Why Big Tech Companies Want Stablecoins

The Pattern Is Unmistakable

Something remarkable is happening across the technology industry. One by one, the biggest companies in the world are placing major bets on stablecoins — digital dollars that live on blockchains.

Meta is exploring stablecoins again after its high-profile Libra failure. Stripe acquired stablecoin infrastructure company Bridge for $1.1 billion and is building its own blockchain. Robinhood is going all-in on crypto as a global expansion strategy. PayPal launched its own stablecoin, PYUSD, which has grown to over $800 million in supply. Mesh just raised $75 million at a $1 billion valuation to connect tokenized assets across platforms.

This isn't a trend driven by speculation or hype. These companies see stablecoins as infrastructure — a fundamental upgrade to how money moves around the world.

“I think we're going to see the same arc of evolution in crypto, which is every business is going to be using crypto, whether they realize it or not. It's just a step function improvement, and most of that involves stablecoins.”

— Santiago Santos, CEO, Inversion Capital

Meta: The Second Attempt

When Meta (then Facebook) announced Libra in 2019, it sent shockwaves through the global financial system. Central banks panicked. Regulators mobilized. The project was ultimately killed — rebranded as Diem, scaled back, and eventually sold for parts.

Now Meta is back. Reports indicate the company is once again exploring stablecoin integration for its platforms, which collectively serve over three billion users. The logic hasn't changed: Meta wants to enable payments across WhatsApp, Instagram, and Messenger without relying on the legacy banking system and the fees that come with it.

What has changed is the environment. In 2019, there was no regulatory framework for stablecoins. Today, the EU has MiCA, the US has stablecoin legislation moving through Congress, and multiple jurisdictions have issued clear guidance. The infrastructure Meta would have had to build from scratch — wallets, on-ramps, compliance tooling — now exists as mature, battle-tested services.

Meta doesn't need to issue its own stablecoin this time. It can integrate existing ones. That changes the regulatory calculus entirely.

Stripe: The $1.1 Billion Signal

If Meta's re-entry is notable, Stripe's moves are seismic. The payments giant acquired Bridge — a stablecoin infrastructure company — for $1.1 billion, one of the largest acquisitions in crypto history. Then Stripe went further: it announced stablecoin-denominated accounts for businesses and began building its own blockchain optimized for payments.

For Stripe, stablecoins solve a core business problem. International payments are slow, expensive, and riddled with intermediaries. A merchant in Nigeria receiving payment from a customer in the US goes through multiple correspondent banks, currency conversions, and compliance checks. Stablecoins collapse that chain into a single transaction that settles in seconds.

Stripe's stablecoin accounts let businesses hold, send, and receive USDC natively. For companies operating across borders, this eliminates the need for local banking relationships in every market. A startup in Lagos can receive dollar-denominated payments from anywhere in the world without a US bank account.

The blockchain play is even more ambitious. By building its own chain, Stripe could control the settlement layer for a significant portion of global commerce. The company already processes hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Moving even a fraction of that volume onchain would make Stripe's blockchain one of the most heavily used networks in the world.

Robinhood: Crypto as a Global Growth Engine

Robinhood's strategy is different in form but identical in logic. The company is using crypto — and stablecoins specifically — as the vehicle for its international expansion.

“I would expect Robinhood to become more and more of a global both fintech, equities and crypto platform. It's very clear that they are on the forefront of the space. They deeply understand it, and it seems to be a big part of their long term strategy.”

— Cuy Sheffield, Head of Crypto, Visa

For Robinhood, stablecoins serve dual purposes. First, they're a product — users can hold and earn yield on stablecoins within the app. Second, they're infrastructure — stablecoins enable Robinhood to offer dollar-denominated financial services in markets where the company doesn't have banking licenses.

This is the playbook that makes traditional banks nervous. A technology company with a superior user experience can use stablecoins to offer savings, payments, and investment products globally — without the regulatory burden of becoming a bank in every jurisdiction.

PayPal, Mesh, and the Supporting Cast

PayPal was the first major tech company to launch its own stablecoin. PYUSD, issued in partnership with Paxos, has grown to over $800 million in supply and is integrated across PayPal's merchant network. The company is positioning PYUSD not as a speculative asset but as a payment method — a way for merchants to accept digital dollars with lower fees and faster settlement than traditional card networks.

Meanwhile, the infrastructure layer is being built by companies like Mesh and Meow. Mesh, which raised $75 million at a $1 billion valuation, is building the connectivity layer for tokenized assets — the pipes that let different platforms, wallets, and applications interact with each other.

“Our thesis is fairly simple. We strongly believe that the future of economy will be tokenized, everything from real estate to equity to deposit.”

— Bam Azizi, CEO, Mesh

Meow is tackling the problem from the business banking side, offering native USDC support as a payment rail — a fundamentally different approach from legacy banking infrastructure.

“Meow is a business banking fintech. We're trying to build something similar to the Costco of financial services. We were the first, or one of the first, major business banking fintechs in the US to support natively sending and receiving USDC as a payment rail.”

— Brandon Arvanaghi, CEO, Meow

The Strategic Logic

Why are all these companies converging on the same strategy? The answer comes down to three structural advantages that stablecoins offer over traditional payment infrastructure.

1. Lower Payment Costs

Credit card interchange fees typically run 2–3% per transaction. Wire transfers cost $25–50. International remittances can eat 6–8% of the transfer amount. Stablecoin transactions cost fractions of a cent on modern blockchains and settle in seconds, not days. For companies processing billions in payments, even a 1% reduction in costs translates to enormous savings.

2. Global Reach Without Banking Licenses

Opening a bank account in a new country requires navigating local regulations, partnering with local banks, and building compliance infrastructure from scratch. Stablecoins are global by default. A user in Jakarta can hold, send, and receive USDC just as easily as a user in New York. For tech companies accustomed to launching products globally with a single deployment, stablecoins align with how they already operate.

3. Yield on Float

Every stablecoin in circulation is backed by reserves — typically US Treasuries and cash equivalents. The issuer earns yield on those reserves. Circle, the issuer of USDC, earned over $1.7 billion in reserve income in 2024. For a tech company that can drive significant stablecoin adoption across its user base, the economics of reserve income alone can justify the investment.

The Libra Lesson: What's Different This Time

The obvious question: if Meta's first attempt was killed by regulators, why would this wave succeed?

Several things have changed fundamentally since 2019.

• Regulation exists. The EU's MiCA framework is live. The US has bipartisan stablecoin legislation moving through Congress. Companies now have a path to compliance rather than operating in a vacuum.
• Infrastructure is mature. Wallet providers, compliance tools, on-ramp services, and blockchain networks have all scaled dramatically. Companies don't need to build everything from scratch.
• Stablecoins have proven product-market fit. Over $200 billion in stablecoins are in circulation. They're used for real commerce, not just trading. The use case is no longer theoretical.
• Companies don't need to issue their own. Libra's fatal flaw was proposing a new currency controlled by a consortium of tech companies. Today's approach is to integrate existing, regulated stablecoins like USDC and USDT. The political optics are completely different.

The regulatory environment has shifted from “this must be stopped” to “this must be regulated.” That distinction is everything.

What This Means for Banks

For traditional banks and payment companies, the implications are significant. The competitive moat that banks have long relied on — access to the payment system — is being eroded by stablecoins. When a tech company can offer dollar-denominated accounts, instant global transfers, and yield on deposits without a banking license, the value proposition of a traditional bank account narrows considerably.

Banks won't disappear. They still provide lending, regulatory capital, and deposit insurance. But the distribution layer — the customer relationship — is at risk. If users interact with their money primarily through Meta, Stripe, or Robinhood, banks get pushed further into the background, becoming infrastructure providers rather than consumer brands.

The smartest banks are already responding. JPMorgan has its own blockchain division. Citi has been piloting tokenized deposits. Societe Generale issued a euro-denominated stablecoin. But the pace of innovation in traditional banking is measured in years, while tech companies move in months.

The Bottom Line

The race into stablecoins by big tech isn't about crypto ideology. It's about economics. Stablecoins offer lower costs, global reach, and new revenue streams. The infrastructure is ready. The regulation is coming. And the companies that move first will define how money works for the next generation of internet users.

Every major tech company is building a stablecoin strategy. The question for banks, payment processors, and fintech companies is whether they'll adapt quickly enough to remain relevant — or whether they'll find themselves in the same position as telecom carriers after the rise of messaging apps: still necessary, but invisible.