Hong Kong’s first Hong Kong dollar stablecoin licenses have been in place for almost a year, yet enthusiasm around the business has faded rather than grown.
The report, written by Joe Zhou and published by Foresight News and carried by PANews, cited an industry source close to regulators as saying: 「We are not optimistic about Hong Kong dollar stablecoins.」 The same person said that being bullish on stablecoins is not the same as being bullish on Hong Kong dollar stablecoins, and added that putting institutions with the least willingness and the weakest incentives in charge while sidelining those with stronger ideas makes execution difficult.
According to the report, several people involved in Hong Kong’s stablecoin business described the first two licenses as evidence of an awkward, defensive form of regulation. One licensed entity, AnchorPoint Fintech, led by Standard Chartered, has actively pushed the project forward. The other, market participants said, has shown little desire to do the business. At the same time, companies such as Ant Group, JD Technology and RD InnoTech, which are described as having a strong interest in exploring Hong Kong dollar stablecoin use cases, have not truly entered the core of the market or do not hold a leading role.
Two people from different institutions but both close to the business summed up the mood in similar terms: participate, but do not feel optimistic.
The article says three distinct reactions have emerged. One group likes the stablecoin sector in general but remains reserved about Hong Kong dollar stablecoins and feels it still needs to secure a position. Another group is not naturally enthusiastic about stablecoins but has entered under regulatory pressure. A third group has the willingness, resources and use cases, yet remains shut out because of its identity.
After the licenses, Standard Chartered and HSBC took very different approaches
In September 2025, 36 institutions submitted applications for Hong Kong dollar stablecoin licenses. By August 2026, the report says, few people were still bringing up the topic on their own.
Once the early noise faded, the real core players were reduced to two: Standard Chartered and HSBC. A new business model ultimately ended up in the hands of institutions rooted in traditional banking, and market sentiment turned cold.
Two people from different licensed crypto exchanges in Hong Kong told the author that HSBC’s stance has not been active.
On April 10, 2026, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority issued the first two Hong Kong dollar stablecoin licenses to AnchorPoint Fintech and The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited. AnchorPoint Fintech is a joint venture formed by Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong), HKT and Animoca Brands.
People in the industry said the two institutions have taken very different views of the business. Standard Chartered has shown a degree of initiative and has started mapping out a broader global stablecoin strategy. On July 2, 2026, Standard Chartered and USDC issuer Circle jointly announced an institutional one-stop access service for USDC. On August 12, 2026, AnchorPoint Fintech began the first phase of issuance for the Hong Kong dollar stablecoin HKDAP. The token is currently available only on a limited basis to institutional distributors and professional investors, including HashKey and OSL, with a plan to expand to retail users as early as the end of 2026 depending on market conditions.
HSBC, by contrast, was described as moving more slowly. One industry source said HSBC was passive and only moved after being pushed. The report says HSBC’s Hong Kong dollar stablecoin timetable trails Standard Chartered’s and is scheduled for the second half of 2026.
A person close to HSBC said the bank is more inclined to push tokenized deposits than stablecoins. The article links that preference to HSBC’s existing business model. It says about 85% of HSBC’s payments revenue comes from net interest income based on deposits, while payments account for roughly 22% of its total revenue in 2025. In that setup, stablecoin issuance could divert deposits and weaken a core source of earnings.
The report also says regulated stablecoin issuance is not a windfall business. Revenue depends heavily on the interest-rate environment, while profits are diluted across issuance, custody and distribution. For a bank built around deposit-and-loan spreads and a large deposit base, the commercial motivation to go all in on stablecoins is limited.
Licensed exchanges fall into three camps
Beyond Standard Chartered and HSBC as issuers, distribution and custody rely on licensed crypto exchanges such as HashKey, OSL, EX.IO and Panthertrade.
From the information gathered by the author, those exchanges have broadly reacted in three ways.
First: little expectation
One person at a licensed crypto exchange in Hong Kong said there is no visible opportunity for institutions to make money from Hong Kong dollar stablecoins from a commercial standpoint. The same person added that licensed crypto exchanges in Hong Kong are themselves still losing money and concluded: 「No expectation at all.」
Second: watching while pulling back
The article says at least three licensed exchanges had been testing Hong Kong dollar stablecoins with AnchorPoint Fintech, but some have already started retreating and are no longer willing to spend as much effort on testing.
Third: tactically active, strategically cautious
Another person at a licensed crypto exchange said the firm is not active strategically, but it is active tactically. The team is still testing cooperation with issuers, but at the company level the business is not seen as one with a visible profit opportunity right now.
Hong Kong is not alone: non-dollar stablecoins are struggling elsewhere too
The report argues that the difficulties facing Hong Kong dollar stablecoins are not unique. Across major financial centers, non-dollar stablecoins are still trailing.
Allen, dean of New Huo Research, told Foresight News that projects in the euro area have accelerated after regulatory rules were put in place, while local-currency stablecoins in Japan and Singapore are moving ahead steadily with support from banks and payment systems. In his view, clear rules, bank-grade risk controls and a focus on real use cases form the common path for non-dollar stablecoins.
Euro stablecoins: currency status far exceeds stablecoin scale
The article says the euro remains the world’s second-largest payment and reserve currency. SWIFT data showed that in June 2026 the euro accounted for 21.88% of global payments, second only to the dollar. In global foreign exchange reserves, the euro accounts for about 20%, also ranking second.
Yet euro stablecoins remain small relative to that standing. The report says a currency with a 22% share in global trade and finance accounts for only 0.22% of the stablecoin market, a gap of roughly 100 times.
Europe plans to launch MiCA-compliant euro stablecoins in the second half of 2026. The group involved has expanded to 37 financial institutions across 15 European countries, including BNP Paribas, ING, UniCredit, BBVA and ABN AMRO.
Even so, the euro stablecoin market capitalization is only $674 million, or 0.3% of the global stablecoin market. Most of that share belongs to one U.S. company. Circle’s EURC stands at about $430 million, equal to 64% of the euro stablecoin segment.
Yen stablecoins: institutional design leaves little room
One industry participant put it bluntly: 「Yen stablecoins are foolish.」 The criticism, according to the article, is not about technology but about a regulatory design that narrowed the path from the outset. The same person said liquidity remains weak.
In June 2026, SBI Holdings formally launched JPYSC, described as Japan’s first Ethereum-based yen stablecoin backed by a trust bank. Mitsubishi UFJ, Sumitomo Mitsui and Mizuho also announced a joint effort to develop their own yen stablecoin, with commercial transactions planned for fiscal 2026.
But Japan’s framework places stablecoins squarely inside the trust-bank system. Issuers must be trust banks, reserve assets must be held with trust banks and redemptions must also go through trust banks. The report argues that this has left yen stablecoins looking more like tightly constrained electronic certificates of deposit than programmable blockchain-native instruments.
Won stablecoins: companies are ready, regulators are still arguing
The report describes won stablecoins as slow and even stagnant. The issue, it says, is not a lack of corporate interest but an unresolved regulatory dispute over who should be allowed to issue them.
It says pilots involving nine card issuers have already been completed. Busan Bank’s pilot on Kaia Chain achieved a 100% transaction success rate with processing times below one second, and infrastructure work by Kakao and Circle is also in place. Even so, regulators are still divided.
The argument centers on who gets to issue. The Bank of Korea insists that banks must hold more than 51% to issue stablecoins, a condition the industry strongly opposes. The report says South Korea’s Banking Act caps a bank’s stake in another company at 15%, meaning at least four or five banks would need to join forces to reach 51%.
The Financial Services Commission’s bill has been delayed from Q1 to the second half of the year, and not just once. The article says South Korea has recorded net stablecoin outflows for 18 straight months, totaling more than $1 billion. Without a local won stablecoin, users have turned to dollar stablecoins instead.
For Hong Kong, the core issue is a mismatch between incentives and use cases
The report’s closing argument is that Hong Kong dollar stablecoins are still stuck in a waiting game: waiting for U.S. legislative clarity and waiting for banks to move at their own pace. The market verdict cited in the article is blunt: the earliest licenses, the coldest start, and little enthusiasm despite formal approval.
The deeper problem, it says, is that institutions with real use cases are not at the center, while those without obvious use-case advantages are being pushed to take the lead. Ant Group, JD and HashKey are cited as examples of firms with willingness, motivation and scenarios, but not a dominant role.
In that framing, Hong Kong’s stablecoin push was not an offensive move from the start. It was a defensive response because others had already moved first.
At the time described in the report, the global stablecoin market was approaching $308.3 billion, with dollar stablecoins accounting for 98%. The article argues that dollar dominance is part of the reason, but slow progress elsewhere matters too, leaving Hong Kong dollar stablecoins in an awkward position.