Summary

1. A milestone in cryptocurrency regulation. Recently, the U.S. passed the stablecoin bill, becoming the first in the U.S. to establish a regulatory framework for stablecoins, filling a regulatory void in this area. Just two days later, Hong Kong also passed a similar stablecoin bill, helping it participate in the global digital financial center competition and consolidate its status as an international financial center. Stablecoins serve as a "bridge" between the traditional financial system and the decentralized financial system (DeFi). Following the European Union, both the U.S. and Hong Kong have introduced regulatory frameworks for stablecoins, marking an important step for cryptocurrencies to integrate into the mainstream financial system.

2. From "barbaric growth" to gradually moving towards regulated development. The recent stablecoin-related bills primarily address risk points that have emerged in the industry, including transparency of reserve assets, liquidity management risks, instability of algorithmic stablecoin values, money laundering and illegal financial activities, and inadequate consumer protection, establishing a series of regulations. The bills reference the regulatory frameworks for traditional financial institutions but are stricter on liquidity management. In the U.S., EU, and Hong Kong, the statutory reserve requirement for banks approaches 0%, while the reserve requirement for stablecoin issuers is mandated to be 100%, which we believe is mainly considering the already mature and strict regulation of banks, as deposits enjoy stable liquidity; however, stablecoins do not pay interest and are traded more frequently. Foreign regulation classifies stablecoins not as "on-chain deposits" but as "on-chain cash," thereby solidifying the foundation of the decentralized financial system.

3. How to understand the impact of stablecoins on the financial system? By the end of May 2025, the total market cap of mainstream stablecoins is approximately 230 billion USD, growing over 40 times from the scale at the beginning of 2020, with a rapid growth rate, yet still relatively small compared to the mainstream financial system, accounting for only 1% of onshore deposits in the U.S. However, in terms of transaction volume, stablecoins play a significant role as an important payment method and infrastructure in the cryptocurrency system, with the annual transaction volume of mainstream stablecoins (USDT and USDC) reaching 28 trillion USD, surpassing the annual transaction volume of credit card organizations Visa and Mastercard. As stablecoins are incorporated into the financial regulatory framework, decentralized finance is expected to welcome development opportunities and deepen its integration with the traditional financial system.

4. Lower cost and higher efficiency as international payment methods. According to data from the World Bank, by the third quarter of 2024, the average remittance fee globally is 6.62%, while the United Nations' 2030 Sustainable Development Goals require that this fee be reduced to no more than 3%, with a remittance time requirement of 1-5 working days. The efficiency of traditional financial systems is mainly affected by the need to pass through multiple intermediary banks in the SWIFT network. In contrast, using stablecoins for remittances generally incurs transaction costs of less than 1%, taking a few minutes or less. However, it is noteworthy that before the introduction of the bills, stablecoin payments had not been included under KYC and anti-money laundering regulations, which also posed challenges to cross-border capital account restrictions in emerging markets. Therefore, although using stablecoins for cross-border payments is technically more efficient, this difference is somewhat derived from regulatory discrepancies, and as regulatory standardization occurs, the compliance costs for stablecoins may also rise. Due to the potential impact on capital accounts and monetary sovereignty in emerging markets, there are regulatory restrictions on stablecoins in some countries and regions. In the long term, as regulatory frameworks improve, we expect the market share of stablecoins in international payments to increase, although this process is still accompanied by industry development and regulatory refinement.

5. Full reserve requirements limit monetary creation functions: The theoretical requirement for 100% reserve assets restricts the ability of stablecoin issuers to conduct credit expansion; the process of deposits being converted into stablecoins is actually a transfer of bank deposits rather than a creation of money, therefore, the issuance of stablecoins theoretically does not affect the supply of USD. However, when funds continuously flow out of deposits, this may lead to banks shrinking their balance sheets and reducing money supply. The process of other currencies being exchanged for USD stablecoins effectively produces an exchange effect, but this manifests as the flow of USD cross-border or between accounts, without affecting the total USD money supply. Additionally, lending platforms using cryptocurrencies as collateral effectively perform a function similar to banks in credit creation, increasing the size of "quasi-money" (i.e., stablecoins) within the decentralized financial system, but this does not affect the supply of traditional currency. Since the application scenarios involving the cryptocurrency financial system are mainly concentrated in payment and investment areas, with lending primarily based on speculative demand, by the end of 2024, the scale of cryptocurrency lending platforms is approximately 37 billion USD, which is relatively small.

6. The impact of deposit disintermediation on banks. The impact of stablecoins on the banking system primarily reflects the financial disintermediation effect. The conversion of deposits into stablecoins may result in outflow of deposits, a similar effect to that experienced by money market funds and high-yield bond markets on the banking system. For example, since 2022, in the high interest rate environment in the U.S., deposits have flowed to money market funds amounting to about 2.3 trillion USD, becoming one of the triggering factors for the Silicon Valley Bank risk incident. According to statistics from the U.S. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, by the end of 2024, among approximately 18 trillion USD in deposits within U.S. banks, approximately 6 trillion USD are transactional deposits, classified by the U.S. Treasury as deposits theoretically facing outflow risk. However, considering that the development of stablecoins has been included in the government regulatory framework, the impact on the financial system is relatively controllable. Meanwhile, traditional banks are exploring ways to adapt to the development trend of stablecoins and respond to challenges from deposit outflow, such as JPMorgan in the U.S., Industrial Bank in France, and Standard Chartered Bank.

7. Undertaking government debt and influencing the transmission of monetary policy. As of the first quarter of 2025, issuers of USDT and USDC hold approximately 120 billion USD in U.S. Treasury reserves. If these are combined as a single 'economy', they rank 19th in terms of overseas holdings of U.S. Treasury securities, sitting between South Korea and Germany in terms of holding amounts. With the increase in market cap of stablecoins, the demand for U.S. Treasuries as reserve assets is expected to rise. However, stablecoins primarily accommodate short-term U.S. Treasuries with maturities of less than three months, and their capacity to absorb long-term Treasuries is expected to be limited. The interest rates on short-term Treasuries are subject to central bank monetary policy adjustments, influenced by factors such as inflation and employment in the real economy. For monetary policy, the purchase of Treasuries by stablecoin issuers lowers short-end interest rates, necessitating the central bank to withdraw money to hedge. In the long run, the appeal of stablecoins for deposits may lead to a trend of financial disintermediation, resulting in a migration of financing from traditional financial systems to decentralized financial systems, which may also weaken the effectiveness of central banks' monetary policy adjustments.

8. The impact of crypto asset price fluctuations on financial market transmission. From the perspective of money creation, borrowing activities within the decentralized financial system have achieved the function of creating 'quasi-money', particularly through the purchase of tokenized stock assets with stablecoins, which allows funds to flow directly in and out of the stock market. From the market sentiment perspective, cryptocurrency price fluctuations are significant, affecting stock market expectations. Historically, there has been a certain correlation between the Nasdaq index and Bitcoin prices; in the stock market, crypto assets and stablecoins related symbols, such as crypto asset exchanges and financial institutions, influence stock prices through changes in fundamentals.

9. The potential reconstructive forces of the international monetary order. For the dollar, the impact of stablecoins is somewhat 'contradictory': on one hand, since 99% of fiat stablecoin market cap is pegged to the dollar, the development of stablecoins seems to reinforce the dollar's dominant position in the global financial system; on the other hand, the international background of the development of stablecoins and crypto assets is actually based on the reverse globalization trend, the increasing risk of geopolitical restrictions and weakened fiscal discipline in the financial sector, and the de-dollarization demand of some economies. Therefore, the high correlation of stablecoins to the dollar not only reflects the dollar's global financial dominance but also serves as a 'bridge' to a more diversified new order in the global financial system. This may explain why the recent rises and popularity of crypto asset prices accompanied by the intensification of reverse globalization trends. Moreover, the European Union and Hong Kong have opened up space for the issuance of non-dollar stablecoins, competing with the dollar's dominance in the stablecoin sector. In the long term, whether the dollar's position is further strengthened as stablecoins operate under a new regulatory framework or faces challenges from other currencies and crypto assets remains to be seen in the industry’s ongoing evolution. For emerging economies, due to the competitive nature of stablecoins relative to local currencies, local residents and enterprises using stablecoins for settlement could result in local currency being effectively converted into dollars, leading to currency depreciation and inflation; thus, for financial security reasons, multiple economies have implemented restrictions on the usage of stablecoins.

10. Implications for currency internationalization. For the Hong Kong dollar, regulating the issuance of stablecoins, especially a Hong Kong dollar stablecoin, helps enhance the influence of the Hong Kong dollar in cross-border payments and crypto assets, increasing the international competitiveness of Hong Kong's financial sector and solidifying Hong Kong's status as an international financial center. At the same time, Hong Kong can leverage its financial market advantages and the institutional innovations brought about by the stablecoin bill to provide a 'testbed' for the internationalization of other currencies. The bill permits the issuance of non-dollar stablecoins, which expands the utility of non-dollar currencies in international payments, settlements, and investment financing scenarios, accelerating the process of internationalization. In summary, the Hong Kong stablecoin bill has far-reaching implications for currency internationalization, but this process still requires ongoing attention to financial stability risks and timely adjustments to relevant policies.

Risks. Development risks of the cryptocurrency industry, with the impact of stablecoins on the traditional financial system exceeding expectations, and regulatory policy advancements not meeting expectations.

Main text

01. The Stablecoin Bill: A Milestone in Cryptocurrency Regulation.

The European Union, the United States, and Hong Kong have successively established regulatory frameworks for stablecoins.

Stablecoins are a type of cryptocurrency whose value is pegged to a specific asset (usually fiat currency). They serve as a bridge between decentralized financial systems (Defi) and traditional financial systems, and are an important infrastructure for decentralized finance. Recently, the United States passed a stablecoin bill, becoming the first country to establish a regulatory framework for stablecoins, filling a regulatory gap in this field. Just two days later, Hong Kong also passed a similar stablecoin bill, which will help Hong Kong participate in the global competition for digital financial centers and solidify its position as an international financial center. Stablecoins are a "bridge" between traditional finance and decentralized finance (Defi). Following the EU, both the USA and Hong Kong have introduced regulatory frameworks for stablecoins, marking an important step towards integrating cryptocurrencies into the mainstream financial system.

Chart 1: Cryptocurrency Assets Begin to Exhibit Characteristics of Currency and Financial Systems.

Chart 2: Principles of Mainstream Stablecoins.

Chart 3: Dollar Stablecoins Collateralized by Highly Liquid Assets Dominate Stablecoins.

02. From "Barbaric Growth" to Gradually Moving Towards Standardized Development.

此前稳定币领域曾出现多个重大风险和监管事件，包括2022年TerraUSD（UST）崩溃、2024年Tether（USDT）底层资产不清晰导致在欧盟受到监管限制、2023年纽约金融监管要求币安美元（BUSD）停止铸造等。美国和中国香港本次的稳定币相关法案主要针对此前行业出现的风险点，包括储备资产不透明、流动性管理风险、算法稳定币币值不稳定、洗钱和非法金融活动、消费者保护不足等问题，制定一系列规范，主要内容包括：

1. 流动性方面，要求稳定币储备资产100%锚定法定货币或高流动性资产，包括现金、活期存款、短期美国国债等，储备资产需要与运营资金隔离防止挪用；

2. 准入资格方面，要求发行机构需要获得监管牌照授权，并设立最低资本准入门槛；

3. 要求稳定币纳入现有的反洗钱监管框架，设置客户身份识别要求；

4. 消费者保护方面，要求确保用户可按面值赎回，破产时客户资金享有优先清偿权；

5. 明确禁止稳定币付息，以减少对传统金融体系的冲击。

实际上，以上稳定币法案均参照了对于传统金融机构的监管框架，设置了类似的牌照、资本、流动性管理、反洗钱、消费者保护等方面的要求，但在流动性管理上更为严格。美国、欧盟和中国香港对于银行的法定准备金率均接近0%，但对于稳定币的发行机构要求准备金率为100%，我们认为主要是考虑到对于银行已存在较为成熟的严格监管，并且银行客户存款一般出于居民和企业的储蓄和实体运营需求，银行也对存款付息，因此存款流动性较为稳定；但稳定币要求不付息，交易较为频繁，流动性状况不稳定。并且，稳定币作为去中心化金融（Defi）的重要基础设施锚定美元等法币，也需要更强的储备资产作为底层支撑。综上所述，境外监管对于稳定币的定位并非“链上存款”，而是 “链上现金”（尽管发行人为商业机构，与央行数字货币有所区别），从而筑牢去中心化金融体系的根基。

图表4：稳定币监管框架趋于完善

03. How to understand the impact of stablecoins on the financial system.

In terms of scale, as of the end of May 2025, the total market cap of mainstream stablecoins is approximately 230 billion USD, which has increased more than 40 times compared to the scale at the beginning of 2020, showing rapid growth. However, compared to the scale of mainstream financial systems, it is still relatively small, such as USD deposits (onshore deposits approximately 19 trillion USD), U.S. Treasury bonds (approximately 37 trillion USD), and smaller than mainstream cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin's market cap approximately 2 trillion USD). However, in terms of trading volume, stablecoins play an important role as a payment method and infrastructure in the cryptocurrency system. According to estimates, the annual trading volume of mainstream stablecoins (USDT and USDC) reaches 28 trillion USD, exceeding the annual trading volume of credit card organizations Visa and Mastercard (approximately 26 trillion USD, although the large volume of high-frequency trading in stablecoins may make this data not fully comparable); this figure is also higher than Bitcoin's trading volume in 2024 (19 trillion USD). As stablecoins are incorporated into the financial regulatory framework, decentralized finance is expected to see development opportunities and deepen its integration with the traditional financial system, posing new challenges and risks to the global financial system.

1. Lower cost and higher efficiency international payment method.

According to the World Bank, as of the third quarter of 2024, the average remittance fee worldwide is 6.62%, and the United Nations' 2030 Sustainable Development Goals require this fee to be reduced to no more than 3%, with delivery times needing to be 1-5 working days. The efficiency of the traditional financial system is mainly affected by the need to go through multiple intermediary banks in the SWIFT network. In contrast, using stablecoins for remittances generally has transaction costs below 1%, with times usually under a few minutes. However, it is worth noting that before the introduction of the bill, stablecoin payments had not yet been included in KYC and anti-money laundering regulations, which poses challenges to cross-border capital account controls in emerging markets. Therefore, despite the higher efficiency of using stablecoins for cross-border payments technically, this difference is somewhat due to regulatory disparities, and as regulations are standardized, the compliance costs of stablecoins may also increase. Due to potential impacts on capital accounts and monetary sovereignty in emerging markets, there are regulatory restrictions on stablecoins in some countries and regions. In the long term, as the regulatory framework improves, we expect the market share of stablecoins in international payments to increase, although this process is still accompanied by industry development and regulatory improvement.

Chart 5: Comparison of traditional cross-border payment and stablecoin payment models.

2. Full reserve requirements limit the currency creation function.

Theoretically, a 100% reserve asset requirement limits the ability of stablecoin issuers to expand credit. The process of exchanging deposits for stablecoins is essentially a transfer of bank deposits rather than their creation, thus the issuance of stablecoins theoretically does not affect the USD money supply, specifically:

1. If reserve assets are used for deposits, the money supply remains unchanged, as household deposits are converted into an equivalent amount of stablecoins and interbank deposits; if reserve assets are used to purchase government bonds held by residents, enterprises, and non-bank institutions, the money supply remains unchanged as market-circulating government bonds are converted into stablecoins. However, continuous outflows from deposits may lead to bank balance sheet contraction and a decrease in the money supply.

2. USD stablecoins have an attractive effect on other currencies; the process of converting other currencies into USD stablecoins essentially creates a currency exchange effect, but this manifests as the flow of dollars across borders or accounts without affecting the total USD money supply.

3. Lending platforms that use Cryptos as collateral effectively perform a credit creation function similar to banks, increasing the scale of "quasi-money" (i.e., stablecoins) within the decentralized financial system, but do not affect the supply of traditional currency. Due to the application scenarios involved in the crypto asset financial system primarily focusing on payment and investment areas, with relatively few lending scenarios, by the end of 2024, the scale of crypto asset lending platforms is about 37 billion USD, which is relatively small.

Figure 6: The impact mechanism of stablecoins on traditional currency supply.

Figure 7: The impact of stablecoin issuance on money supply.

3. The impact of disintermediation on bank deposits.

The impact of stablecoins on the banking system mainly manifests as a financial disintermediation effect, which means removing intermediaries. Converting deposits into stablecoins may lead to deposit outflows. Although the issuers of stablecoins purchasing government bonds and reverse repos will cause deposits to flow back to banks, in the long term, this will lead to banks' liabilities being replaced from savings deposits to interbank liabilities, or cause banks to reduce their bond holdings resulting in balance sheet contraction, thus putting pressure on bank interest margins and eroding profits. This effect is similar to the impact of money market funds and the high-yield bond market on the banking system. For example, since 2022, the outflow of deposits to money market funds in the high-interest-rate environment in the U.S. has reached about 2.3 trillion USD, becoming one of the triggering factors for the Silicon Valley Bank risk event.

From the perspective of the stablecoin legislation, U.S. regulatory legislation explicitly requires stablecoins not to pay interest, which can somewhat reduce the appeal of stablecoins to deposits. The vast majority of deposits are used for daily fund transactions, resulting in stickiness. Although the scale of stablecoins has grown rapidly, it only accounts for about 1% of the total bank deposits in the United States. Assuming the scale of stablecoins maintains an annual growth rate of 15% over the next three years, by 2030, the attraction of stablecoins to deposits would be about 200-300 billion USD, accounting for around 1% of deposits, indicating a limited impact. However, in the long run, there are two risks:

1. The development speed of stablecoins exceeds expectations. For example, U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent quoted market predictions that the scale of stablecoins would rise from the current 200-300 billion USD to 2 trillion USD by 2028, implying an eightfold growth within three years, significantly higher than the recent annual growth rate of 15%.

2. Stablecoins can obtain investment returns through indirect means more conveniently, such as investing in Tokenized MMF, RWA (real-world assets that generate income), and Staking Derivatives, making non-interest-bearing stablecoins generate yields and increasing their attractiveness to deposits.

According to statistics from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as of the end of 2024, about 6 trillion USD of the approximately 18 trillion USD in deposits held by banks in the United States are transactional deposits, which are theoretically classified by the U.S. Treasury as facing outflow risks. However, it is believed that considering the development of stablecoins has been included in the government's regulatory framework and the impact on the financial system is also within the scope of policy discretion, making the impact relatively controllable.

At the same time, traditional banks have also conducted some explorations to adapt to the development trend of stablecoins and respond to the challenges of deposit diversion. For example, JPMorgan has launched JPM Coin to achieve dollar tokenization, serving institutional clients in cross-border payments and securities transactions; Societe Generale has launched the USD CoinVertible and EUR CoinVertible stablecoins aimed at institutions and investors; Standard Chartered has established a joint venture to issue a Hong Kong dollar stablecoin and has applied for a license from the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, and so on.

Chart 8: Deposits facing outflow risks are mainly transaction-type non-interest-bearing deposits.

Chart 9: The phenomenon of deposit disintermediation in the United States intensifies in a high-interest-rate environment.

4. Absorbing government debt, affecting the transmission of monetary policy.

Stablecoin issuers become buyers of U.S. debt. The reserve assets of USDT and USDC are mainly composed of short-term U.S. Treasury securities and reverse repurchase agreements, with short-term U.S. Treasury securities accounting for 66%/41% of the reserves for USDT/USDC, respectively. As of the first quarter of 2025, USDT and USDC issuers hold reserves in U.S. debt totaling about 120 billion USD. If combined as one 'economy,' they rank 19th in terms of holding U.S. debt overseas, between South Korea and Germany.

How to understand the role of stablecoins in bearing government debt? As the market value of stablecoins rises, we expect the demand for U.S. Treasury securities as reserve assets will increase. If we consider the market prediction quoted by U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent, estimating that by 2028, the scale of stablecoins will rise from the current 200-300 billion USD to 2 trillion USD, exceeding Japan, which is currently the largest holder of U.S. debt. However, it is worth noting that stablecoins can mainly hold short-term U.S. debt with maturities of less than three months. We expect their ability to absorb long-term U.S. debt is rather limited, while short-term U.S. debt rates are subject to central bank monetary policy control, depending on factors such as inflation and employment in the real economy. The central bank can hedge by reducing or increasing the injection of base currency.

Impact on the transmission of monetary policy. As mentioned earlier, stablecoin issuers buy U.S. debt, which lowers short-end interest rates, prompting central banks to withdraw money for hedging; in the long term, the attractiveness of stablecoins for deposits may lead to financial disintermediation, resulting in a shift in financing from the traditional financial system to the decentralized financial system, which may also weaken the effectiveness of central bank monetary policy control.

Chart 10: The reserves of USDT and USDC are primarily composed of short-term Treasury securities and reverse repurchases.

Figure 11: In the long term, stablecoins may take on part of the demand for U.S. Treasury Bonds.

Data source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Tether, Circle, China International Capital Corporation Research Department.

Figure 12: In recent years, the scale of U.S. Treasury holdings in mainland China has declined.

5. The impact of cryptocurrency prices on financial market transmission.

The impact of stablecoins on financial markets mainly occurs in three areas:

1. From the perspective of money creation, as mentioned earlier, the lending activities within the decentralized financial system realize the creation function of "quasi-money," especially through stablecoins to purchase tokenized stock assets, which directly causes funds to flow into/out of the stock market;

2. From the perspective of market sentiment, the price fluctuations of Cryptos are significant and affect stock market expectations. Historically, there has been a certain correlation between the Nasdaq Index and Bitcoin prices;

3. In the stock market, crypto assets and stablecoin related symbols, such as crypto asset exchanges and Financial Institutions, influence stock prices through changes in fundamentals.

Chart 13: There is a correlation between the price of Cryptos and the Nasdaq Index.

6. The potential reconstructive force of the international currency order.

For the USD, the impact of stablecoins is somewhat "contradictory":

On the one hand, since currently 99% of fiat stablecoins' market value is pegged to the dollar, the development of stablecoins seems to consolidate the dollar's dominant position in the global financial system;

On the other hand, the international context for the development of stablecoins and crypto assets is actually based on the rising risks of geo-restrictive measures and weakened fiscal discipline in the financial sector under the trend of deglobalization, as well as the demand for de-dollarization in some economies.

Therefore, the high correlation of stablecoins with the USD not only reflects the USD's dominance in the global financial landscape but also serves as a 'bridge' for the global financial system transitioning from USD dominance to a more diversified new order. This may explain why the recent rise and spread of crypto asset prices have coincided with the intensification of deglobalization trends. Additionally, this time, the EU and Hong Kong have opened up space for the issuance of non-USD stablecoins, competing against the USD's dominant position in the stablecoin sector. In the long run, whether the USD's position continues to strengthen under the guidance of the new regulatory framework for stablecoins or faces challenges from other currencies and crypto assets themselves remains to be observed continuously in the development of the industry.

For emerging economies, stablecoins are competitive with local currencies. If local residents and enterprises use stablecoins for settlement, it would effectively convert the local currency into USD, leading to currency depreciation and inflation. Therefore, for financial security reasons, several economies have introduced restrictions on the use of stablecoins.

Chart 14: The USD dominates major financial systems.

7. Implications for Currency Internationalization.

For the Hong Kong dollar, regulating stablecoin issuance, particularly for Hong Kong dollar stablecoins, can help enhance the influence of the Hong Kong dollar in fields such as cross-border payments and crypto assets, strengthening the international competitiveness of Hong Kong's financial sector and the Hong Kong dollar, consolidating Hong Kong's position as an international financial center. At the same time, Hong Kong can leverage its financial market advantages and the institutional innovations brought by the stablecoin bill to provide a 'testing ground' for the internationalization of other currencies. The bill allows for the issuance of non-USD stablecoins, capable of expanding the use of non-USD currencies in international payment, settlement, and investment scenarios, accelerating the internationalization process. In summary, the Hong Kong stablecoin bill has far-reaching implications for currency internationalization, but this process still needs to continuously monitor financial stability risks and timely optimize and adjust relevant policies.

Chart 15: There is room for the RMB's share in global Forex reserves to increase.

Risk Warning

1. Risks in the development of the Cryptos industry: Currently, regulation of the Cryptos industry is in its early stages, and there is still considerable uncertainty in the industry's development. Potential risks include lack of transparency in reserve assets, liquidity management risks, volatility in the value of algorithmic stablecoins, money laundering and illegal financial activities, and inadequate consumer protection.

2. The impact of stablecoins on the traditional financial system is greater than expected: The rapid development of the Cryptos industry may have an impact on the traditional financial system, affecting the business development of traditional financial institutions.

3. Regulatory policy advancement may be slower than expected: The current regulatory framework for stablecoins still needs to be improved, and it takes time for regulatory policies to be implemented. There is a risk that subsequent policy advancements may not meet expectations.

Editor/melody