Why the “$1.5 Trillion by 2035” Forecast Demands Serious Consideration
When the market encounters numbers like “$1.5 trillion,” the immediate reaction is often skepticism—does this scale seem exaggerated?
Yet, financial history shows that early-stage critical infrastructure is frequently underestimated, especially systems that meet these criteria:
- Network effects—the more users, the better the utility;
- Standardization—standardized systems are more easily adopted by institutions;
- Cross-market circulation—ability to connect different assets and jurisdictions.
Stablecoins are nearing this inflection point. They are evolving beyond digital asset trading and are steadily entering cross-border payments, B2B settlements, on-chain government bonds, RWA settlements, and the fund clearing processes between exchanges and custodians.
Therefore, the value in discussing this forecast is not to determine whether a specific number will be “precisely hit,” but to identify a broader trend: is global USD liquidity finding new channels for distribution and settlement?
Transaction Volume Is Not Market Cap, Nor Net New Money
Three stablecoin-related concepts are often conflated, leading to misjudgments:
- Market Cap: The total circulating supply of stablecoins.
- Transaction Volume: The aggregate amount transferred on-chain within a set timeframe.
- Net New Money: Funds genuinely entering the system.
If a stablecoin is frequently transacted among institutions, exchanges, market makers, and payment channels, the same dollar can be counted multiple times in transaction volume over a short period. Thus, high transaction volume does not automatically indicate “wealth creation at the same scale.”
Far from diminishing stablecoin importance, this highlights their role as “turnover efficiency amplifiers.”
Put simply, $1.5 trillion is more a projection of “financial pipeline throughput” than “asset pool size.”
For professionals, the key question is: which real-world demands does this pipeline address, and can it operate continuously, transparently, and under regulatory oversight?
Four Core Drivers of Stablecoin Transaction Volume Growth
Cross-Border Payments and Corporate Settlement Efficiency
Traditional cross-border payments are plagued by slow processing, lengthy chains, and opaque fees.
Stablecoins offer clear advantages:
- 24/7 availability;
- Shorter settlement paths, reducing intermediary account layers;
- Greater compatibility with APIs and automated financial systems.
As enterprises move from “pilot use” to “process integration,” transaction volume shifts from event-driven to daily operational flows.
Institutional Funds Entering On-Chain Markets
Historically, institutions accessed digital assets via ETFs or custodial accounts. Now, a shift is underway: some institutions are using stablecoins as on-chain cash management tools for repurchase, collateral, short-term liquidity, and risk hedging.
Once stablecoins are integrated into institutional Treasury systems, transaction volume becomes tied to asset-liability management cycles, not just retail trading sentiment.
Expansion of RWA and On-Chain Yield Products
The essence of RWA isn’t merely “displaying assets on-chain,” but creating tradable, settleable, and auditable closed loops. Stablecoins are the natural settlement unit within these loops.
As on-chain government bonds, fund shares, and note products expand, stablecoin transaction volume will increase passively, since each asset delivery requires a settlement medium.
Multi-Chain Ecosystem and Infrastructure Maturity
Stablecoin activity was previously concentrated on a handful of blockchains.
If mature cross-chain messaging, unified account abstraction, compliant bridging, and low-cost settlement layers emerge, stablecoins will be utilized in more scenarios.
This will yield two outcomes:
- Lower transaction costs, fostering high-frequency micro-payments;
- Enhanced capital transfer efficiency across chains, boosting overall turnover.
Five Key Constraints and Risks
Optimistic projections hinge on ongoing management of constraints. If the following risks are unresolved, scale forecasts may be significantly revised downward.
Regulatory Fragmentation
Definitions, licenses, reserve requirements, and redemption mechanisms for stablecoins differ across regions.
Long-term regulatory fragmentation will split global liquidity into “regional pools,” reducing transaction volume growth efficiency.
Centralized Issuers and Custodian Dependence
Mainstream stablecoins rely on centralized issuance and bank custody.
This introduces risks related to freeze permissions, account availability, redemption priority, and counterparty exposure.
During market stress, the ability to deliver “timely, sufficient, low-friction redemption” is the ultimate stress test.
On-Chain Infrastructure and Security Risks
Bridges, oracles, wallet infrastructure, and contract permission management remain frequent targets for attacks.
Frequent security incidents will drive institutions to apply higher risk discounts, slowing real business migration.
Insufficient Liquidity Depth and Offer Quality
Transaction volume does not equal high-quality liquidity.
For large settlements, the market focuses on:
- Controllable spreads;
- Stable depth;
- Execution capability during extreme market conditions.
Lack of depth makes it difficult for stablecoins to handle large-scale institutional settlements.
Competition from Sovereign Digital Currencies and Traditional Systems
Stablecoins operate in a competitive environment.
They will face:
- Technical upgrades to traditional payment networks;
- Real-time clearing transformations by commercial banks;
- Various CBDC and regional digital settlement solutions.
Thus, the upper limit for stablecoins depends not on narrative, but on whether their relative efficiency can be sustained.
The critical shift for stablecoins is not “being used more often for transfers,” but a role upgrade.
A clearer pathway emerges:
- Payment Tool Stage: Serving CEX deposits/withdrawals, on-chain trading, and small cross-border transfers.
- Settlement Layer Stage: Becoming part of standard clearing and settlement processes for enterprises and institutions.
- Capital Operating System Stage: Deep integration with lending, collateral, risk management, and automated finance.
Once stablecoins reach stages 2 and 3, transaction volume resembles “infrastructure traffic,” not “market sentiment traffic.”
This brings three structural impacts:
- For exchanges: Competition shifts from “number of coins” to “clearing efficiency and capital routing.”
- For banks and payment institutions: Requires restructuring monitoring, risk management, and reconciliation systems for on-chain USD flows.
- For crypto markets: Valuation logic shifts from single bull-bear narratives to infrastructure penetration and sustainable cash flow.
Three Scenario Pathways and Observation Indicators Before 2035
To avoid binary judgments, a scenario analysis framework is recommended.
Conservative Path (Below $500 Trillion)
- Slow regulatory coordination, lack of unified standards in key markets;
- Institutional adoption remains at pilot stage;
- Stablecoins primarily serve internal crypto trading turnover.
Baseline Path ($500 Trillion – $1 Trillion)
- Major economies establish mutually recognized compliance frameworks;
- Steady growth in enterprise cross-border settlement and institutional Treasury usage;
- Ongoing expansion of RWA and on-chain cash management products.
Optimistic Path (Approaching or Reaching $1.5 Trillion)
- Stablecoins become a standard interface for cross-border settlement;
- High maturity in multi-chain interoperability, audit, and compliance tools;
- Institutions integrate stablecoins into core liquidity and collateral systems.
Continuous tracking of these indicators is advised, rather than relying on isolated news:
- Monthly active stablecoin addresses and share of large transfers;
- Number of institutional custody and redemption channels;
- Coverage and progress of compliance licenses and cross-regional mutual recognition;
- Stablecoin share in RWA settlements;
- Frequency and recovery time of depegging during extreme market conditions.
Conclusion: Stablecoin’s Core Variable Is “Building Infrastructure,” Not “Storytelling”
“$1.5 Trillion by 2035” should be viewed as an ambitious target, not a guaranteed outcome.
Its value lies in signaling that stablecoins are evolving from trading tools to financial infrastructure—a shift already impacting payments, clearing and settlement, institutional fund management, and on-chain asset issuance.
A more objective assessment is:
- Short term: Stablecoins remain sensitive to policy, liquidity, and risk events;
- Medium term: Coupling between stablecoins, RWA, institutional funds, and cross-border settlement will intensify;
- Long term: The true ceiling is set not by narrative hype, but by compliance sustainability, technical reliability, and system-level trust.
Thus, when considering long-term forecasts such as those from Chainalysis, the most professional stance is neither blind optimism nor outright dismissal, but a focus on verifiable variables: who is actually using stablecoins, in which scenarios, whether low-friction settlement is sustainable, and whether systems endure stress tests.
As long as these questions continue to be answered positively, stablecoin transaction volume can realistically reach new heights over the next decade.
