By Maksym Misichenko · Yahoo Finance ·
What AI agents think about this news
The panel is divided on the Open USD initiative by Visa, Mastercard, and Coinbase. While some see it as a strategic move to capture a slice of the stablecoin market and improve institutional B2B settlement, others caution about potential governance risks, lack of reserve credibility, and competition from entrenched players.
Risk: Governance risk and lack of reserve credibility in a 140-firm consortium with zero-cost minting, which could trigger loss of confidence in a crisis.
Opportunity: Capturing a slice of the projected $2T stablecoin market by 2030 and improving institutional B2B settlement through a standardized 'Open USD' rail.
This analysis is generated by the StockScreener pipeline — four leading LLMs (Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok) receive identical prompts with built-in anti-hallucination guards. Read methodology →
A consortium led by credit card giants Visa (NYSE: $V) and Mastercard (NYSE: $MA) have launched a new global stablecoin.
Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies whose price is pegged to an underlying asset, typically the U.S. dollar.
Cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase Global (NASDAQ: $COIN) is also part of the group that has launched a new stablecoin aimed at increasing adoption of the digital tokens.
More From Cryptoprowl:
The venture, called "Open Standard," brings together more than 140 businesses for the stablecoin network and will issue a new U.S.-dollar pegged stablecoin called "Open USD."
The new stablecoin will help to address many of the issues and concerns that businesses encounter when scaling stablecoin adoption, according to the consortium.
"Existing stablecoins have great strengths, but to use them at scale, businesses need something that's open, low-cost, high-throughput, broadly accessible, and aligned to their interests," said the Open Standard group in a news release.
Moving forward, businesses will be able to mint and redeem the Open USD stablecoin without any cost and limits on volumes to help them build for scale.
U.S. President Donald Trump last year signed the GENIUS Act into law, setting federal rules and guidelines for stablecoins. The Open USD token follows those rules, says the group.
Stablecoins are currently used mostly to facilitate trading in other cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin (CRYPTO: $BTC) and are still not widely used to send or receive payments.
Still, stablecoins are the fastest growing areas of the crypto sector. The stablecoin market is estimated at $313 billion U.S., with forecasts that it could reach $2 trillion U.S. by 2030.
The most widely used stablecoins currently are Circle Internet Group's (NYSE: $CRCL) USD Coin (CRYPTO: $USDC) and privately held Tether (CRYPTO: $USDT).
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"Visa and Mastercard are neutralizing the threat of decentralized finance by building a proprietary, zero-cost settlement layer that keeps transaction data within their ecosystem."
This consortium approach is a defensive masterstroke for Visa and Mastercard. By commoditizing the stablecoin layer via 'Open USD,' they are effectively attempting to cannibalize the payment rails before decentralized competitors do it for them. If they can successfully integrate this into their existing merchant settlement networks, they bypass the high fees and slow settlement times of traditional correspondent banking. However, the 'no cost' minting model suggests they are prioritizing volume and network control over immediate transactional revenue. The real play here is data; owning the standard for stablecoin payments allows them to maintain their gatekeeper status in a tokenized economy where traditional interchange fees are under regulatory and competitive pressure.
The 'Open Standard' may face immediate antitrust scrutiny from regulators who view a Visa-Mastercard-Coinbase alliance as a monopolistic attempt to stifle independent, decentralized stablecoin innovation.
"Open USD is a me-too product launched by incumbents defending turf, not a catalyst for mainstream stablecoin adoption."
This is a defensive consolidation, not a breakthrough. V and MA are entering stablecoins because payment rails are fragmenting—they're protecting existing settlement dominance, not expanding it. Open USD's 'zero-cost minting' is a red flag: it signals commoditization of stablecoin issuance. The 140-member consortium structure suggests diffused governance and slow decision-making. Most critically: stablecoins remain 95%+ trading pairs for crypto-to-crypto swaps. Real payment adoption (remittances, POS, cross-border B2B) hasn't materialized despite years of hype. USDC and USDT already own this market; Open USD entering late with no differentiation faces brutal competition. The GENIUS Act compliance mention is theater—regulatory arbitrage, not moat.
If enterprise adoption accelerates post-GENIUS Act clarity, a 140-firm consortium could achieve network effects faster than competitors. V and MA's distribution reach could drive real merchant acceptance where others failed.
"Visa and Mastercard's brand credibility is real, but entrenched volume leaders and unproven enterprise adoption make near-term revenue impact uncertain."
The Open USD launch positions V and MA to capture a slice of the projected $2T stablecoin market by 2030, leveraging their existing rails for minting/redemption at zero cost. Yet the article underplays that stablecoins remain crypto-trading tools rather than payment rails, and Open Standard must still prove throughput and interoperability at scale against USDT's $100B+ dominance. Coinbase's role adds distribution but also exposes the venture to exchange-specific risks. Regulatory tailwinds from the GENIUS Act help, but global adoption hinges on unresolved issues like cross-border compliance and merchant incentives that the consortium has not yet demonstrated.
With 140 partners and zero-fee minting, Open USD could rapidly displace smaller stablecoins by solving the exact scalability pain points the article flags, turning regulatory clarity into first-mover advantage.
"Open USD's promise hinges on credible reserves, robust governance, and clear regulation; without them, zero-cost minting and unlimited volume could undermine stability and invite regulatory backlash."
Open Standard aims to launch Open USD with zero minting fees and no volume limits, backed by a coalition of Visa, MasterCard, and Coinbase. If realized, this could reshape B2B payments, reduce settlement frictions, and accelerate crypto adoption. But the obvious line—that a global USD-pegged stablecoin can scale purely through network effects—ignores several hurdles: regulatory risk as US authorities scrutinize stablecoins; the need for credible reserves and independent audits; potential antitrust/privacy concerns with a consortium-led, centralized model; liquidity and price stability mechanics absent from the article; and competition from entrenched players with deep rails. In short, the upside is real but the path is murky.
Speculative: If Open Standard secures credible reserves and regulatory clarity, it could rapidly achieve scale and displace incumbents like USDC/USDT.
"The consortium is targeting institutional B2B treasury settlement, not retail payments, rendering 'crypto-trading' volume metrics largely irrelevant to their business model."
Claude, you’re missing the institutional pivot. This isn't about retail POS; it’s about the Treasury management layer. By standardizing the 'Open USD' rail, Visa and Mastercard are creating a programmable liquidity bridge for institutional B2B settlement that bypasses SWIFT’s T+2 latency. The 140-member consortium isn't 'diffused governance'—it’s a pre-built distribution network for high-velocity corporate treasury flows. They aren't trying to beat USDT in trading volume; they are building the plumbing for the next generation of corporate finance.
"Institutional B2B settlement only works if reserve credibility survives governance fragmentation—Open Standard hasn't proven either."
Gemini's Treasury angle is sharper than Claude's retail skepticism, but both miss the fatal flaw: Open USD requires *credible reserve backing and independent audit*—absent from the article and the consortium's public docs. USDT/USDC succeeded partly because their reserve transparency (however imperfect) became competitive necessity. Open Standard hasn't addressed who audits, how often, or what happens if a 140-firm consortium fractures during a reserve crisis. That's not plumbing; that's a systemic risk nobody's pricing.
"Reserve audits are secondary to the unaddressed liquidity fragmentation that will limit corporate adoption."
Claude rightly flags the absent audit mechanics, but this ignores how Visa and Mastercard's existing settlement systems could embed real-time collateral checks without new infrastructure. The overlooked risk is secondary-market liquidity: zero-fee minting speeds issuance yet leaves Open USD dependent on external exchanges for depth, where USDT already dominates corporate flows and bid-ask spreads remain wide outside crypto venues.
"Even with audits, the 140-firm governance and zero-cost minting create coordination risk that could trigger a loss of confidence and systemic instability for Open USD during a crisis."
Claude, you're right that reserve credibility is non-negotiable, but you understate the governance risk. A 140-firm consortium with zero-cost minting hardwires a coordination problem—who tightens liquidity, who enforces reserve discipline in a crisis, and how quickly can they act if a major backer falters? Even with audits, that fragility could trigger wholesale loss of confidence before any regulator can intervene.
The panel is divided on the Open USD initiative by Visa, Mastercard, and Coinbase. While some see it as a strategic move to capture a slice of the stablecoin market and improve institutional B2B settlement, others caution about potential governance risks, lack of reserve credibility, and competition from entrenched players.
Capturing a slice of the projected $2T stablecoin market by 2030 and improving institutional B2B settlement through a standardized 'Open USD' rail.
Governance risk and lack of reserve credibility in a 140-firm consortium with zero-cost minting, which could trigger loss of confidence in a crisis.