This is a guest post Vincent ChokCEO First Digital Group.
21stst In July 2014, we witnessed the launch of the world's first stablecoin, BitUSD. It was a powerful new concept entering the market, offering the promise of a stable digital currency that could facilitate transactions without the volatility associated with other cryptocurrencies. However, four years later, BitUSD lost its 1:1 parity with the US Dollar and has not recovered since. BitUSD was not alone; the early years were plagued with many failures as the structure, infrastructure, and oversight required to support a stablecoin had not yet matured.
Today, the landscape has changed dramatically, with robust projects and long-awaited stablecoin regulation in Hong Kong. As stablecoins approach their 10th anniversary, it’s time to look back on how far we’ve come and why the current environment paves the way for success. This shows that stablecoins are now in the right place at the right time.
Examining past failures
Ten years ago, when the world was still suffering from the effects of the Global Financial Crisis, the idea of ​​stablecoins was new and exciting. They were seen as a bridge between the volatile world of cryptocurrencies and the stability of traditional fiat currencies. There was also a growing realization that Web3-enabled digital payment systems could make stablecoins more attractive and accessible to the unbanked.
However, many of the early projects failed, mainly due to poorly thought out mechanisms, lack of robust infrastructure, and lack of regulatory oversight. In the case of BitUSD, a detailed analysis by BitMEX Research found that this stablecoin is collateralized with BitShares, an obscure, unstable, and unbacked asset. If the price of BitShares falls, one BitUSD can be used to buy more BitShares, facilitating mass arbitrage trading similar to traders of traditional asset classes. However, the reverse is not guaranteed, creating structural weaknesses.
Another notable example is TerraUSD (UST), which maintained a price peg through an arbitrage mechanism via its sister token, LUNA. Although this mechanism was innovative, it had some flaws.
Under normal circumstances, redemption fees were 0.5%, but during the collapse, fees soared to 60%, making it unprofitable for arbitrageurs to restore the peg. Inaccuracies in the Luna price oracle contributed to volatility, with discrepancies of up to 70% between the oracle price and the exchange price. Delays occurred between UST redemptions and LUNA sales, creating uncertainty and preventing effective arbitrage trading. Ultimately, the collapse of UST was exacerbated by speculative attacks and bank-run-like scenarios, with mass redemptions causing a death spiral for both UST and LUNA.
Other stablecoins such as Acala USD (aUSD) and Deus Finance’s DEI have also faced significant issues, with Acala USD, for example, being taken down by a technical exploit that allowed hackers to issue 1.28 billion aUSD due to a misconfiguration of its liquidity pool.
DEI was the target of a hack that exploited multiple network vulnerabilities, resulting in a $6 million loss. In hindsight, many of these mistakes could have been easily avoided, but as with any emerging technology, trial and error is part of the process of maturity.
Learning from the past
Today, the stablecoin landscape has improved significantly. Learning from past mistakes, modern projects reflect more robust models and well-thought-out mechanisms. For example, market entry of uncollateralized algorithmic stablecoin projects has declined in favor of fiat and commodity-based stablecoins. Unlike algorithmic stablecoins, collateralized stablecoins do not rely on market forces to maintain stability and are less exposed to fundamental risk. For example, FDUSD is pegged to the US Dollar and backed by audited cash and high-quality cash equivalent reserves held at financial institutions.
Modern stablecoins are built on more secure and scalable blockchain platforms, reducing the risk of technical exploits, due to better standards and the fact that the specialization of the sector has attracted top talent from big tech companies and the cybersecurity sector.
Regulatory certainty
In the early days of stablecoins, the regulatory environment was characterized by a lack of clear guidelines and standards. This ambiguity posed a major challenge for stablecoin projects navigating a complex web of financial regulations across various jurisdictions. Many early projects operated in a regulatory grey zone, leading to compliance and security issues. Today, however, regulators are increasingly introducing clearer guidelines that help mitigate risks, put in place proper governance, and provide much-needed certainty for projects to succeed.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority is expected to launch a stablecoin regime within the coming months. The licensing criteria and conditions are expected to include strict requirements to ensure the stability and integrity of stablecoins under the authority's jurisdiction. Hong Kong is known for developing some of the highest standards of financial regulation and governance throughout its rise as an international financial centre.
Dubai's VARA regime also provides an attractive platform for digital asset companies to build their businesses and solutions in the market, with the UAE Central Bank just recently approving the issuance of regulations for the licensing and supervision of stablecoin regimes.
The European Commission's MiCA regulation also includes provisions regarding capital requirements, governance and consumer protection for stablecoins.
Interoperability and interchangeability
Regulation is a key driver, as regulated stablecoins would have the same KYC and AML mechanisms as central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), creating a level playing field. Their fungibility and interoperability would also allow stablecoins to be used for traditional financial services.
Currently, stablecoin usage is primarily focused on cross-border payment and remittance scenarios. Expanded scope of adoption and usefulness must be predicated on greater reliability and trust. Historical issues with well-known stablecoins and large exposure to the US market at inherently uncertain times continue to cast a shadow over the sector.
It presents a compelling case for an alternative issued outside the U.S. market and developed with integrity from the design stage. Features include audited and secured high-quality reserves, unlimited issuance, and 1:1 redemption.
The right place at the right time
As stablecoins celebrate their 10th anniversary, it's clear that they've come a long way. Early failures have taught them valuable lessons, leading to the development of more resilient and trustworthy stablecoins. As the world continues to change and risks and uncertainties increase, people and businesses are calling for trust, certainty and consistency more than ever before.
Thus, stablecoins are in the right place at the right time. Supported by robust infrastructure, emerging regulatory frameworks, and increasing interoperability, these factors position them to play a transformative role in the financial system, leveraging their inherent programmability to inspire new business models and increase accessibility to the financial system for users around the world.
Mentioned in this article
