Impact of the Stablecoin Bill: Rewriting the CRCL Pricing Logic

Article by: BruceBlue

Preface

U.S. crypto regulation is entering a critical window.

In the short term, the market is focused on the markup of the Senate Banking Committee’s hearing on the CLARITY Act on May 14, but the core issue isn’t just an ordinary policy vote; it’s whether the U.S. will formally incorporate crypto assets, especially stablecoins, into the financial infrastructure system.

If the CLARITY Act progresses smoothly, its impact on the market won’t just be “crypto stocks rise for a day,” but will change how investors price the entire USD stablecoin ecosystem, including @circle @coinbase RWA and DeFi.

The most noteworthy is $CRCL , because its investment logic is shifting from:

Stablecoin issuers: earning US debt yields through USDC reserves

? Upgrading to ?

On-chain USD financial infrastructure: USDC + payment networks + Arc + AI

This is precisely the biggest impact of the Stablecoin Act on Circle.

Legislation Position: GENIUS solves issuance, CLARITY solves market structure

First, it’s necessary to distinguish between two bills.

The GENIUS Act came into effect on July 18, 2025, and the OCC explicitly states that it establishes a regulatory framework for payment stablecoin activities, and in principle prohibits non-permitted payment stablecoin issuers from issuing payment stablecoins in the U.S. The Treasury / FinCEN also proposed rules requiring permitted payment stablecoin issuers to be treated as financial institutions, bearing BSA, AML, and sanctions compliance obligations. In other words, GENIUS addresses:

┌──────────── GENIUS Act ────────────┐

│ Topic: Stablecoin issuance

│

│ Who can issue?

│ How are reserves managed?

│ How are redemption, audits, AML, sanctions compliance enforced?

└────────────────────────────────────┘

Meanwhile, the CLARITY Act / H.R.3633 addresses broader market structure issues. The Senate Banking Committee’s official website shows that the committee will review H.R.3633, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025, on May 14, 2026, at 10:30 AM ET. It addresses:

┌──────────── CLARITY Act ───────────┐

│ Topic: Crypto market structure

│

│ Are tokens securities or commodities?

│ How do SEC / CFTC divide responsibilities?

│ How to regulate exchanges, DeFi, tokenization?

│ Where are the boundaries for stablecoin rewards?

└────────────────────────────────────┘

For Circle, GENIUS determines whether USDC can be issued compliantly; CLARITY determines whether USDC can scale into trading, payments, RWA, DeFi, and AI agent scenarios.

Core controversy: Can stablecoins become “deposit-like products”

The key controversy of the CLARITY Act isn’t about cryptocurrencies themselves, but about stablecoin rewards.

Reuters summarized the latest bill as: it will prohibit paying interest-like rewards on idle stablecoin balances, but allow rewards related to trading activities; subsequent SEC, CFTC, and Treasury will need to jointly formulate implementation rules.

Behind this is a core conflict of interests between banks and the crypto industry.

┌──────────── Banking industry concerns ────────────┐

│ If stablecoins can pay interest

│ User funds might flow from bank deposits to stablecoin platforms

│ Creating a “shadow deposit system” without FDIC insurance

└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

┌──────────── Crypto industry demands ──────────┐

│ Not all rewards should be banned

│ Payments, trading, and usage scenarios need incentives

│ Otherwise, stablecoins will struggle to become a true payment network

└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Therefore, the current compromise direction is:

┌──────────── Stablecoin reward boundaries ────────────┐

│ Prohibit:

│   Passive income from simply holding stablecoins

│   Idle balance yields similar to bank deposit interest

│

│ Allow:

│   Payment rewards

│   Trading rewards

│   Activity-based incentives tied to real use cases

└───────────────────────────────────────────────┘

This is somewhat favorable for Circle.

Because Circle’s core advantage isn’t attracting users with high interest, but with compliance, transparent reserves, institutional access, enterprise payments, developer APIs, and the future Arc / Agent Stack ecosystem.

If passive income is restricted, the “high-yield savings” competitive model will be pressured; if activity-based rewards are preserved, Circle’s payment network and ecosystem expansion will have more room.

Probabilistic outlook: Committee likely to pass, but with variables

My judgment is: the committee has a high probability of passing on May 14, but the final law isn’t a certainty. There are three reasons:

1. The Senate Banking Committee has officially scheduled H.R.3633 for markup.

2. Reuters reports that the bill aims to clarify crypto industry regulation, including when tokens are securities, commodities, or other categories.

3. The GENIUS Act has already been enacted, and U.S. policy has shifted from “whether to regulate stablecoins” to “how to incorporate stablecoins into the financial system.”

But resistance is clear: banks are lobbying to restrict stablecoin yields; some Democrats are dissatisfied with AML and conflict-of-interest clauses; the full Senate still needs enough bipartisan support. Reuters mentions that at least 7 Democratic senators’ support is needed for passage.

I break down the probabilities as follows:

┌──────────────────────────────┬──────────┐

│ Event                        Probability estimate

├──────────────────────────────┼──────────┤

│ Committee approval on May 14 70-80%

│ Final law within 2026         55-65%

│ Stablecoin reward compromise version 60-70%

│ Further tightening by bank lobby 25-35%

│ Short-term sell-the-news scenario 35-45%

└──────────────────────────────┴──────────┘

Thus, the market shouldn’t just focus on “will it pass,” but on “how it passes.”

If approved but rewards are heavily restricted, the long-term compliance logic for Circle remains positive, but valuation elasticity in the short term will be suppressed.

If approved and activity-based rewards are largely preserved, Circle’s narrative as a payment network will be further reinforced.

Economic significance: The U.S. isn’t suddenly fond of crypto, but is competing to bring USD on-chain

From an economic perspective, the stablecoin bill isn’t just a crypto-friendly policy.

Its core is: the global expansion rights of USD stablecoins.

Stablecoins are essentially USD representations on-chain. As long as USDC, USDT, and similar USD stablecoins continue expanding in trading, payments, RWA, cross-border settlements, and AI agent economies, the USD can maintain dominance in new financial networks.

That’s why U.S. regulation isn’t about outright banning stablecoins, but about:

┌──────────────────────────────┐

│ 1. First confirming issuance frameworks with GENIUS

│ 2. Then clarifying market structure with CLARITY

│ 3. Reinserting on-chain finance into U.S. regulatory frameworks

│ 4. Enabling compliant USD stablecoins to continue global expansion

└──────────────────────────────┘

Therefore, the significance of the CLARITY Act isn’t just “reducing crypto companies’ lawsuits,” but enabling compliant crypto assets to systematically enter the mainstream U.S. financial system for the first time.

This is a strategic positive for Circle.

Impact on CRCL valuation: from interest rate stocks to network stocks

Circle’s Q1 2026 data shows USDC circulation reached $77 billion, up 28%; on-chain trading volume hit $21.5 trillion, up 263%; total revenue and reserve income were $694 million, up 20%; Adjusted EBITDA was $151 million, up 24%. Circle also disclosed that its ARC completed a $222 million presale, valuing it at $3 billion.

These figures indicate that Circle still relies on reserve income, but the growth narrative is beginning to spill over.

┌──────────── Current Circle model ────────────┐

│ Reserve Income = USDC supply × reserve yield │

└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

┌──────────── Future Circle model ────────────┐

│ USDC supply

│ + compliance premium

│ + enterprise payment network

│ + Arc ecosystem

│ + AI agent payments

└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

This is the key impact of the stablecoin legislation on Circle’s valuation.

If the market only sees Circle as “a stablecoin company earning US debt yields,” its valuation will be constrained by falling interest rates.

But if CLARITY makes USDC easier to enter payments, RWA, trading, DeFi, and AI agent scenarios, the market will start valuing Circle as “on-chain USD financial infrastructure.”

These are two entirely different valuation frameworks.

┌──────────── Old valuation framework ────────────┐

│ Core variable: interest rates

│ Focus: reserve income

│ Valuation anchor: financial income multiple

└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

┌──────────── New valuation framework ────────────┐

│ Core variable: USDC network size

│ Focus: payments, RWA, Arc, AI agents

│ Valuation anchor: financial infrastructure + network platform premium

└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Price and trading framework: not the main focus here, but key to risk-return

As of my latest check, CRCL’s stock price is about $125, with a market cap of roughly $33 billion. This indicates the market has already priced in some policy and Q1 earnings optimism, and we’re in a high-volatility revaluation phase, not a bottom reversal.

Sell-side target prices also show significant divergence. Needham raised its target to $150, JPMorgan to $155, Mizuho to $135; MarketBeat’s aggregated data shows an average target of about $131.76, with a high of $243 and a low of $60.

This reflects broad market disagreement on CRCL: conservative investors see it as overvalued stablecoin income stock; optimistic investors see it as on-chain USD infrastructure.

I’d condense the price framework as follows:

┌──────────────────┬──────────────────────────┐

│ Price Range        Implication

├──────────────────┼──────────────────────────┤

│ $150 - $155        Mainstream optimistic target, suitable for phased realization

│ $135 - $140        Short-term resistance zone, needs volume breakout

│ $116 - $120        First support zone, for pullback and observation

│ $108 - $112        Deep correction zone, small positions for assessment

│ Below $96        Trend breakdown, reevaluate

└──────────────────┴──────────────────────────┘

Combining price and bill progress:

┌──────────────────────────────┬──────────────────┐

│ Bill scenario                CRCL pricing response

├──────────────────────────────┼──────────────────┤

│ Committee passes, mild terms   Challenge $135-$155

│ Committee passes, but terms tighten    Initial rise, then pullback, hold $116

│ Delay in committee                Pullback to $108-$120

│ Unexpected failure in committee    Drop below $108, increased risk

│ Full Senate path clear            Market revisits $180+

└──────────────────────────────┴──────────────────┘

Therefore, my trading approach isn’t “blindly chase the high,” but more about:

┌──────────────────────────────┐

│ Holders:

│ As long as $116-$120 holds,

│ and the bill’s logic doesn’t worsen, continue holding.

│

│ New buyers:

│ Avoid chasing at $135-$140,

│ better to wait for a pullback and observe.

│

│ Risk management:

│ Lower positions if below $108,

│ reassess mid-term trend if below $96.

└──────────────────────────────┘

This is just a trading execution framework; the core remains how the bill influences CRCL’s long-term valuation.

Impact on Coinbase and the industry: positive but differentiated

CLARITY Act is also positive for Coinbase, as it helps clarify token classification, exchange regulation boundaries, and SEC / CFTC responsibilities. Reuters also summarized that one of the bill’s focuses is to clarify when tokens are securities, commodities, or other categories.

But Coinbase’s stock COIN is a diversified asset, affected by trading volume, fees, custody, subscriptions, and USDC distribution.

CRCL, on the other hand, is more pure.

If the main narrative is “U.S. stablecoin regulation clarity,” then CRCL is a more direct expression.

┌──────────────────┬──────────────────────────┐

│ Asset              Beneficial logic

├──────────────────┼──────────────────────────┤

│ Circle            Compliance stablecoin + payment network

│ Coinbase          Clear regulation + USDC distribution

│ RWA / Tokenization  Open compliance entry

│ DeFi              Differentiation, higher compliance barriers

│ Banking sector    Facing stablecoin deposit substitution pressure

└──────────────────┴──────────────────────────┘

This is also why I believe the biggest winners of the stablecoin bill aren’t all crypto projects, but those infrastructure companies already on a compliance path, capable of serving institutional funds and real payment scenarios.

Final note: The stablecoin bill is about CRCL’s “valuation identity transformation”

The short-term impact of the CLARITY Act is to catalyze policy for crypto stocks. But its real effect on Circle is to change how the market values it.

In the past, the market’s core question about Circle was: How much interest can USDC reserves earn?

In the future, the core question will be: Can USDC become the default settlement layer for on-chain USD finance?

This is a completely different valuation logic, and my final judgment is:

┌────────────────────────────────────┐

│ 1. High probability of passing on May 14

│ 2. Final law still depends on bank, AML, and partisan compromises

│ 3. Quality of terms matters more than “whether it passes”

│ 4. Circle is the most pure compliant stablecoin beneficiary

│ 5. CRCL is not cheap now; better to wait for pullback or confirmation breakout

└────────────────────────────────────┘

If the CLARITY Act advances smoothly and preserves activity-based stablecoin rewards, CRCL’s valuation logic will continue to upgrade from “interest income company” to “on-chain USD financial infrastructure.”

Short-term stock price may sell the news, but in the medium to long term, the market’s re-pricing isn’t just about a day’s policy news, but a larger trend:

USD is going on-chain, and Circle is one of the closest companies to a “USD on-chain operating system” in the U.S. stock market.

That’s the core reason I remain bullish on Circle and CRCL.