Stablecoins as B2B Settlement Infrastructure
This isn't theoretical. Brokers operating in regions with limited banking infrastructure—LATAM, Africa, parts of Asia—are already using stablecoins for client deposits, IB commission payments, and affiliate settlements. Some prime-of-prime arrangements now include stablecoin settlement options for faster margin calls. Multi-entity brokers use them for inter-company transfers, reducing correspondent fees and delays.
What They Are
Dollar-denominated payment instruments
Operating on modern settlement rails—not investment vehicles, not speculative instruments.
B2B settlement infrastructure
Increasingly used by institutional treasury operations, including FX prime brokers and LPs.
24/7 operation with settlement finality in minutes
Not days. No banking hour constraints.
Regulatory clarity improving rapidly
MiCA in Europe, clear frameworks emerging in major jurisdictions.
Why They Matter for FX/CFD Brokers
Settlement happens when you need it
Weekends, holidays, 3am margin calls. The rails don't close.
Minutes to finality
Not 3-5 days waiting on correspondent chains. Position adjustments, LP settlements, IB payouts—all with same-day certainty.
No correspondent intermediaries
Direct counterparty settlement. Each bank in a correspondent chain adds time, cost, and failure points. Stablecoin rails eliminate the chain.
Transparent FX conversion
You see the rate before you commit. No spread opacity, no post-facto adjustments.
Reduced intermediary fees
Correspondent banking fees on high-value transfers add up. Stablecoin settlement costs are predictable and typically lower for cross-border flows.
Programmable release conditions
Escrow, milestone-based releases, automated settlement triggers. Treasury operations that currently require manual intervention can be systematized.
Immutable transaction records
Every settlement is documented with timestamps and counterparty details. Compliance and audit trails are built into the infrastructure.
Works across your geographic footprint
Major currency corridors, emerging markets, jurisdictions where correspondent banking is expensive or limited.
When They Make Sense
Not every flow belongs on stablecoin rails. Here's where they add value:
Regular cross-border payments across multiple jurisdictions
Where correspondent chains add days and costs to every settlement.
Settlement timing creates operational pressure
Margin calls, LP settlements, time-sensitive payouts—flows where hours matter.
Correspondent fees materially impact margins
On your payment flows. Predictable costs vs. variable correspondent markup.
Current banking relationships are expensive, limited, or unstable
For certain corridors. Alternative infrastructure for specific friction points.
Treasury operations span multiple entities across jurisdictions
Inter-company transfers without correspondent delays or fees.
When They Might Not
Stablecoins aren't the answer for every payment flow:
Domestic-only payment flows
Local rails are typically more efficient for domestic settlements.
Jurisdictions with regulatory uncertainty
Around stablecoin usage. Regulatory landscape varies significantly.
Payment volumes too low to justify infrastructure setup
There's a minimum threshold where the setup makes sense.
Existing banking relationships already optimized
For your specific corridors. If it's working well, don't fix it.
My Role
Assess whether stablecoin infrastructure fits your specific payment flows
Not everything belongs on stablecoin rails. I help you identify where it actually adds value.
Compare settlement costs and timing against your current setup
With actual corridor-level analysis. Real numbers, not marketing claims.
Navigate the provider landscape
Not all stablecoin rails are equivalent. I don't get paid by providers.
Support evaluation without lock-in
To any particular solution. Assessment and recommendation are separate from implementation.
Start a Conversation
I need to understand your flows before I can recommend anything. If stablecoins don't make sense for your operations, I'll tell you.