result is an EVM-compatible Layer 1 blockchain that is fully optimized for payments.

Arc

On August 12, 2025, Circle announced that its Layer 1 blockchain focused on stablecoins and payments—Arc—will enter a private testnet in the coming weeks, with a public testnet launching in the fall of 2025, aiming to launch the mainnet test version in 2026.

The core features of Arc are: it operates with a permissioned set of validators (running the Malachite BFT consensus engine), providing deterministic finality; its native gas fees are paid in USDC; and it offers an optional privacy layer.

▲ source: Arc Litepaper

Arc is directly integrated into the entire ecosystem platform of Circle—including Mint, CCTP, Gateway, and Wallet—allowing value to flow seamlessly between Arc, traditional fiat payment rails, and other blockchains. Businesses, developers, and consumers will transact through applications on Arc (covering payments, foreign exchange, asset tokenization, etc.), while asset issuers can mint assets on Arc and act as Paymasters to sponsor Gas fees for their users.

Arc uses a consensus engine called Malachite and employs a permissioned Proof-of-Authority mechanism, with its validator nodes being held by known authoritative institutions.

▲ source: Circle

Malachite is a Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus engine that applications can embed to achieve strong consistency protocols and finality among numerous independent nodes.

The green-labeled consensus library is the core of Malachite. Its internal round state machine adopts a Tendermint-style round mechanism (propose → pre-vote → pre-commit → commit). The voting guardian is responsible for aggregating votes and tracking the quorum. The driver coordinates these rounds over time, ensuring that the protocol can continue to make decisions even when some nodes are delayed or fail. This consensus library is deliberately designed for universality: it handles “numeric” in an abstract way, allowing different types of applications to connect.

The core module is surrounded by reliability and network infrastructure components marked in yellow. The peer-to-peer and gossip protocols transmit proposals and votes between nodes; the node discovery mechanism is responsible for establishing and maintaining connections. The pre-write log persistently stores key events locally, ensuring security when nodes crash and restart. The synchronization mechanism has dual paths for value synchronization and voting synchronization—lagging nodes can achieve data synchronization by obtaining the final confirmed output results (values) or by completing the missing intermediate votes required for ongoing decision-making.

Arc provides about 1 second of deterministic finality—once ≥2/3 of validators complete the confirmation, the transaction is immediately irreversibly finalized (with no risk of reorganization); Ethereum's Proof of Stake and its layer 2 solutions achieve economic finality after about 12 minutes, transitioning from an initial probabilistic phase that may experience reorganization to an “economic final” state; Bitcoin exhibits probabilistic finality—over time, as the confirmation count accumulates, it reaches an “economic security” state after about 1 hour, but mathematically, 100% finality can never be achieved.

▲ source: Arc Litepaper

Once ≥⅔ of the validators confirm the transaction, it changes from an “unconfirmed” status to 100% finality (there is no “reorganization probability tail”). This feature complies with Principle 8 of the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures (PFMI) regarding clear final settlement.

In terms of performance, Arc achieved a throughput of approximately 3000 TPS and a final confirmation delay of less than 350 milliseconds on 20 geographically distributed validation nodes; on 4 geographically distributed validation nodes, it achieved a throughput of over 10,000 TPS and a final confirmation delay of less than 100 milliseconds.

▲ source: Arc Litepaper

▲ source: Arc Litepaper

The upgrade plan for the Malachite consensus engine includes: support for a multi-proposer mechanism (expected to increase throughput by about 10 times), as well as an optional lower fault tolerance configuration (expected to reduce latency by about 30%).

At the same time, Arc has launched an optional confidential transmission feature for compliant payments: the transaction amount is hidden while the address remains visible, and the authorizer can obtain the transaction value through a selectively disclosed “view key.” The goal is to achieve “auditable privacy protection”—suitable for banks and enterprises that require on-chain confidentiality but cannot sacrifice compliance, reporting obligations, or dispute resolution mechanisms.

Arc's design choices focus on the predictability required by institutions and the deep integration with the Circle technology stack—but these advantages come with corresponding trade-offs: a permissioned PoA-style validation node set centralizes governance and oversight in known institutions, and BFT systems tend to stop functioning rather than fork in the event of network partitions or validation node failures. Critics argue that Arc resembles a walled garden or consortium chain aimed at banks, rather than a public network with trusted neutrality.

However, this trade-off is clear and reasonable for corporate needs: banks, payment service providers, and fintech companies prioritize certainty of final outcomes and auditability over extreme decentralization and permissionless features. In the long run, Circle has revealed plans to evolve towards a permissioned proof of stake, allowing qualified stakers to participate under forfeiture and rotation rules.

Using USDC as the native fuel currency, equipped with an institutional-grade pricing/foreign exchange engine, featuring sub-second certainty and finality, supporting optional privacy features, and deeply integrated with Circle's full-stack products, Arc encapsulates the fundamental capabilities that enterprises truly need into a complete payment rail.

Stablecoin Rail Wars

Plasma, Stable, and Arc are not simply three competitors in a straightforward race; they are different paths towards the same vision - allowing the dollar to flow as freely as information. Looking at the big picture, the real competitive focus emerges: the issuer camp (USDT vs USDC), the distribution moats on existing chains, and the permissioned tracks that are reshaping enterprise market expectations.

Issuer Camp: USDT to USDC

We are simultaneously witnessing two races: the competition among public chains and the contest among issuers. Plasma and Stable are obviously USDT-focused, while Arc belongs to Circle (the issuer of USDC). With PayPal Ventures investing in Stable, more issuers are flooding in—each vying for distribution channels. In this process, issuers will shape the market entry strategies, target areas, ecosystem roles, and overall development directions of these stablecoin public chains.

Plasma and Stable may have chosen different market paths and initial target areas, but their ultimate anchor point should be the market dominated by USDT.

Tether's USDT performs stronger in regions with more emerging markets, while Circle's USDC is more prevalent in Europe and North America. It is important to note that the study only covers EVM chains (Ethereum, BNB Chain, Optimism, Arbitrum, Base, Linea) and does not include the Tron network, where USDT usage is significant, therefore the actual footprint of USDT in the real world is likely underestimated.

▲ source: Decrypting Crypto: How to Estimate International Stablecoin Flows

In addition to differing regional focal points, the strategic choices of issuers are also reshaping their roles within the ecosystem—thereby influencing the priorities of stablecoin public chains. Historically, Circle has built a more vertically integrated tech stack (wallets, payments, cross-chain), while Tether has focused on issuance/liquidity and relies more on ecosystem partners. This differentiation now creates space for public chains focused on USDT (such as Stable and Plasma) to build more value chain segments on their own. Meanwhile, to facilitate multi-chain expansion, the design of USDT0 aims to unify the liquidity of USDT.

At the same time, Circle's ecosystem development has been cautious and cumulative: it started with the issuance and governance of USDC, then regained control by dissolving Centre and launching programmable wallets. Next came CCTP, which transformed it from relying on cross-chain bridges to adopting a native burn-mint transfer method, thereby unifying the cross-chain liquidity of USDC. By launching the Circle Payments Network, Circle connected on-chain value with off-chain commerce. Arc is the latest step in this strategy. Flanking these core pillars are services aimed at issuers and developers—Mint, Contracts, Gateway, and Paymaster (Gas fees priced in USDC)—which reduce reliance on third parties and tighten the feedback loop between products and distribution.

▲ source: Circle

Strategies for Existing Public Chains

The competition for stablecoin trading volume has always been fierce. The dynamic changes in the market landscape are clearly visible: it was initially dominated by Ethereum, followed by a strong rise of Tron, and in 2024 Solana emerged as a contender, while recently the Base chain has also gained momentum. No single chain can maintain its top position for long—even the deepest moats will face monthly share battles. With specialized public chains focusing on stablecoins entering the arena, competition is bound to intensify, but existing giants will not easily relinquish market share; it is foreseeable that they will adopt aggressive strategies in areas such as transaction fees, finality, wallet user experience, and integration of fiat exchange channels to defend and expand their stablecoin trading volume.

▲ source: Stablewatch

Major public chains have taken action:

• BNB Chain launched the “Zero Fee Carnival” at the end of the third quarter of 2024, collaborating with multiple wallets, centralized exchanges, and bridges to fully waive users' USDT and USDC transfer fees. This event has been extended to August 31, 2025.
• The direction of the TRON network is similar; its governance body has approved a reduction in the network's “energy” unit price and plans to launch a “Gas-free” stablecoin transfer solution in the fourth quarter of 2024, further solidifying its position as a low-cost stablecoin settlement layer.
• TON takes a different approach by completely hiding complexity through the Telegram interface. When users transfer USDT to contacts, the experience is “zero fee” (the actual cost is borne or absorbed by the Telegram wallet within its closed-loop system), and normal network fees are only required when withdrawing to an open public chain.
• The core narrative of Ethereum L2 is structural upgrades rather than short-term promotions. The Blob space introduced by the Dencun upgrade significantly reduces the data availability cost of Rollups, enabling them to pass on the saved fees to users. Starting from March 2024, transaction fees for major L2s have significantly decreased.

Permissioned Rails

A parallel track to public chains is accelerating its development: building permissioned ledgers for banks, market infrastructure, and large enterprises.

The most notable new member is Google Cloud Universal Ledger—a permissioned Layer 1. Google states that its target applications are wholesale payments and asset tokenization. Although details are limited, its leaders position it as a neutral, bank-grade chain, and the CME Group has completed preliminary integration testing. GCUL is a non-EVM chain, independently developed by Google, running on Google Cloud infrastructure, using Python smart contracts. It is far from a public chain, and its model is based on trust in Google and regulated nodes.

▲ source:

If GCUL is a single cloud hosting track, then the Canton Network adopts a “network of networks” model. It is built around the Daml smart contract stack from Digital Asset, connecting applications with independent governance, allowing assets, data, and cash to synchronize across different domains while providing fine-grained privacy and compliance controls. Its list of participants includes numerous banks, exchanges, and market operators.

HSBC Orion (HSBC Digital Bond Platform) has been launched since 2023 and hosted the European Investment Bank's first digital bond denominated in pounds - issuing £50 million under the Luxembourg DLT framework through a combination of private and public blockchains.

In terms of payments, JPM Coin has been providing value transfer services for institutions since 2020, supporting programmable intraday cash flow on the rails operated by JPMorgan Chase. By the end of 2024, the bank will reorganize its blockchain and tokenization product line into Kinexys.

The core of these efforts throughout is pragmatism: retaining regulatory guardrails and a clear governance structure while drawing on the essence of public chain design. Whether achieved through cloud services (GCUL), interoperability protocols (Canton), product issuance platforms (Orion), or payment tracks operated by banks (JPM Coin/Kinexys), permissioned ledgers converge on the same commitment: achieving faster, auditable settlements under institutional-level control.

Conclusion

Stablecoins have crossed the threshold from a niche area of cryptocurrency to the scale of payment networks, and the economic impact that comes with it is profound: when the cost of transferring one dollar approaches zero, the profit margin from charging for fund transfers disappears. The profit center of the market has shifted to the value that can be provided around the transfer of stablecoins.

The relationship between stablecoin issuers and public chains is increasingly evolving into an economic tug-of-war over who captures the reserve income. As we see in the case of Hyperliquid's USDH, its stablecoin deposits generate approximately $200 million in treasury yield annually, which flows to Circle rather than its own ecosystem. By issuing USDH and adopting a 50/50 revenue-sharing model with Native Markets—half used to repurchase HYPE tokens through an assistance fund and half for ecosystem growth—Hyperliquid has “internalized” this portion of income. This could be another development direction beyond “stablecoin public chains,” where existing networks capture value by issuing their own stablecoins. A sustainable model would be an ecosystem where issuers and public chains share economic benefits.

Looking to the future, auditable privacy payments will gradually become the standard configuration for payroll, treasury management, and cross-border capital flows. This is not achieved by creating a “completely anonymous privacy chain” but rather by hiding specific amounts in transactions while keeping the counterparty addresses visible and auditable. Stable, Plasma, and Arc all adopt this model: providing companies with user-friendly privacy protection and selective disclosure features, compliance interfaces, and predictable settlement experiences, thus achieving “hidden when confidentiality is needed, transparent when it can be checked.”

We will see more features tailored to enterprise needs launched by stablecoin/payment public chains. Stable's “secured block space” is a typical example: it is a reserved capacity channel that ensures payroll, treasury, and cross-border payments can be settled with stable latency and costs even during peak traffic times. It is like reserved instances in cloud services, but applied to on-chain settlement.

With the emergence of the next generation of stablecoins/payment public chains, this will unlock more opportunities for applications. We have already seen strong momentum for DeFi on Plasma, as well as consumer-facing front ends like Stable Pay and Plasma One, but a bigger wave is still ahead: digital banking and payment applications, smart agent wallets, QR code payment tools, on-chain credit, risk grading, and a new class of interest-bearing stablecoins and the financial products built around them.

The era in which the dollar can flow as freely as information is coming.

Sources

The Future of Finance Belongs to Stablechains

The Infrastructure Revolution: Gas-Free USDT Transfers and the Future of Digital Payments

en/introduction/technical-roadmap

en/architecture/usdt-specific-features/overview

How Stable Powers The Real-World Wallet Stack

: : Stable: A Digital Nation of USDT, by USDT, for USDT

: : [Issue] How Stable Can Be the Next Growth Catalyst of Tether

DeFiying gravity? An empirical analysis of cross-border Bitcoin, Ether and stablecoin flows

Rich Widmann’s post:

0xResearch Plasma interview:

Bitfinex Plasma interview:

Plasma: The Stablecoin Singularity:

Plasma MiCA whitepaper:

Litepaper - 2025.pdf