Topic starter
10/07/2026 9:12 pm
TL;DR: Stablecoin adjusted volume reached $28 trillion in 2025 and Chainalysis projects it could hit $719 trillion by 2035, or as much as $1.5 quadrillion with macro catalysts, while stablecoin payment volumes could match Visa and Mastercard between 2031 and 2039. The identity and access question is no longer theoretical: payment infrastructure that settles in seconds and operates 24/7 shifts governance pressure onto controls around wallets, keys, delegated access, and transaction authorisation.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Chainalysis: “The $100 Trillion Wealth Shift: Stablecoin Utility and the Future of Payments”.
By the numbers:
- Adjusted stablecoin volume reached $28 trillion in real economic activity in 2025.
- Chainalysis projects adjusted stablecoin volume could reach $719 trillion by 2035 through organic growth alone.
- With macro catalysts, Chainalysis says 2035 stablecoin volume could approach $1.5 quadrillion.
Key questions
Q: How should organisations govern stablecoin payment authorisation?
A: They should treat stablecoin authorisation as privileged access governance, not just payment operations.
Q: Why do stablecoin payment rails change identity and access requirements?
A: Because settlement happens faster and with less intermediary delay, the organisation has less time to catch mistakes after the fact.
Q: What breaks when payment delegation is not tightly scoped?
A: The main failure mode is authority creep, where a system granted limited spend rights gradually accumulates broader transactional power than intended.
Practitioner guidance
- Map value-moving authority to privileged identities Inventory every wallet, signer, treasury integration, and automated workflow that can initiate or approve stablecoin transfers.
- Bound delegated payment permissions by task and expiry Replace standing transfer rights with task-scoped approvals, limit transaction size and counterparty scope, and require automatic expiry for delegated signing rights.
- Separate custody, approval, and execution functions Do not let the same identity or service both hold signing capability and authorise settlement.
Bottom line: Stablecoin adoption is turning payments governance into an identity problem because wallets, keys, and delegated approvals now control value movement.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
10/07/2026 9:34 pm
Stablecoin payments turn transaction authorisation into an identity governance problem. The article is not really about speed alone. It shows that the rail is becoming software-defined, which means the real control point is the authority to sign, delegate, and settle value. For IAM and PAM teams, that makes payment governance inseparable from identity lifecycle management and privileged access discipline.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How do stablecoin controls compare with traditional payment controls?
A: Traditional payment controls often depend on batch timing, intermediary checks, and delayed settlement to create review windows. Stablecoin systems reduce those windows, so the control model has to move earlier, to issuance and signing time, with stronger policy enforcement, identity assurance, and real-time monitoring.
👉 Read our full editorial: Stablecoin rails are reshaping payments governance and identity risk