Matera, Circle tie up to support stablecoin-ready financial platform
The collaboration establishes a native integration between Matera's real-time banking infrastructure and USDC, a fully reserved digital dollar.
The agreement enables interoperability between local currency accounts and USDC through Matera's Digital Twin real-time ledger platform.
This integration allows financial institutions to offer accounts with multiple currencies, including the Brazilian Real (BRL), US Dollar (USD), and USDC.
Through this integration, local payment systems such as PIX can now be connected to the global liquidity provided by USDC, facilitating 'faster', more cost-efficient, and 'transparent' international payment operations.
Circle's technology will enable Matera's clients to offer USDC as a balance option within their platforms, allowing for the global use of USDC in transactions akin to local currencies.
Matera CEO Carlos Netto said: 'We are ushering in a new layer of global banking infrastructure. Interoperability between stablecoins and local currency accounts is no longer a side project—it's now at the heart of the financial system. This is a game-changer for banks and fintechs looking to operate globally with near-instant settlement and low costs.'
Circle Brazil Policy and Regulatory Strategy VP Daniel Mangabeira said: 'Integrating USDC into Matera's widely used technology will empower Brazilian financial institutions to make fast, cost-efficient, and transparent global payments. With USDC, it will be easier to access the global digital economy with a transparent digital dollar.'
Earlier in the month, Circle Internet Group made its NYSE debut, with its stock commencing trading at $69.
"Matera, Circle tie up to support stablecoin-ready financial platform " was originally created and published by Retail Banker International, a GlobalData owned brand.
The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How FIS is responding to the stablecoin wave
Bank technology giant Fiserv jumped on the stablecoin train quickly, announcing plans to issue its own coin before the enabling Genius Act was signed into law. While rival FIS has not yet gone that far, it is also betting that thousands of banks will want to tap stablecoins. "Stablecoins are having their time in the sun now, and that's a good thing" Himal Makwana, global head of corporate strategy at FIS, told American has partnered with Circle to enable banks to transact in USDC, Circle's stablecoin, part of a mult-pronged strategy to support stablecoins while enabling interoperability among digital assets and traditional currencies and payment types. "We feel that the best use case and benefit right now for stablecoins is in 'send and receive,'" Makwana said. "We have ACH, wires, FedNow and RTP, so why not provide another medium that they can access through our existing platform," Circling stablecoins Banks can use FIS and Circle to make domestic and global stablecoin payments in USDC. FIS' Circle collaboration follows FIS' May launch of its Money Movement Hub, which enables financial firms to connect to multiple payment networks covering different payment types. FIS has combined its real-time payments and fraud detection with Circle's blockchain technology. Banks can use this to adopt digital assets like stablecoins and other cryptocurrencies. These institutions can also use the technology to support their own stablecoins and interoperability with other digital assets. FIS, which has spent the past two years refocusing on bank technology, after divesting a large stake in Worldpay in 2023, is enabling banks to support multiple digital asset and payment types, according to Makwana. "With thousands of banks globally, everything we do has to be scalable," Makwana said. "So if a bank wants us to issue a stablecoin, we would have to make sure it has usability, scalability and reusability." FIS's most direct competitor, Fiserv, recently announced plans to launch a digital asset platform, including a stablecoin, FIUSD, that will be part of Fiserv's banking and payments menu by the end of 2025. Fiserv plans to make FIUSD available through its existing payment technology at no added cost. FIUSD will use stablecoin infrastructure from Paxos and Circle, and will make the stablecoin available on the Solana blockchain. Read more about stablecoins. (Stablecoin | American Banker) "Fiserv's FIUSD announcement sits at one end of the spectrum," James Wester, a research director at Javelin Strategy & Research, told American Banker. "It's a more vertically integrated, proprietary stablecoin model." FIS, through its Circle partnership, is on the other end, using an existing issuer and leaning into its Money Movement Hub as a distribution and orchestration layer, Wester said. "That's a meaningful distinction, because it's focused on enabling compliant access to a widely used stablecoin like USDC, rather than issuing one directly," Wester said. FIS is not ready to issue its own coin, at least not yet."Many others have said something [about issuance]. Our stance is we will evaluate if it's the right time for us to issue our own coin," Madwana said. "We're not convinced of the business case to jump right out of the gate but we are continuously evaluating our options." More stablecoin tech The race to sell stablecoin technology is also attracting financial technology sellers from outside traditional banking. For example, Alchemy, a blockchain technology firm, recently launched Cortex, a system designed to scale real-time transaction settlement for stablecoins and other digital assets. Alchemy's users include Circle, PayPal, Paxos and Anchorage. "The big banks see all sorts of possibilities in stablecoins, and rightly so. Which creates a top down pressure on regional banks, and a fear of missing out for smaller banks." Gareth Lodge, a senior analyst at Celent, told American Banker. "Many banks think they need to have them, so it creates a large opportunity for FIS and others to meet that need." As banking has shifted from brick-and-mortar branches to digital-first platforms, stablecoins are starting to disrupt "traditional" payment rails, according to Guillaume Poncin, chief technology officer of Alchemy. "The race to build reliable, scalable stablecoin infra is critical because the future of finance demands systems that can handle massive, real-time transaction volumes without delays," Poncin told American Banker in an email. "Major players like Circle, PayPal, Stripe and JPMorganChase are already integrating stablecoin infrastructure, delivering faster access to liquidity worldwide. This shift isn't just about technology, it's about meeting the demands of institutional clients and consumers who all want real-time, global financial access." Adoption will ultimately still depend on client demand, the maturity of use cases, and a deeper understanding of how to build and launch stablecoin-enabled products, Wester said. "There's still a lot of education to be done before that happens. But the direction is clear: stablecoins are moving from 'wait and see' to "let's get going.'" While dozens of banks, technology firms and retailers consider their own stablecoins, Makwana is less concerned about a bubble than cohesion. "There is always a danger of too many flavors of payments, but the interoperability of them is the challenge," Makwana said. If the largest 20 banks and merchants all issued their own stablecoins, the question would be how easy is it to "off ramp" or "on ramp" the different coins, Makwana said. "If the answer is 'yes, it is easy,' then you can have as many as you want." Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Coinbase's Weak Q2 Is a Blip, Not a Breakdown, Says Benchmark
Coinbase's (COIN) softer-than-expected second quarter results triggered a sharp Friday sell-off, but Wall Street broker Benchmark says the drop is a buying opportunity, not a red flag. Analyst Mark Palmer reiterated his buy rating and $421 price target. He argued that the exchange's long-term investment case remains intact as the company continues to build foundational crypto infrastructure. The shares are 1.8% higher in early trading Monday, after having closed 16.7% lower on Friday. Benchmark highlights five catalysts supporting its thesis. First, Coinbase's revenue-sharing agreement with Circle on USDC reserves positions it to benefit from stablecoin adoption, especially after the U.S. passed the GENIUS Act. Second, its institutional offerings, including prime brokerage, crypto-as-a-service and derivatives, are well-timed because the CLARITY Act may spur further adoption. Third, the firm is developing a crypto 'super app' integrating trading, payments, non-fungible tokens (NFTs), decentralized finance (DeFi) and developer tools, a unique product in the U.S. market. Fourth, the integration of decentralized exchanges expands token access beyond centralized listings. Finally, Coinbase's estimated $360 million in July transaction revenue, a 44% jump from its monthly average during the second quarter, signals a potential recovery in crypto activity. Benchmark concludes the quarter's miss is short-term noise. Coinbase's evolving platform, underpinned by regulation tailwinds and increasing institutional demand, points to long-term in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Are Stablecoins Actually Safe? What Every Crypto Investor Should Know in 2025
Benzinga and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue on some items through the links below. Stablecoins were supposed to be the calm in crypto's storm — a digital answer to cash that wouldn't tank when markets got shaky. Pegged to fiat currencies like the U.S. dollar, they were designed to offer price stability in a world of wild volatility. But the truth is more complicated. From the collapse of TerraUSD to temporary de-pegs of USDC, stablecoins have had their share of headline-making failures. And while many investors still rely on them to park funds between trades or earn yield in DeFi, the idea that they're "safe" by default is misleading. In 2025, stablecoins still play a vital role in the crypto economy, but how safe they are depends entirely on how they're built, how they're backed, and who's in control. The Four Types of Stablecoins To understand the risk, you first need to understand the design. Not all stablecoins work the same way, and the method they use to maintain their peg makes a huge difference in how safe they are. Most fall into four categories: fiat-collateralized, crypto-collateralized, algorithmic, and hybrid or semi-centralized models. Fiat-collateralized stablecoins like USDC and USDT are backed by traditional assets — cash, treasuries, or commercial paper — and issued by centralized companies. These are among the most widely used, and while they carry counterparty risk (you're trusting the issuer to actually hold those reserves), they tend to offer the strongest peg in normal market conditions. Crypto-collateralized options like DAI and LUSD take a different approach, locking up excess amounts of digital assets like ETH into smart contracts to maintain the peg. This design is more decentralized and trustless, but still vulnerable to rapid price moves or smart contract bugs. Algorithmic stablecoins — which try to keep their price steady by automatically adjusting supply — are generally considered the riskiest. UST's collapse in 2022 wiped out $60 billion in value and permanently damaged confidence in the model. Some newer projects have tried to reintroduce algorithmic systems with guardrails, but few investors forget how quickly the original experiment failed. Don't Miss: New to crypto? Get up to $400 in rewards for successfully completing short educational courses and making your first qualifying trade on Coinbase. A must-have for all crypto enthusiasts: Sign up for the Gemini Credit Card today and earn rewards on Bitcoin Ether, or 60+ other tokens, with every purchase. Stablecoins Aren't Entirely Risk-Free Stablecoins may seem straightforward, but the risks go beyond simply whether or not they stay at $1. There's reserve transparency, for one. Not every issuer is clear about what's backing their tokens. Tether (USDT), for example, spent years dodging full audits before being fined by regulators — and it still doesn't publish the kind of granular reserve breakdowns many critics would like to see. Then there's the issue of regulatory exposure. In the U.S. and Europe, stablecoin issuers are facing growing scrutiny, with new laws aimed at treating them more like banks or money market funds. That could add compliance costs — or shut down certain coins altogether. Even coins like USDC, which are relatively well-regulated and transparent, have shown cracks under pressure. When Silicon Valley Bank collapsed in 2023, $3.3 billion of Circle's reserves were tied up there, and USDC briefly dropped below $0.90 before recovering. These events show that even the "safe" stablecoins can wobble under stress. Not All Pegs Are Created Equal One of the biggest misconceptions about stablecoins is that being "pegged" to the U.S. dollar guarantees stability. It doesn't. Pegs are maintained through mechanisms — and those mechanisms can fail. In fiat-backed coins like USDC and TUSD, the peg holds as long as people believe they can redeem the coin 1:1 for real dollars. If that trust erodes, the peg breaks. In crypto-backed coins like DAI and LUSD, the peg is enforced through collateralization ratios and liquidations. But during market crashes, collateral values can drop faster than the protocol can respond. And with algorithmic coins, it's often just a confidence game. If users stop believing the peg will hold, they rush for the exits — and the mechanism collapses in a death spiral. The lesson is simple: the peg is only as strong as the system backing it. And when that system is opaque, poorly collateralized, or overly reliant on user confidence, the risks grow exponentially. What Makes a Stablecoin Safer in 2025? If you're holding stablecoins, you're probably doing it for a reason — easier trading, access to DeFi yields, or as a crypto-native store of value. So what makes one coin safer than another today? The big three factors are collateral quality, transparency, and decentralization. USDC, managed by Circle and Coinbase, remains the most transparent fiat-backed coin on the market. It's fully audited, backed mostly by short-term U.S. Treasuries, and subject to regulatory oversight. DAI, meanwhile, has proven itself as a decentralized alternative. It's overcollateralized, battle-tested, and operates through a transparent, on-chain system. LUSD, from the Liquity protocol, is another favorite among DeFi purists. It only accepts ETH as collateral and removes governance risk entirely — once the protocol was deployed, it became immutable. Coins like USDT and TUSD are still widely used due to their deep liquidity, but they're considered less safe by some due to weaker transparency and a history of regulatory run-ins. If safety is your goal, stick with coins that are well-collateralized, well-audited, and ideally decentralized — or at least highly regulated. Trending Now: This Jeff Bezos-backed startup will allow you to become a landlord in just 10 minutes, with minimum investments as low as $100. $100k+ in investable assets? Match with a fiduciary advisor for free to learn how you can maximize your retirement and save on taxes – no cost, no obligation. The Dangers of Algorithmic Stablecoins No discussion of stablecoin safety is complete without a warning about algorithmic designs. TerraUSD (UST) was supposed to be the future — a clever blend of incentives and supply controls that could keep a stable peg without backing reserves. But when confidence wavered and too many holders rushed to exit, the algorithm failed. The peg collapsed, the coin crashed, and billions in value disappeared almost overnight. The fallout was so severe that most algorithmic stablecoins have since been abandoned or restructured. Even FRAX, which once used a partial algorithmic model, moved toward full collateralization after the UST collapse. While newer experiments are still cropping up, they're typically smaller and carry warnings from nearly every major research firm. If you see a coin offering high returns and promising a "self-regulating peg," take a closer look. If it's relying on unproven mechanisms and has no collateral backing, the risk may not be worth the reward. Stablecoin Hacks and Wallet Risks Even if the coin itself is solid, how you store it matters. Stablecoins live on blockchains — and blockchain wallets can be hacked. That includes browser extensions, mobile apps, and even exchanges. In 2025, phishing scams remain a major threat. Clicking a fake MetaMask link or approving a malicious contract can drain your stablecoins in seconds. That's why many long-term holders choose hardware wallets like Ledger or Trezor, which store your keys offline and are much harder to compromise. Stablecoins themselves don't get hacked, but the smart contracts that issue or manage them sometimes do — especially on newer platforms. Always make sure the coin you're using has been independently audited and battle-tested in live market conditions. And never, ever share your seed phrase — no real crypto platform will ask you for it. Are Stablecoins a Good Investment? That depends on what you're using them for. If you're trying to earn a few percent interest in a DeFi yield farm, the reward may justify the risk — especially with coins like USDC or DAI. But if you're just trying to park cash in a stable asset, there may be safer options. Some investors now use tokenized Treasuries (like BlackRock's BUIDL or Ondo Finance's OUSG) for short-term parking, since they offer yield and regulatory protections. Others keep a mix — stablecoins for speed and on-chain activity, traditional banking for safety. Just remember: stablecoins are not FDIC insured. If the issuer fails or the protocol breaks, you could lose some or all of your holdings. Do your homework. Read the audits. Understand what's backing the coin. And don't confuse convenience with security. See Next: Grow your IRA or 401(k) with Crypto – unlock the power of alternative investments including a Crypto IRA within your retirement account. Trade crypto futures on Plus500 with up to $200 in bonuses — no wallets, just price speculation and free paper trading to practice different strategies. This article Are Stablecoins Actually Safe? What Every Crypto Investor Should Know in 2025 originally appeared on Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
