Bank of Italy: Stablecoin remittances lack consistent cost or speed edge
A Bank of Italy study found that stablecoin remittances do not deliver a consistent cost or settlement-speed advantage over traditional payment rails. Researchers tested 200 USDC remittances across 10 bidirectional corridors between Italy and Brazil, Argentina, Japan, the UAE, and South Africa, comparing end-to-end costs and settlement times versus established remittance services.
The findings point to a key driver: fiat on- and off-ramp frictions. Exchange fees and currency conversion accounted for most of the cost differences, while blockchain transaction fees were only a small share. Total stablecoin remittance costs varied widely by corridor—from about 0.3% to nearly 9%—with settlement taking under 20 minutes when instant payment systems were available, and one to two business days when they were not.
Compared with the World Bank’s global average remittance cost benchmark of 6.65%, stablecoin transfers were cheaper in most corridors studied. However, they were less expensive than Wise in only three of seven comparable corridors.
The study also stressed that investment in domestic instant payment infrastructure could improve stablecoin remittances competitiveness, because settlement time heavily depends on local payment-rail quality. It added that regulation materially shapes outcomes: prohibitionist rules failed to eliminate demand and pushed users toward offshore or unregulated channels, while overly restrictive frameworks increased complexity for retail users. These conclusions come as the EU’s MiCA framework and the US’s GENIUS Act aim to govern crypto assets and payment stablecoins.
Context: the stablecoin market has grown to roughly $307 billion (+~16% year-on-year).
Neutral
Neutral.
This is a fundamental, policy-and-infrastructure driven finding rather than a direct crypto protocol breakthrough. By attributing most differences in stablecoin remittance costs and settlement time to fiat conversion and payment rails (not on-chain fees), the article reduces the market narrative that “stablecoins automatically make cross-border payments cheaper and faster.” That can temper bullish expectations for stablecoin volume growth tied purely to on-chain efficiency.
However, the study also notes that stablecoin remittances can be cheaper than traditional benchmarks in most corridors studied, and settlement can be very fast where instant payment systems exist. That leaves room for gradual adoption as payment infrastructure improves.
Regulation is the other mixed lever: MiCA and the US GENIUS Act may clarify compliance and on-ramps, but overly restrictive approaches can push usage to offshore channels—both outcomes are consistent with a market that digests headlines without immediate, uniform price impact.
In short, traders may see short-term sentiment swings around “stablecoin efficiency” headlines, but the longer-term signal points to infrastructure readiness (local instant rails) rather than an imminent re-pricing of major tokens. Similar research-led narratives historically tend to create limited immediate impact unless they coincide with concrete changes in regulation, banking access, or issuer policy.