Recently, I’ve been pondering a question: why does Visa allow you to swipe your card at any merchant worldwide without issue, yet the underlying settlement still runs on SWIFT? The senior executives at Visa now working on Beam have a very sobering judgment — digital payments have become mainstream, but settlement hasn’t.

What’s the reason behind this? It’s actually because the PSP (Payment Service Provider) layer has been designed far too simply. Twenty years ago, PSP was just a gateway connecting merchants to bank card networks, with a very linear process. But now? A single payment must go through application layers, PSP layers, compliance checks, custodial banks, and possibly cross multiple rails. Each rail is an independent operating system, not just a variation of the same model.

ACH can be reversed, RTP cannot. Card networks can be disputed, stablecoins are the final confirmation on-chain. The abstraction layers of traditional PSPs mask these differences, but only until problems arise. Recently, I saw a case where an American company paid a supplier in the Philippines via ACH, which takes T+4 to arrive, with high wire transfer costs and tight deadlines. But with a stablecoin sandwich solution, it’s done in an hour, costing less than 1% of the transfer amount. This isn’t a product experience gap — it’s three completely different operating systems.

Systems like RTP and FedNow are changing the game. In the past, ACH and wire transfers had delays, providing a window for error detection and intervention risks. But once an instant payment rail is completed, it’s irreversible. Risk control logic must move upstream — decisions must be made before the funds move, not afterward. This forces PSPs to evolve.

The topic of stablecoins is most easily misunderstood. They’re not a new payment method; they’re a new settlement rail. They solve the delay between “accounting completed” and “funds actually received.” The most practical approach is a sandwich structure: fiat in, on-chain transfer, fiat out — customers don’t need to understand stablecoins at all. Plus, in-transit funds can generate yields, which is almost nonexistent in traditional systems. Cross-border payments often have funds sitting idle for 24 to 72 hours, with no yield and tying up operational capital. Stablecoins change this logic.

But here’s a big problem: the current PSP ecosystem is divided into ten layers, each responsible for a part, with no single entity able to tell you where the money truly is. Stripe can only tell you what happened in its segment; banks have their own systems; risk management has its decision processes; compliance has its checks. When issues occur, no one can provide a complete answer.

I’ve seen too many cases of payment operations collapsing. A wire transfer submitted on Friday afternoon shows “processing,” the bank shows “pending settlement,” two different statuses, and no one knows where the money is. The supplier is waiting for funds to arrange weekend shipments, and the finance team doesn’t know what to say. This isn’t an extreme case — it happens every week.

The next evolution of PSPs must be to provide consistent visibility across the entire payment lifecycle. Not just another service provider or routing tool, but an advanced PSP capable of coordinating all these functions, tracking status across providers, managing workflows, and maintaining reliable financial records. It should be able to execute payments across banks, traditional rails, and stablecoin networks, maintaining consistent records via internal ledgers, and managing approvals and exceptions.

For teams building financial products, don’t start with “whether to fully embrace stablecoins.” Find a specific pain point: a cross-border settlement channel that’s too slow, a supplier payment process with too much manual work, or funds in transit that generate no yield. Pick a use case and experiment — start from a cash management scenario, control risks, and build awareness.

The real strategic risk isn’t whether to use stablecoins, but that competitors have already rebuilt settlement costs and capital efficiency with stablecoins, while you’re waiting for the perfect entry point. Without a unified coordination layer, complexity grows exponentially with scale. Having it enables companies to operate cash flows with clarity, control, and confidence.