Original Article Title: "When Stablecoins Start Building Chains, Does Ethereum Still Have a Chance?"

Original Article Author: Viee, Biteye

Over the past few years, stablecoins have been one of the most quietly influential players in the crypto market, with a continuously growing market size. Cross-border remittances, transaction settlements, regulatory pilots... Stablecoins have always been an indispensable gear in the flow of crypto capital.

This year, however, a more significant milestone has been reached: stablecoin issuers are no longer content with just "standing on a chain" but have begun to build their own chains. In August, Circle announced the launch of Arc, followed closely by Tempo led by Stripe, revealing more details. These two giants, who have been deeply involved in stablecoins for many years, almost simultaneously took this step, leaving behind intriguing logic.

Why do stablecoins need their own chain? In this seemingly "B-end-oriented" game, do retail investors still have a chance? When stablecoins control their own "money road," do general-purpose blockchains like Ethereum and Solana still retain enough influence?

This article will unfold from four perspectives:

1. What is a stablecoin chain, and how does it differ from traditional blockchains;

2. A comparison of the design paths of representative projects;

3. Will stablecoin chains threaten Ethereum;

4. Opportunities for ordinary users to participate.

01 Stablecoin Chain: A Path Closer to the "Settlement Layer"

If Ethereum, Solana, and other blockchains are focused on decentralized applications, stablecoin chains are closer to the settlement layer.

They have several distinctive features:

· Stablecoin as Gas: Stable, predictable transaction fees, eliminating the need to hold additional volatile assets to pay for transactions.

· Designed for Payments and Settlement Optimization: The goal is not universality but stability and ease of use.

· Built-in Compliance Modules: Facilitating integration with banks and payment institutions, reducing gray areas.

· Designed around the Demand for "Money": Cross-currency settlements, foreign exchange matching, unified accounting units, closer to real-world settlement systems.

In other words, a stablecoin native chain is more like a vertical integration model, where key processes such as issuance, clearing, and applications are controlled as much as possible in-house. Its cost involves bearing the initial cold start pressure, but in the long run, it can achieve economies of scale and influence.

02 Five Representative Chains Taking Different Paths

1. Arc @arc: Circle's First Self-Owned Public Chain

As the world's second-largest stablecoin issuer, Circle's launch of Arc is not surprising. Despite the massive market size of USDC, transaction fees are constrained by the volatility of Ethereum or other public chains. The emergence of Arc is precisely what Circle aims for in building its own "settlement layer."

In Arc's design, there are three core points:

· USDC as Gas: Transparent fees with no exchange rate risk.

· Fast Transactions, Stable Settlement: Commits to confirming transactions within 1 second, suitable for cross-border payments and large-value clearing.

· Optional Privacy Features: Providing necessary accounting privacy for enterprises or institutions while ensuring compliance.

This means that Arc is not only Circle's technological experiment but also a crucial step towards its transformation into a financial infrastructure provider.

2. Tempo @tempo: "Payment-First" Public Chain

Tempo, co-incubated by Stripe and Paradigm, has a straightforward core logic: after stablecoins go mainstream, there is a need for infrastructure truly suitable for payments. Traditional public chains either have unstable fees, insufficient performance, or are too "crypto-native" in experience, making it difficult to support global settlement flows. Tempo aims to fill this gap.

Therefore, Tempo has several distinct design features:

· Any Stablecoin Can Be Used as Gas: Achieving stablecoin swaps through a built-in AMM.

· Low Fees & Predictability: Equipped with payment channels, memos, and whitelisting functions, making it more akin to real-world payment systems.

· Ultimate Performance: Targeting 100,000 TPS, sub-second confirmation, suitable for scenarios such as payroll, remittance, microtransactions, etc.

· EVM Compatibility: Based on the Reth architecture, with low developer migration costs.

It also has heavyweight partners, including Visa, Deutsche Bank, Shopify, OpenAI... This makes Tempo more like an open USD payment network rather than a mere stablecoin appendage. If successfully implemented, it might even become a prototype of an "on-chain payroll system."

Although Tempo focuses on "payments first," the level of decentralization has also sparked some discussions. Currently, Tempo's design leans more toward the attributes of a "permissioned blockchain" rather than a "public blockchain," where nodes are not entirely open, thus indeed reducing the level of decentralization.

3. Stable @stable: USDT's Home

Stable is a chain specifically designed for USDT, supported by Bitfinex and USDT0, aiming to facilitate the smoother circulation of USDT in daily financial activities.

In its design, Stable has done several things:

· USDT Native Gas: Fees paid directly in USDT, peer-to-peer transfers completely gas-free.

· Sub-second Confirmation: Balancing small payments and large fund flows.

· Enterprise-grade Features: Including batch transfer aggregation, compliant privacy transfers.

· Consumer Experience: Wallet integration with bank cards and merchant payments.

· Developer-Friendly: EVM-compatible and provides a complete SDK.

The key word for Stable is implementation, focusing on how to naturally integrate USDT into cross-border remittances, merchant acquiring, institutional settlement, and other daily scenarios.

4. Plasma @PlasmaFDN: Bitcoin Sidechain

Unlike Stable, Plasma chose a different path. As a Bitcoin sidechain, it relies on BTC's security while focusing on stablecoin payments.

Design-wise, Plasma has the following key features:

· Bitcoin Native Bridge: BTC can cross-chain into the EVM environment without custody, directly participating in the stablecoin ecosystem.

· USDT Zero Fee Transfers: Completing USDT transfers for free is its main selling point.

· Custom Gas Token: Developers can choose stablecoins or native tokens for payment.

· Optional Privacy Feature: Suitable for use cases like payroll and institutional settlement.

· EVM Compatible: Built on the Reth architecture, developers have low migration costs.

In July, Plasma officially launched its public sale with the token $XPL, and the final total subscription amount exceeded $373 million, with oversubscription reaching over 7 times. The market's enthusiasm has already given it a boost ahead of time.

5. Converge @convergeonchain: The Convergence Point of RWA and DeFi

The previous chains essentially revolve around "stablecoin settlement payments." Converge has a different ambition; its goal is to bring RWA and DeFi onto the same chain.

In terms of design logic, Converge focuses on three key points:

· High-Performance: Sub-second block times, partnering with Arbitrum and Celestia to push performance to the limit.

· Stablecoin Native Gas: USDe and USDtb used for transaction fees.

· Institutional-Grade Security: Leveraging the ENA Network (CVN) to provide additional protection.

In short, Converge aims to address "how large capital can enter safely and efficiently." Its partners include well-known DeFi protocols like Aave, Pendle, Morpho, and it will also support the integration of RWA assets such as Securitize.

03 Different Starting Points, Common Direction

From Arc to Tempo, from Stable and Plasma to Converge, although with different approaches, they are all trying to address a very consistent core issue, which is how stablecoins can truly enter the daily financial cycle. Arc and Stable focus on the controllability of their own assets, Tempo and Plasma emphasize multi-coin neutrality, and Converge targets institutions and RWAs. The difference lies in the path, but the common goal is to make transfers more certain, liquidity smoother, and compliance more natural.

Following this main thread, three trends can generally be seen in the future of stablecoin public chains:

· Compliance and Institutionalization: In the future, stablecoin public chains will focus more on settlement finality and compliance interfaces, with Arc, Stable, and others striving to become a settlement layer that banks and payment institutions can directly connect to.

· Challenging Traditional Payments: Chains designed with "multi-currency neutrality" like Tempo, with low cost and global reach characteristics, are putting pressure on Visa and Mastercard as alternatives.

· Reshaping Market Dynamics: Currently, Circle and Tether occupy nearly 90% of the stablecoin market share, creating an almost duopoly in the market. However, chains like Tempo, with a "stablecoin-neutral" design, are breaking this pattern, and the future may move towards a multi-polar coexistence.

04 Stablecoin Chains: How Will They Reshape the Public Chain Landscape?

When stablecoin issuers enter the chain-making scene, the most immediate question is whether they will impact general-purpose blockchains like Ethereum and Solana?

Stablecoin chains are naturally born for the "money road," and are indeed more suitable for high-frequency but low-risk businesses such as cross-border remittances and salary payments than the ETH mainnet or Solana. Especially, the impact on TRON may be more direct. TRON's stablecoins mainly come from USDT, accounting for over 99%, and have already become the largest issuing public chain for USDT. However, if a Stable chain promoted by Tether itself gradually matures, TRON's greatest competitive advantage will be weakened.

However, some believe that these "payment-specific chains" are not truly considered blockchains in essence. This is because if they aim for complete decentralization, they cannot avoid various unrelated projects and tokens flooding in, resulting in congestion and performance degradation. Yet, if they choose to only serve payments, they either have to be as functionally minimal as Bitcoin, only capable of transfers, or be partially centralized, controlled by a small group of institutions. In other words, it is challenging for them to balance both "decentralization" and "efficient payments."

This also means that the positioning of Ethereum and Solana is actually quite secure. The former has built up a developer ecosystem based on security and composable general-purpose finance, while the latter has carved out its own space in high performance and user experience. The ultimate competitive landscape is more likely to be stablecoin chains focusing on deterministic settlement, with ETH/SOL preserving open innovation.

05 Retail Investor Perspective: Where Are the Opportunities?

Frankly, this round of opportunities is not very "retail investor-friendly" in terms of direct benefits. Compared to past public chains, stablecoin public chains lean more towards the "B end," involving payment, clearing, and custody systems.

However, there are still several entry points worth paying attention to:

· Participate in Ecosystem Incentives: New chain launches often come with bounty programs, developer subsidies, transaction mining, etc., which may be followed by similar activities in the future.

· Node Staking: Players with stronger technical backgrounds can pay attention to node validation. For example, Converge requires staking ENA to participate.

· Testnets: Many projects airdrop rewards to early users, so you can prioritize testnets. For example, ARC may launch a public testnet this autumn, while Stable, Plasma, and Tempo testnets are already online.

· Long-Term Allocation: If you are bullish on the "stablecoin public chain" narrative, you may consider longer-term investments, such as focusing on Circle, Coinbase, and other related stocks.

Plasma is particularly worth mentioning. In its public sale in July, the token $XPL was oversubscribed by 7 times, with a total amount exceeding $370 million. It then collaborated with Binance for an airdrop event, which ran out of allocation within an hour. Even in a more "institutionalized" race, early retail investors still have the opportunity to reap dividends.

06 Conclusion

A stablecoin public chain will not overturn the crypto market overnight. Its changes mostly occur in the background, such as shorter settlement paths, more stable fees, and smoother regulatory interfaces.

On the surface, these narratives may seem lacking in "sexiness," but at the infrastructure level, they are gradually building the "utilities" of stablecoins. When we shift our focus from "coin price" back to "how money flows," the logic becomes clearer:

· Who can ensure settlement finality;

· Who can provide stable cross-currency liquidity;

· Who can bridge real payment scenarios.

A stablecoin public chain is likely to be the most solid narrative of the next bull market. If there is a project that can truly deliver on these three things, it will not just be a "public chain," but perhaps will become the infrastructure of the next generation of decentralized finance.

Original Article Link

Welcome to join the official BlockBeats community:

Telegram Subscription Group: https://t.me/theblockbeats

Telegram Discussion Group: https://t.me/BlockBeats_App

Official Twitter Account: https://twitter.com/BlockBeatsAsia