There are many first-principle truths that exist outside of the crypto-native bubble One of those truths is that institutions will never transact on public blockchains in the absence of enshrined privacy There are actual regulatory requirements around client data confidentiality and compliance reporting that literally make it a non-starter for any credible enterprise or institution The counter to this is that Blackrock and Franklin Templeton are already using Ethereum and Solana today The reality is these institutions are simply using blockchains as a distribution mechanism for products like BUIDL and BENJI to advance their principal goal – grow AUM and clip more fees They themselves are not moving any of their operations on-chain In the absence of optional privacy, blockchains look more like marketing vehicles than backend infra for institutional finance

There are many first-principle truths that exist outside of the crypto-native bubble One of those truths is that institutions will never transact on public blockchains in the absence of enshrined privacy There are actual regulatory requirements around client data confidentiality and compliance reporting that literally make it a non-starter for any credible enterprise or institution The counter to this is that Blackrock and Franklin Templeton are already using Ethereum and Solana today The reality is these institutions are simply using blockchains as a distribution mechanism for products like BUIDL and BENJI to advance their principal goal – grow AUM and clip more fees They themselves are not moving any of their operations on-chain While less popular in the CT bubble, I have a lot of respect for projects like Canton who actually understand what institutions need and have built their chain accordingly from first-principles

As stablecoins go from oiling the cogs of CeFi and DeFi markets to a true medium of exchange, value accrual will continue look a lot different Historically, issuers captured the majority of value as usage was downstream of liquidity and integrations However, in a world where the ultimate distributors of stablecoins are no longer exchanges, wallets, and DeFi protocols, but rather fintechs and payment apps, value will accrue to whoever owns the end customer Downstream of owning the end customer you own exclusive payment order flow. Not only does this enable you to monetize through a front-end fee, but more importantly, it opens up the option to route payment flow through your own stablecoin and your own rails This explain why (1) Bridge / Stripe is increasingly routing flow through their own stablecoin (USDB) and (2) why Stripe is launching their own L2 – why leak value to other issuers and chains when you own the end customer and their payment flow? This also explains why Circle launched CPN. It's their best attempt to expand into orchestration and also get closer to the end customer. Arc is the next logical evolution as it allows them to monetize these payment flows more effectively Value disproportionately accrues to whoever is closest to the end user and stablecoins will be no different

There’s a compelling yet underexplored opportunity for stablecoin startups taking a vertical-specific approach While stablecoins in isolation offer superior unit economics — lower costs, faster settlement, programmability — most payment flows are embedded within nuanced operational workflows that vary dramatically across industries Trade finance is the most obvious example imo. While the payment itself is quite straightforward, there are vertical-specific nuances from bills of lading to certificates of origin to regulatory heterogeneity across geographies etc Vertical-specific stabelcoin solutions that use the improved unit economics of stablecoins as a wedge to build a broader full-stack solution that integrates with and abstracts these operational workflows present an interesting opportunity It’s also possible that, as stablecoin payments infra gets increasingly commoditized, verticalized approaches are best positioned to capture value as they build moats around (1) tailoring to the nuances of a specific industry and (2) owning more of the operational stack

Two of the most interesting charts in crypto right now While launchpad market share continues to shift on unsustainable token incentives, Axiom's unincentivized market share remains flat Owning the end user has been, and will always be, the most valuable position in the stack

Two of the most interesting charts in crypto right now While launchpad market share continues to shift on the back of unsustainable token incentives, Axiom's unincentivized market share remains flat Owning the end user has been, and will always be, the most valuable position in the stack

Whether or not a crypto project should return value to tokenholders can be reduced to a simple question: Can you generate a higher ROIC than the risk free rate? If the answer is yes, the project should reinvest these cashflows and grow the business If the answer is no, the project should return this value to tokenholders One of the many precedents crypto can learn from TradFi

Whether or not a crypto project should return value to tokenholders can be reduced to a simple question: Can you generate a higher ROIC than the risk free rate? If the answer is yes, the project should reinvest these cashflows and grow the business If the answer is no, the project should return this value to tokenholders One of the many precedents crypto can learn more TradFi

Perhaps the ultimate bull case for stablecoins is very simply that the arc of technological adoption bends towards efficiency Money is a unit of account, and blockchains are objectively better ledgers

When you take the “who owns the end user?” question to its logical end, it’s not blockchains nor apps, but rather the tokens themselves that own the end user A simple thought experiment proves this: why do you use one blockchain over another? It’s not because of the chain itself. I’d also argue it’s not because of the apps. Irrespective of a handful of truly differentiated apps (eg Polymarket), all of the low hanging primitives — spot DEXs, perp DEXs, lend/borrow etc — look the same across every chain Instead, the reason I use Solana is simply because Solana has tokens that I want to trade that Ethereum doesn't. And as soon as I want to trade AAVE or MKR, I'll use Ethereum. And if Base has a token I like, I'll use Base In other words, user behavior is principally governed by the tokens themselves In the near term, this suggests that the blockchain that wins will be the blockchain that is the leader with respect to “desirable tokens”