Stablecoins are moving out of the trial phase and into production use, according to CoinDesk’s latest Crypto for Advisors newsletter, which featured analysis from EY-Parthenon partner Prashant Kher. The piece argues that the debate has shifted over the past year from whether stablecoins would gain meaningful adoption to how they are being integrated into payment and treasury operations.
Survey data shows production use is rising
Kher cited EY-Parthenon’s 2026 Blockchain Payments Survey, which covered 521 corporate and financial institution decision-makers. The survey found that 18% of corporates have used stablecoins in production, double the share reported in EY-Parthenon’s 2025 survey. Tokenized deposits were close behind, with 15% of corporates reporting adoption.
Financial institutions also showed a stronger commitment than a year earlier. According to the survey, 69% already offer stablecoin services or plan to launch them within two years, up from 30% in 2025. Among banks, 49% already offer or plan to offer tokenized deposits over the same period.
The newsletter said blockchain payments have not yet reached mass adoption. Even so, the findings point to a clear shift away from technology testing and toward integration into existing payment workflows and treasury functions.
Cross-border B2B payments remain the main entry point
Cross-border business payments were identified as the most common use case for both stablecoins and tokenized deposits. Across the two forms of digital money, 50% to 53% of respondents said they had used or were exploring each for cross-border supplier payments or cross-border business-to-business payment acceptance.
The report said cross-border B2B flows lead blockchain payment use cases for most respondents, while interest in payouts is more concentrated among banks and payments firms.
Respondents tied that interest to long-standing frictions in international payments. A total of 56% cited slow processing and settlement, 52% pointed to foreign exchange costs or spreads, 48% mentioned regulatory, sanctions and compliance delays, and 36% cited correspondent banking fees. Financial institutions, in turn, saw faster settlement and lower costs as leading reasons to pursue both stablecoins and tokenized deposits.
The opportunity is not limited to moving money from one place to another. Among financial institution respondents, 63% selected tokenized asset settlement as the most common opportunity to add value on top of blockchain payment rails, reflecting interest in using blockchain-based money as a settlement mechanism.
The market is becoming multi-rail
The newsletter said adoption is no longer shaping up as a simple choice between stablecoins and tokenized deposits. Among respondents interested in blockchain payments, 45% of corporates and 53% of financial institutions said they favor using both rails. Flexibility and the expectation that both methods will coexist were cited as the main reasons.
Kher wrote that the two rails serve different roles. Stablecoins offer reach across wallets, platforms and public blockchain networks. Tokenized deposits can bring commercial bank money into programmable environments. Instead of choosing one rail for all situations, organizations can decide based on the use case, the counterparty, geography and liquidity needs.
For financial institutions and payment providers, the commercial opening lies in making that choice easy for clients. The report said firms that let customers move between traditional fiat payment methods and blockchain-based rails through integrated processes and a unified user experience will be better placed to capture demand.
Integration and programmability are central to scale
Corporate respondents showed a strong preference for blockchain payment services delivered inside systems they already use. The survey found that 76% view integration with existing enterprise resource planning, treasury management and banking platforms as very important or critical. Another 74% want blockchain payments fully integrated into current banking and payment interfaces, while only 14% prefer a separate digital asset experience.
That preference gives incumbent providers an advantage. According to the survey, 63% of corporates would likely adopt blockchain payments if the service came from their existing bank or payments provider. The newsletter added that financial institutions still need to pair trusted relationships with credible economics, secure execution and regulatory readiness.
Programmability was presented as a separate but related source of value. A total of 54% of financial institutions already offer or plan to launch programmable payments within two years, and 75% see them as at least a moderate revenue opportunity. Their leading priorities include liquidity and cash management automation at 51%, conditional payments at 51%, automated reconciliation at 49% and cross-border automation at 47%.
Kher concluded that blockchain payment adoption may increasingly happen inside familiar banking and payment products rather than through stand-alone digital asset interfaces. In his view, institutions that combine stablecoins, tokenized deposits and traditional rails inside existing workflows, while layering programmable services on top, will be in the strongest position for the next phase of adoption.
Ask an Expert: payment companies, bank consortia and euro stablecoins
The same newsletter also included an Ask an Expert section featuring Sam Boboev, founder of Fintech WrapUp. He addressed why payment companies are launching their own stablecoins, why banking groups in the U.S. and Europe are developing them, and whether euro-denominated stablecoins can challenge the dollar’s lead.
Why payment companies want their own stablecoins
Boboev said payment companies are increasingly interested in issuing stablecoins because they see a chance to capture more value from the money moving through their platforms. He noted that payment providers currently make money mainly from transaction fees, currency conversion and other financial services. Issuing a stablecoin could add another revenue stream tied to the reserves backing tokens in circulation, subject to the applicable regulatory framework.
He also described a strategic benefit. A payment company with its own stablecoin could connect merchant settlements, cross-border payouts and customer balances within a single infrastructure. That could reduce dependence on outside settlement providers and improve liquidity management.
Still, he said distribution will be decisive. In his view, issuing a stablecoin is relatively straightforward compared with persuading businesses to hold and use it. He expects payment companies with established merchant networks and strong distribution to have an edge because existing customer relationships could help turn stablecoins into practical payment products.
Why bank groups in Europe and the U.S. are building stablecoins
Boboev said banks are increasingly worried about losing payment flows and customer balances as stablecoin adoption grows. In Europe, he noted, Qivalis has brought together 37 financial institutions across 15 countries to develop a regulated euro stablecoin.
He also pointed to a separate global consortium of 21 financial institutions that announced plans in September 2026 to launch a U.S. dollar stablecoin in the first half of 2027, with euro issuance also listed as a priority. The newsletter named Bank of America, Citi, Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo among the participants.
According to Boboev, these efforts could allow banks to offer around-the-clock settlement while keeping their role in managing customer funds. He said the biggest opening is in institutional payments and tokenized asset settlement, where banks already have established customer relationships and payment infrastructure.
He added that competing with existing stablecoin issuers will still require enough liquidity and broad distribution. The key question, he said, is whether these consortia can turn existing banking relationships into meaningful transaction volume.
Can euro stablecoins challenge dollar dominance?
Boboev said euro stablecoins still account for only a tiny share of the market. Citing Bank of Ireland, he said just 0.2% of global stablecoin circulation was euro-denominated in May 2026.
He argued that this creates a problem for European businesses that want to use blockchain payments while keeping transactions and treasury balances in euros. Using dollar stablecoins introduces foreign exchange costs and currency exposure.
The newsletter said the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation, or MiCA, has provided a regulatory framework for euro stablecoin issuers, while European banks are building infrastructure to support euro-denominated settlement. Boboev said the strongest opportunities are in European B2B payments and corporate treasury.
Even so, he said challenging dollar stablecoins on a global basis will be difficult. Dollar liquidity and established distribution networks give existing issuers a considerable advantage. In his view, the more realistic path is to build a strong euro stablecoin market serving European businesses and financial institutions, with adoption depending on liquidity and integration with existing banking systems.
Other items mentioned in the newsletter
The newsletter also briefly listed several other developments. It said JPMorgan predicts bitcoin will be the top-performing asset of the next 10 years. It also said the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has issued the first final rule under the GENIUS Act requiring crypto exchanges to seek approval for existing stablecoin rewards programs. In addition, Switzerland’s Financial Market Supervisory Authority has approved the country’s first retail bitcoin fund, allowing direct bitcoin investment for everyday investors under strict risk disclosure and custody requirements.
At the end of the page, CoinDesk also included a short teaser titled Beyond the Risk-Free Rate: Diversified Real World Yield in Productive Stablecoins. The teaser said diversified RWA stablecoins can sustain 5% to 7% yield from real credit as crypto funding compresses to about 4%, that GENIUS pushes yield off-chain, and that total addressable market grows to $4 billion in three years. The source text did not provide further detail beyond that summary line and the phrase “Why it matters.”
