在中国人民银行等八部门联合发布的2026年第一份监管文件中，虚拟货币及稳定币被纳入更严格的监管网络，金融监管部门对新型金融风险的防 范态度已然明确。 2026年2月6日，中国人民银行、国家发展改革委、工业和信息化部等八部门联合印发《关于进一步防范和处置虚拟货币等相关风险的通知》，这是对2021 年"237号文"的进一步延续和完善。这份文件重申了境内对虚拟货币相关业务活动保持一贯的禁止性政策立场，同时首次明确了对挂钩人民币的稳定币的监 管要求。 通知明确指出，虚拟货币相关业务活动属于非法金融活动，未经相关部门依法依规同意，境内外任何单位和个人不得在境外发行挂钩人民币的稳定币，境内 主体及其控制的境外主体不得在境外发行虚拟货币。 一、政策背景 中国对虚拟货币的监管政策由来已久且立场一贯。早在2013年，当比特币刚开始在全球范围内被炒作时，人民银行等五部门就联合发布《关于防范比特币风 险的通知》，明确比特币属于一种虚拟商品而非货币，同时禁止金融机构开展相关业务。 随着虚拟货币市场的发展，监管政策也在不断升级。2017年，针对代币发行融资(ICO)投机炒作盛行的现象，监管部门联合发布公告，清理整顿了各类虚拟 货币交易 ...

January 26, 2026 05:35 PM GMT Cross-Asset Spotlight | Global Rates Whiplash Signals, Flows, & Key Data: A weekly summary of key cross-asset monitors, data, moves, and models tracking sentiment, fund flows, and positioning. Last week, 40-year JGB yields surpassed 4% for the first time amid fiscal concerns and MSCI Europe retreated on possible Greenland-related tariffs. Key highlights from last week: Exhibit 1: Morgan Stanley forecasts | Soham Sen | | | --- | --- | | Strategist | | | Soham.Sen1@morganstanley. ...

A version of this story appeared in The Guidance newsletter on January 26. Sign up here. It’s the new year, and the UK’s financial regulator has declared stablecoins pegged to the national currency a key priority in 2026. Meanwhile, the Bank of England has led its own consultations in parallel to better understand how private sector money issuance could affect the British economy. But what does that mean exactly? For some, it means avoiding the pitfalls that have slowed US policy makers. “Stablecoins ...

Core Insights - Vitalik Buterin, co-founder of Ethereum, has raised concerns about the limitations of decentralized stablecoins and the overreliance on USD-pegged assets [1][5] - He identified three main issues: the need for a better index than the USD, the creation of a decentralized Oracle that cannot be manipulated, and the competitive nature of staking yields [1] - The current market dynamics show that stablecoins are integral to Ethereum's operations, functioning as its cash layer rather than a secondary feature [2][6] Group 1: Concerns About Decentralized Stablecoins - Buterin emphasizes that many stablecoin designs appear stable in calm markets but can fail under stress, citing the collapse of Terraform Labs' UST stablecoin as a significant example [4] - He argues for the necessity of independence from the USD price ticker in the long term, highlighting potential risks such as hyperinflation in the US [5] Group 2: Market Context and Implications - The market capitalization of prominent stablecoins like Tether's USDT and Circle's USDC is approximately $260 billion, with over $70 billion in daily trading volume [3] - Ethereum processed trillions in stablecoin transfers last year, indicating the critical role these tokens play in trading, lending, and payments within the network [6]

Core Viewpoint - The incident involving Paxos highlights significant vulnerabilities in the stablecoin ecosystem, raising concerns about the reliability of issuance mechanisms and regulatory frameworks in the industry [1][3][6]. Group 1: Incident Overview - Paxos experienced a major internal error that led to the accidental minting of 300 trillion PYUSD stablecoins, a nominal value exceeding $300 trillion, which is more than double the global GDP [1][2]. - The erroneous minting lasted for 22 minutes before Paxos took corrective action by burning the excess coins, emphasizing the need for robust operational controls [1][5]. Group 2: Stability and Issuance Mechanisms - The reliability of stablecoin issuance mechanisms is under scrutiny, as the incident revealed that the minting process heavily relies on the issuer's credit rather than adequate collateral [3][4]. - Concerns were raised about the potential for arbitrage opportunities if real-time collateralization cannot be ensured, highlighting the risks associated with excessive minting [3][4]. Group 3: Regulatory and Operational Concerns - The incident exposed multiple operational vulnerabilities, including a lack of thresholds for minting limits, absence of multi-signature confirmation, and inadequate review processes [4][5]. - Regulatory oversight in the U.S. is fragmented, with state-level regulations leading to inconsistencies in transparency regarding reserve assets and risk management practices [5][6]. Group 4: Market Implications - The market reaction to the incident indicates underlying panic, with fears that similar errors could undermine the trust in stablecoins and lead to significant market disruptions [1][6]. - The ongoing development of regulatory frameworks, such as the proposed U.S. legislation to enforce reserve requirements, aims to mitigate risks but may also increase the integration of stablecoins into traditional financial systems [6].

Core Insights - The conference highlighted the intersection of cryptocurrencies, AI infrastructure, and energy, with a positive outlook on the future of AI and its impact on various sectors [2][3][5] Industry Trends - There is a strong belief in the potential of AI to transform industries, with key thought leaders present at the conference expressing optimism about the sector's growth [3][5] - The SPAC (Special Purpose Acquisition Company) market is seen as a valuable tool for younger companies to access capital quickly, especially in the current environment where the IPO market is less active [6][7] Investment Strategies - The company has maintained a commitment to SPACs and cryptocurrencies, viewing them as essential areas for investment and growth [7][8] - The integration of stable coins into the AI ecosystem is emphasized, with the potential for autonomous transactions between AI agents being a significant future development [9][10][13] Policy and Regulation - The current administration's supportive stance towards AI and digital innovation is viewed as beneficial for the industry, with recent legislation like the Genius Act being highlighted as a positive step [15][16]

Core Viewpoint - Three major Japanese banks, Mitsubishi, Mitsui, and Mizuho, have launched a stablecoin, which is a digital currency tied to the value of the yen and the dollar, aimed at facilitating transactions for large corporations, with a significant potential market given their combined client base of over 300,000 companies [1] Group 1: Stablecoin Overview - The most popular stablecoins in the market are fiat-collateralized, such as USDT and USDC, which are backed by actual dollars or short-term U.S. Treasury bonds, providing a high level of security [2] - Other models include crypto-collateralized stablecoins, which require a higher collateral value in cryptocurrencies, and algorithmic stablecoins that rely on programming to maintain value, though the latter has seen failures like UST [2] Group 2: U.S. Financial Strategy - Stablecoins account for over 80% of the cryptocurrency market, acting as a hard currency and facilitating a system where users must buy U.S. debt, effectively creating a cycle that returns money to the U.S. [4] - The U.S. faces a dilemma known as the Triffin Paradox, where to maintain the dollar's status as a global reserve currency, it must circulate widely, necessitating continuous purchases of U.S. debt by foreign holders of dollars [4] Group 3: Impact on U.S. Debt and Global Finance - As confidence in U.S. debt wanes and buyers decrease, stablecoins are seen as a lifeline, with legislation like the GENIUS Act mandating that companies issuing dollar-pegged stablecoins must use user funds to purchase cash or short-term U.S. Treasury bonds [6] - This creates a new cycle where global users' investments in dollar stablecoins ultimately support U.S. debt, despite their primary interest being in the convenience of digital transactions [6] Group 4: China's Position - China is cautious about the rise of dollar stablecoins, recognizing that if they surpass the efficiency of the yuan in cross-border payments, it could hinder the internationalization of the yuan [10] - The challenge for China in creating a globally accepted yuan stablecoin is compounded by capital account restrictions and the nature of its trade surplus, which limits the yuan's global circulation [12] - Hong Kong's recent legislation on stablecoins positions it as a potential bridge for China to engage in the global stablecoin market while navigating the associated risks [12] Group 5: Public Perception and Regulatory Landscape - Public sentiment reflects skepticism towards stablecoins, with some viewing them as a means for the U.S. to leverage foreign investments to support its debt [14] - Regulatory measures are being developed to address the rapid flow of money and associated risks, indicating a growing recognition of the need for oversight in the stablecoin market [16] - Individuals are advised to be cautious and informed, focusing on reliable platforms and understanding the underlying collateral of stablecoins to avoid being misled by high returns [18]

Core Viewpoint - A U.S. bankruptcy court has approved a settlement between Terraform Labs and Three Arrows Capital (3AC) regarding a $1.3 billion claim related to the 2022 collapse of the Terra/LUNA cryptocurrency [1][2]. Group 1: Settlement Details - The court ruling, issued by Judge Brendan L. Shannon, determines the treatment of 3AC's claim in Terraform Labs' ongoing Chapter 11 bankruptcy [2]. - 3AC's losses will be classified as a "Crypto Loss Claim," which is significant as it aligns 3AC with other investors who lost money in the Terra ecosystem during the crash, resulting in a nearly $60 billion market value wipeout [3][4]. Group 2: Dispute Resolution - The agreement concludes a months-long dispute between Todd Snyder, the plan administrator for Terraform, and 3AC's liquidators, representing creditors in 3AC's bankruptcy proceedings [5]. - Under the court order, 3AC will withdraw its original claim but retains the option to refile portions later if certain damages are deemed outside the "Crypto Loss Claims" rules [5]. Group 3: Claims Process - Claimants must file their claims online by May 16, 2025, for losses related to cryptocurrencies created by Terraform or held within its ecosystem that became worthless after the second de-peg of its stablecoin from the U.S. dollar [6]. Group 4: Broader Implications - Terraform's bankruptcy plan, confirmed in September 2024, established a Wind-Down Trust to manage asset liquidation and creditor fund distribution [7]. - This ruling marks a significant step in coordinating responses between the bankruptcies of Terraform Labs and Three Arrows Capital, potentially influencing future digital asset failure disputes [7].

Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the growing importance of stablecoins in the digital finance landscape, highlighting their advantages over traditional cryptocurrencies due to their price stability and regulatory compliance, which makes them increasingly integrated into the mainstream financial system [3][4][5]. Summary by Sections Current Status and Characteristics of Stablecoins - Stablecoins are digital assets based on blockchain technology that maintain price stability through a "anchoring mechanism" to fiat currencies. They have evolved from being used primarily in cryptocurrency exchanges to being integral in decentralized finance (DeFi) activities such as lending and staking, as well as in cross-border payments and trade settlements due to their fast settlement speeds and low transaction costs [5][6]. Development History of Stablecoins - The development of stablecoins has transitioned from exploration to regulation. The launch of USDT in 2014 marked the introduction of fiat-collateralized stablecoins, which quickly gained traction. The introduction of DAI in 2017 pioneered decentralized stablecoins. The demand for stablecoins surged during the DeFi boom in 2020, but the collapse of algorithmic stablecoin UST in 2022 raised regulatory concerns. Recent regulations, such as the U.S. GENIUS Act and Hong Kong's Stablecoin Regulation, have laid a foundation for compliant development [6][7]. Market Characteristics - The stablecoin market is characterized by concentration, with the total market cap exceeding $280 billion as of August 2025, where USDT holds about 60% market share. The majority of stablecoin transactions occur on major public blockchains like Ethereum, Tron, and Solana, with Ethereum alone accounting for over $137 billion in stablecoin market cap [7]. Technical Principles of Stablecoins - The stability and security of stablecoins rely on blockchain and smart contract technologies. They can be categorized into three types based on their anchoring mechanisms: fiat-collateralized, crypto-collateralized, and algorithmic stablecoins. Each type has distinct technical implementations, with fiat-collateralized stablecoins like USDT and USDC relying on off-chain reserves, while crypto-collateralized stablecoins like DAI use over-collateralization and automated liquidation mechanisms [10][11]. Trust Logic of Stablecoins - The core competitive advantage of stablecoins lies in trust, which is built on reliable anchoring and reserve mechanisms, verifiable technology, and regulatory frameworks. The trust in fiat-collateralized stablecoins is derived from the transparency and liquidity of their reserves, while crypto-collateralized stablecoins depend on over-collateralization and automated liquidation for stability. Algorithmic stablecoins face structural challenges due to their reliance on supply-demand algorithms without actual asset backing [15][16]. Challenges and Future Outlook - Stablecoins face challenges in regulatory technology, price stability, and governance. The lack of a global regulatory framework for stablecoins and blockchain transactions complicates compliance. Additionally, past incidents of reserve opacity have led to market instability. However, the future of stablecoins looks promising, with potential growth in cross-border payments and tokenization of real-world assets, supported by evolving regulatory environments and technological innovations [17][18][19].

Group 1 - The core argument emphasizes that the international status of the Renminbi (RMB) determines the strategic space for China's stablecoin, rather than technology alone [1][3] - Blockchain technology is viewed as a tool that cannot create currency credit on its own; stablecoins are a digital extension of sovereign credit [1][2] - The essence of Real World Assets (RWA) is the digital representation of asset credit, not the creation of credit through tokenization [2][3] Group 2 - The article discusses the evolution of blockchain from a utopian ideal to a pragmatic tool in finance, highlighting its role in reducing trust costs and improving collaboration efficiency [4][5] - It identifies the need for a balanced blockchain architecture that combines centralized efficiency with decentralized trust [6][11] - The future of stablecoins is framed as a digital battleground for sovereign currency dominance, with the U.S. aiming to establish a "digital dollar hegemony" through regulatory frameworks [12][16] Group 3 - Stablecoins are categorized into three types: fiat-collateralized, crypto-collateralized, and algorithmic stablecoins, each facing unique challenges and market dynamics [12][13][14] - The article notes that the market for stablecoins is projected to grow significantly, driven by speculative trading rather than everyday payment use [15][19] - The potential for RWA to bridge the gap between real-world assets and blockchain technology is emphasized, marking a shift towards the digitization of tangible assets [21][23] Group 4 - The challenges facing RWA include legal ambiguities, cross-jurisdictional conflicts, and high compliance costs, which hinder its widespread adoption [27][28][29] - The article concludes that the integration of stablecoins and RWA is essential for the development of a sustainable Web3 economy, where both elements work together to enhance capital allocation and financial inclusivity [30][31]