Global stablecoin supply remains heavily concentrated on two blockchains: Ethereum and Tron. The data cited in the report shows that Tron accounts for 27.7% of the market, while all blockchains outside the two leaders together represent only about 18%. The picture is clear. Most stablecoin liquidity is still sitting on a small number of dominant networks rather than spreading evenly across newer chains.
Ethereum leads in DeFi, Tron thrives on cheap USDT transfers
The gap between the two networks is not only about market share. It also reflects different user behavior. Ethereum remains the main base for DeFi activity, and both institutional and retail users continue to rely on it for stablecoin transfers and DeFi applications. Large pools for major stablecoins, including USDT and USDC, are still concentrated there. Tron has built a different strength, especially in emerging markets, where low fees and high throughput make it attractive for fast and inexpensive USDT transfers.
The report notes that much of Tron’s volume appears to be tied to transfer efficiency rather than protocol-based collateralization or deeper engagement with on-chain applications. In other words, a large stablecoin balance on a chain does not automatically mean the same type of usage across networks.
Solana and BNB Chain form the next tier, while the rest stay small
Beyond Ethereum and Tron, stablecoin distribution becomes fragmented. Solana holds 5.4% of total circulation, BNB Chain 5.1%, Arbitrum 2.5%, and Base 1.5%. Polygon, Avalanche, Plasma, Aptos, TON, and HyperEVM each account for less than 1% on an individual basis. That leaves a long list of smaller networks with only marginal weight in the broader market.
Put together, this distribution suggests that new capital has not flowed evenly into alternative chains. The largest liquidity pools and the strongest protocol demand are still gathering where stablecoin supply is already dominant. The concentration is not easing.
Supply concentration does not capture transaction intensity
The report also draws a line between where stablecoins are held and how they are actually used. A blockchain may show a smaller stablecoin balance but still generate substantial activity through frequent, lower-value transfers. Tron fits that pattern: its large aggregate supply points to a user base focused on speed and cost efficiency, not necessarily long-term holding or extensive protocol interaction.
According to the methodology referenced from Artémis, the analysis only measured where stablecoins are stationed and did not include transfer intensity or diversity of use. A fuller view of stablecoin adoption across chains would need both supply data and on-chain activity metrics.