Stablecoins for business payments: Cutting through the noise

Your supplier is in Vietnam. The invoice is in USD. You're expecting a three-day wait and an FX spread that will quietly eat into your margin. Meanwhile, a competitor is reportedly settling the same payment in seconds, for a fraction of the cost using a stablecoin.

It's a compelling pitch. And if you work in finance, you've probably heard some version of it by now.

Stablecoins have moved from crypto infrastructure to a genuine question on the finance team's agenda. But is it the right question for your business? The full picture is more nuanced than the headlines suggest. In this piece, we examine the three dimensions that matter most to international businesses — cost, speed and FX risk management — and assess honestly where stablecoins hold up, where they fall short, and what that means for your payments in practice.

How stablecoin payments actually work

A stablecoin is a digital currency pegged 1:1 to a fiat currency (most commonly the US dollar, but increasingly the euro). Unlike Bitcoin or Ethereum, its value is designed to remain stable. It behaves like cash, but moves like crypto: programmable, borderless, and settled in seconds rather than days.

The dominant instruments today are USDT (Tether), USDC (Circle), and EURC (Circle's euro equivalent, built to comply with the EU's MiCA regulatory framework). Between them, they account for the majority of stablecoin payment volume.

The payment journey

Making a stablecoin payment involves four steps:

• On-ramp: Convert your euros or dollars into stablecoins via an exchange or provider.
• Transfer: Send the stablecoins across the blockchain to your recipient's wallet — this is the fast part.
• Off-ramp: Your supplier converts the stablecoins back into their local currency via their own exchange or provider.
• Settlement: Funds arrive in the supplier's account.

Step 2 is where the speed advantage is real. Steps 1, 3 and 4 are where real-world complexity creeps in — and where the gap between the headlines and the reality often widens.

A payment provider's infrastructure works differently. Here's how the same payment moves via a fiat currency route:

• Initiation: Your finance team enters payment details into a cross-border payment provider, which runs security checks on your beneficiary. The details travel via the SWIFT network.
• Conversion: Currency exchange is handled as part of the journey — your agreed FX rate is applied before the payment moves.
• Routing: Where your bank has no direct relationship with your beneficiary's bank, funds pass through one or more intermediary banks, each of which processes, validates, and forwards the payment in sequence. The payment moves only during business hours in each country it passes through, so time zones, local holidays and weekends can add time to the journey. However, SWIFT report that 90% of international payments reach the beneficiary’s bank within an hour.
• Settlement: Funds arrive in the supplier's account in the specified currency. The same SWIFT report states that only 43% reach recipients’ accounts that quickly. In other words, one of the major bottlenecks is the “final mile” (the payment processing by your beneficiary’s bank).

 It's not instant, but every step is managed, traceable and covered by a regulated framework.

Speed: is stablecoin settlement really faster?

The headline claim is striking: blockchain settlement ranges from 15 seconds on Ethereum to under two seconds on TRON. Compared with the one to three business days of a traditional wire transfer, that sounds like a decisive advantage.

How? A stablecoin transfer cuts out the intermediary chain entirely. It moves directly from your wallet to your supplier's wallet, peer-to-peer, on a blockchain that runs 24 hours a day, seven days a week. There are no intermediaries to process, no cut-off windows to miss, and no batch processing to wait for. That's where the speed comes from.

The reality, though, is more conditional.

It's fast as long as you remain on a wallet infrastructure.

But a business payment isn't just the blockchain leg. It's on-ramp acquisition time, supplier wallet setup, off-ramp conversion, and final settlement into a bank account. Each step can add delays, depending on the provider, the jurisdiction, and your supplier's own infrastructure. That’s why these steps are often excluded from the headline-grabbing speed comparisons.

Where does the stablecoin speed advantage hold up?

Julien Molez, COO at iBanFirst, says:

There are some good use cases for stablecoins — high-friction corridors, very slow correspondent banking, very volatile environments — where they could be a good substitute to traditional finance.

In high-friction corridors like Latin America, Africa, and parts of Southeast Asia where correspondent banking is genuinely slow or structurally limited, the stablecoin route can deliver real improvements, if the full off-ramp infrastructure is in place at the other end.

Case study: Back to our Vietnamese supplier. On a payment provider route, your finance team logs in, enters the payment details, locks in an FX rate, and sends. Your supplier receives USD or VND into their bank account within one to three business days.

On the stablecoin route, you can transfer on-chain in seconds. Bbut your supplier's local off-ramp takes 24–48 hours, and the final VND settlement still hits their account in roughly the same timeframe. The speed advantage largely disappears at the final mile.

Cost: are stablecoins actually cheaper for business payments?

The cost case is equally compelling on paper: all-in transaction costs via stablecoin can fall to 0.1–0.5%, versus the typical 2–5% for traditional wire transfers when FX spreads and intermediary charges are included.

Again, the reality is more nuanced.

The blockchain transfer fee itself is low, it’s true. But an all-in stablecoin payment also includes: the spread on acquiring the stablecoin (on-ramp cost), the blockchain network fee, the off-ramp conversion cost, and any custody or wallet infrastructure fees. These vary significantly by provider and corridor — and they're not always transparent upfront.

Payment providers typically charge a transparent FX spread plus a fixed transfer fee. You know exactly what you're paying before you send.

Where does the stablecoin cost advantage hold up? For high-volume, high-value transfers to corridors with deep stablecoin liquidity and competitive off-ramp infrastructure, the cost case can be genuinely compelling. For lower-value payments or less liquid corridors, the picture is less clear.

Case study: A €50,000 order to your Vietnamese supplier. Via a payment provider, the all-in cost (FX spread plus transfer fee) comes to around €600–€800, transparent and predictable.

Via stablecoin, the on-ramp spread, network fee, and off-ramp conversion add up to approximately €300–€500, depending on the provider and prevailing market spread. The stablecoin route is cheaper, but the margin narrows once all steps are included, and shifts further if your stablecoin infrastructure requires paid custody or compliance tooling.

FX risk management: where payment providers still hold the ground

A stablecoin pegged to the US dollar keeps its value stable during the transfer itself. But your invoice is denominated in USD and your business operates in EUR and multiple other currencies. When EUR/USD moves, your margin moves with it, regardless of how you transfer the funds.

What the best payment providers offer goes well beyond the transfer. Forward payment contracts let you lock in today's exchange rate for a payment due in 30, 60 or 90 days. Rate alerts notify you when the market hits a target rate. Visibility tools let your finance team track exposure across multiple currencies and upcoming payments, giving you control over your cash flow cycle.

Stablecoins offer none of this. They offer stability during transfer only. The currency exposure on either side of the transfer remains entirely unmanaged unless you layer additional tools on top — tools that, for most businesses, simply don't exist yet in the stablecoin ecosystem.

Case study: EUR/USD moves 2% between the date you place your order with your Vietnamese supplier and the payment date. On a payment provider route, you could have locked in the rate at the point of order using a forward payment contract, protecting your margin.

On a stablecoin route, that same 2% move hits your P&L, because there is no equivalent mechanism to fix your rate ahead of time.

The stablecoin risks the headlines underplay

Speed and cost might dominate the headlines but the risks get less airtime. Here's what finance teams need to understand before acting.

De-pegging

The fundamental promise of a stablecoin is a stable 1:1 peg to its reference currency. When reserves include illiquid assets, issuers can slow or suspend redemptions under stress and the peg breaks. The collapse of TerraUSD in May 2022 is the starkest example: it fell from $1 to $0.40 in days, wiping out billions in value and triggering a market-wide crash. More recently, USDe briefly traded at $0.65 on Binance in October 2025 during a liquidation event. For a business mid-payment, a de-pegging event can mean real, unrecoverable losses.

Payment providers deal in regulated fiat currencies. There's no peg to maintain, no reserve to question and no redemption mechanism that can fail under stress.

Regulatory fragmentation

MiCA in the EU provides some clarity: USDC is compliant, USDT is not. The US GENIUS Act — a comprehensive regulatory framework for stablecoins — was signed into law in July 2025 but is still being implemented, with full rules expected later in 2026. Across other jurisdictions, the picture is fragmented.

Payment providers operate under established frameworks — PSD2 in the EU, FCA authorisation in the UK — with clear rules on client fund protection, dispute resolution and cross-border operations.

Compliance exposure

Stablecoins accounted for 84% of illicit virtual-asset transaction volume in 2025. For regulated businesses, this creates reputational and compliance exposure even without any direct involvement. Your AML and KYC obligations don't disappear because the payment rail is different.

With a regulated payment provider, AML and KYC compliance is built into the product by regulatory obligation, not something you layer on afterwards.

Operational risk

Stablecoin payments depend on digital wallets, private keys, API integrations, and custodian systems. Network congestion slows settlement; outages stop it entirely. Losing a private key is the functional equivalent of losing cash; permanent and irreversible.

Payment providers require no private key management and no wallet infrastructure. Funds are held in regulated accounts with defined recourse if something goes wrong.

Logistical risk

On-chain transfers are irreversible. Any misrouting results in permanent loss. Phishing, malware and credential theft are all credible threats: in 2024, a phishing attack stole $55 million in DAI stablecoins from a single digital wallet. Internal controls need to be significantly tighter than for a traditional payment workflow.

With a payment provider, erroneous or fraudulent payments can often be recalled or investigated. Your provider's compliance team carries part of that burden alongside you.

Reconciliation challenges

Unlike a traditional bank account, a stablecoin wallet doesn't automatically identify who sent a payment. When a stablecoin transfer arrives, the sender's identity isn't necessarily clear to the recipient.

As Julien explains:

If you work on the value of trust — knowing who is paying you, being able to reconcile your payments — you better be sure it's been paid by someone in the name you expect.

A lot of payment providers use nominative accounts: every payment carries the sender's name, IBAN and reference. Your accounts team knows exactly who paid, when and what for.

Hidden counterparty risk

Reserve quality, redemption terms, sanctions exposure, wallet controls, counterparty concentration, and regulatory treatment across jurisdictions all need active management. The risks for enterprise users extend well beyond price.

Regulated payment providers are subject to capital requirements, regular auditing and supervisory oversight. Reserve quality and sanctions exposure are managed at the regulatory level, not left to individual businesses to assess.

Case study: Your Vietnamese supplier payment is in transit as a stablecoin. A de-pegging event drops the value of your USDT by 10%. An off-ramp outage delays conversion by 48 hours. Your finance team has no mechanism to recall the transfer.

On a payment provider route, none of these failure modes apply. Payments operate within regulated frameworks, supported by compliance teams, with defined recourse.

What this means in practice

Stablecoins are a genuinely interesting development in cross-border payments, and their relevance will grow as institutional adoption accelerates and regulatory frameworks mature.

Visa, Mastercard, Stripe, PayPal and Klarna have all integrated stablecoin rails. Nine European banks — including ING, UniCredit and SEB — launched a consortium in late 2025 to issue a euro-denominated stablecoin, explicitly positioned as a response to US dollar dominance in digital payments. In 2025, stablecoin payments reached $400 billion, with an estimated 60% of that volume driven by B2B flows. It's worth noting that this transaction volume also consists of trading, internal fund transfers, and automated blockchain activity.

It's also worth noting that traditional payment infrastructure isn't standing still. SWIFT is actively developing a DLT-based network of its own, reimagining correspondent banking on blockchain rails, while keeping the same regulated participant banks in place.

Separately, real-time payment scheme interconnection — linking systems like the UK's Faster Payments, Brazil's PIX and India's UPI — is creating a third lane for fast, low-cost cross-border settlement with no crypto involvement required.

The competitive landscape for cross-border payments isn't simply stablecoins versus legacy rails. It's already a more competitive race. And the outcome is far from decided.

But the question for your business isn't "are stablecoins interesting?" It's "are they the right tool for your payments right now?" The honest answer? It depends on a few specific conditions.

Where stablecoins make sense today:

• High-friction corridors (parts of Latin America, Africa and Southeast Asia) where correspondent banking is genuinely slow or expensive
• Treasury liquidity management where near-real-time positioning is a priority
• High-volume, high-value transfers where all-in costs favour stablecoins
• Businesses with the internal infrastructure to manage wallets, keys, compliance and off-ramp complexity

Where payment providers still hold the ground:

• Predictable, reliable settlement with full visibility and defined recourse
• FX risk management tools like forward payments, rate alerts, exposure tracking built around your cash flow cycle
• Regulated, compliant frameworks with operational support
• Transparent, all-in pricing without infrastructure overhead

As Julien Molez reflects:

We believe there's a real interest in the underlying value proposition. But you need that network effect. You need more suppliers and customers wishing to pay in stablecoin for it to become a reality. It's like surfing. There's a moment to stand up and ride the wave. Question is: what's the right moment?

The next 12–18 months will bring greater regulatory clarity, deeper off-ramp infrastructure and more institutional-grade stablecoin products. The balance will shift. But for most finance teams making international payments today, the case for stablecoin rails is strongest in specific corridors and use cases only, not as a wholesale replacement for established payment infrastructure.

As Julien concludes:

The day you can pay your taxes with stablecoin, then maybe something will drastically change.

Why 10,000+ international businesses trust iBanFirst as their dedicated payment provider

iBanFirst is a payment provider built for small to medium-sized multinationals; finance teams with regular international payments and complex FX needs. As a direct SWIFT member, we inject payment instructions into the network directly, so payments move faster because the routing is shorter.

With iBanFirst, you and your finance team can:

• Make cross-border payments in 135+ fiat currencies with transparent FX spreads shown before execution
• Track payments in real time with the iBanFirst Payment Tracker and give your suppliers the same visibility
• Use FX risk management tools, including forward payment contracts, when future-currency exposure affects budget certainty
• Work with FX specialists who understand your business and provide support whenever you need it

Request an account to see whether iBanFirst is a good fit for the way your team handles cross-border payments.