Stablecoin Worldview: Building a Multidimensional Classification Framework from the User's Perspective

With the widespread application of stablecoins in global payments, DeFi, and as a hedge against value storage, it can no longer be defined as a singular concept. There are significant differences in how different users understand and use stablecoins; it can be a primary tool for cross-border transfers or a core component of on-chain yields.

This means that the use cases of stablecoins vary from person to person and change according to needs. Driven by diversified demands, a multidimensional classification framework based on user intentions, risk trust, and technical architecture has become a key starting point for understanding the stablecoin ecosystem.

This article attempts to reconstruct the worldview of stablecoins from the user's perspective, based on three dimensions: user goals, risk models, and technical architecture, to establish a truly user-demand-driven and use-case-adaptive framework for understanding stablecoins.

1. Overview of Stablecoins in the Traditional Sense

The topic in the crypto world is diverse, but stablecoins remain the constant theme.

In traditional narratives, the market has long been accustomed to centering around the "anchoring mechanism", primarily categorizing stablecoins into three types:

• Fiat-backed: such as USDT, USDC, etc., pegged to the US dollar at a 1:1 ratio, with strong liquidity and high acceptance;
• Crypto-collateralized: such as DAI, RAI, which maintain their peg through over-collateralization of assets like ETH, emphasizing decentralization and censorship resistance;
• Algorithmic stablecoin: such as the already collapsed UST, relies on mechanism design and market expectations to regulate prices, without the need for real asset collateral;

In addition, there are stablecoins pegged to non-US dollar assets such as gold and euros, such as a certain gold stablecoin that has recently attracted attention, where each token represents one ounce of gold, supporting on-chain transfers and physical redemptions. Currently, it is stored in a self-built vault in Switzerland by the issuer, with a holding scale reaching 8 billion US dollars, making it one of the largest private holders of gold in the world.

In the past few years, this classification framework has provided us with a preliminary understanding of stablecoins, but in practical use, this method of classification based on anchoring mechanisms has become increasingly difficult to meet the understanding and choice needs of diverse users.

The core reason is that, as stablecoins break boundaries, the users are not all on-chain traders or DeFi players, which makes it difficult for a single anchoring mechanism to address the most concerned questions from users: "Is it suitable for me?" "Is it safe to use?" "Can it be used on the chains I frequently use?".

For example, both USDT and USDC are fiat-collateralized stablecoins, but their reserve structures, compliance levels, and market trust differ significantly. At the same time, new regulations ( such as the GENIUS Act and MiCA ) are also classifying based on usage and compliance, further complicating the traditional classifications to match the actual policy framework.

2. The Classification Dilemma of Stablecoins Under New Variables

Recently, the CEO of a stablecoin issuer explained in an interview that during the economic downturn since 2020, some developing countries have been greatly impacted, facing soaring prices, currency depreciation, and high unemployment rates, which have put many families in financial difficulty. Stablecoins like USDT can meet these families' needs to a certain extent, being used for storing value, cross-border remittances, and daily payments.

For this reason, in regions such as Latin America, the Middle East, and South Asia, many users have become global users who are first exposed to the crypto world. They use stablecoins due to the devaluation of their local currency and difficulties in cross-border transfers, and thus only care about their stability, fees, and whether they can cash out at any time.

In contrast, native Crypto players—experienced on-chain users, arbitrageurs, and institutional traders—have a completely different focus on stablecoins. They are more interested in native liquidity, protocol support, portfolio efficiency, and arbitrage paths, rather than just the anchoring mechanism.

This also means that the differentiation of the user base is becoming increasingly apparent, and the stablecoin sector must break out of the traditional framework of "fiat collateral/crypto collateral/algorithmic anchoring". When reconstructing classification logic from the user's perspective, the "change" of stablecoins, in essence, is the result of user demand and the market ecosystem jointly driving it.

This includes not only the explosion of stablecoin application scenarios ( from DeFi staking to cross-border salary distribution ), but also the differentiation of user groups and usage demands ( from capital preservation to high returns ), as well as the improvement of regulatory frameworks in a macro sense ( from the EU MiCA to the US GENIUS Act ). Therefore, in the eyes of users, the stablecoin world has already split into several parts:

• Crypto newcomers need a "simple and secure" stablecoin that allows them to safely store funds and learn gradually.
• DeFi enthusiasts focus on "yield potential", using stablecoins to lend on Aave and provide liquidity mining on Curve;
• Experienced traders pursue "extreme liquidity" and need stablecoins that can be quickly exchanged on mainstream exchanges.
• Global users place more emphasis on "low-cost cross-border payments", with on-chain fees and arrival speed being the core indicators;

The traditional classification system is destined to gradually become ineffective against the backdrop of today's increasingly diverse demands.

In short, there is no "best" stablecoin for the current Web3 world and the stablecoin sector; there is only a stablecoin that is "most suitable for a specific goal."

3. How to build a multidimensional stablecoin worldview?

It is against this background that, in order to allow every user to find the stablecoin that best suits them, we propose a stablecoin classification framework consisting of three core axes:

From the user's perspective of (, why use ), how safe is the risk trust of (, and where and how to use the technical architecture of ), the aim is to provide a clear picture for each type of stablecoin, helping users make informed judgments in complex scenarios.

1. User Intent and Financial Goals ( Why use )

This is a classification axis based on user motivations, clarifying the use cases of stablecoins and directly answering the question of "why use".

As we all know, the functions of stablecoins have long been diversified, with different options corresponding to different scenarios:

• Payment and value transfer: such as certain stablecoins, low fees, wide coverage, convenient for cross-border remittances;
• Capital preservation and risk hedging: Certain stablecoins are suitable for use as on-chain dollar accounts or for hedging in bear markets;
• Yield generation and wealth appreciation: Some new stablecoins generate native yield through a pegging mechanism and derivative hedging model;
• Use of collateral and leverage: such as certain mainstream stablecoins, the most commonly used collateral assets in DeFi protocols, facilitating lending and trading;

This classification can directly respond to the most common questions from users: I want to do X, which stablecoin should I choose?

2. Risk Status and Trust Model ( How Safe is )

This determines how much risk users are willing to take when making choices, with core elements including reserve composition, audit status, regulatory licenses, etc.

The highest tier includes bank-grade and regulated stablecoins, whose credibility is rooted in government regulation and the traditional financial system. Typical representatives are certain compliant stablecoins. Next are market-dominant and systemic stablecoins, such as certain mainstream stablecoins, whose trust mainly comes from enormous network effects and unmatched liquidity, although their regulatory status and reserve transparency are controversial.

Again, it is decentralized and on-chain verifiable stablecoins, such as certain DeFi stablecoins, where users trust the publicly auditable code and community consensus rather than a centralized entity; finally, there are synthetic assets and algorithm-driven stablecoins that represent cutting-edge exploration, such as some innovative stablecoins, whose trust is based on complex economic models and also comes with new types of risks that have not been long-tested.

Certain regulatory rating agencies have rated different stablecoins, confirming the real basis of this hierarchical framework.

3. Technical Architecture and Ecological Adaptation ( Where to Use & How to Use )

The third classification axis focuses on the technical architecture and ecosystem, determining "where and how to use" the stablecoin.

In short, the different deployment methods on different chains determine their availability, security, and cost structure, where the distinction between native and cross-chain deployment is crucial—native stablecoins are directly issued by the authorities, such as stablecoins on certain L2 networks (, which are more secure; cross-chain versions rely on cross-chain bridge mechanisms, which carry the risk of smart contract attacks;

Secondly, a stablecoin-dominated ecosystem determines its core application scenarios. For example, the Ethereum mainnet is more suitable for settlement due to its high security, while certain high-performance L1s attract a large amount of payment and transfer activities because of their low fees and high speed. Meanwhile, some Ethereum L2s are rapidly becoming the main venues for DeFi activities due to their low Gas fees and compatibility with Ethereum.

This means that users can choose the most suitable version among different networks based on on-chain costs and usage needs.

![Stablecoin Worldview: How to Build a Classification Framework for Stablecoins from the User's Perspective?])https://img-cdn.gateio.im/webp-social/moments-fdf375e43352dfb5380f9989bf941ed0.webp(

Summary

The essence of stablecoin is a tool that serves people.

From traditional classification to a multidimensional worldview, what has changed is not only the classification method but also the service to the actual needs of users. Therefore, there is no万能stablecoin, only stablecoins that fit specific scenarios:

For example, a complete description of certain mainstream stablecoins will incorporate the attributes of "capital preservation" and "collateral" according to user intent; in terms of risk conditions, it belongs to the first tier, "bank-grade and regulated"; in terms of technical architecture, it offers native versions across many mainstream L1 and L2.

This is far richer and more practical than simply saying "fiat-collateralized" stablecoin, as it can truly help users understand the trade-offs of different stablecoins in terms of security, yield potential, composability, and trading efficiency, allowing them to make the most informed choices based on their own needs.

In short, we believe that the ultimate value of stablecoins comes from the ability to "serve people". It should not merely be a derivative of the crypto narrative, but should become the one tool in the user's asset management toolbox that is closest to reality.

In the Web3 world, the best choice is always the one that is "suitable for you."

![Stablecoin Worldview: How to Build a Classification Framework for Stablecoins from the User's Perspective?])https://img-cdn.gateio.im/webp-social/moments-b006e91e6c0b9540cd36961beb95d7e1.webp(