Euro stablecoins lag as Turkey’s lira tokens win adoption
CryptoSlate reports that Zodia Markets (Standard Chartered–majority-owned) processed about $3.4B in Turkish lira (TRY) stablecoin transactions in 2025, making lira-pegged stablecoins its second-most-used currency after the dollar—well ahead of euro-pegged tokens.
The core finding is that euro stablecoins face a demand problem, not necessarily a regulatory one. Europe is preparing MiCA-compliant euro tokens (via a 37-bank, 15-country banking consortium under the Qivalis effort) while the ECB works toward a digital euro. However, the article argues euro stablecoins may struggle because tokenized euros have little extra “friction” to solve: cross-border euro banking rails already clear quickly and cheaply.
By contrast, lira stablecoins gained usage because they offered faster, more reliable, and cheaper settlement than correspondent banking for moving TRY across borders. Traders and users reportedly routed local TRY into Zodia’s dollar settlement, so lira tokens acted as an on-ramp to dollar liquidity rather than a competitor for savings.
The article also links the pattern to broader stablecoin market structure: dollar tokens tend to dominate as the unit of account and savings layer, while local-currency tokens often become the settlement/transfer layer where banking frictions exist.
It warns regulators may eventually face supervisory pressure if lira stablecoins scale and start influencing domestic bank funding dynamics. Overall, the data suggests euro stablecoins adoption could remain muted even as Europe improves the rules—because actual user demand depends on operational payment frictions.
(Keyword focus: euro stablecoins.)
Bearish
The article’s evidence suggests euro stablecoins could struggle to gain real on-chain usage because they don’t clearly solve a pain point for everyday users. Zodia Markets’ $3.4B TRY-stablecoin volume (second after the dollar) implies stablecoin adoption follows operational “friction,” not the size or regulatory sophistication of the underlying economy.
Historically, this aligns with prior cycles where tokenized assets gained traction mainly when they reduced settlement time, improved reliability, or cut costs versus existing rails. When a token doesn’t offer incremental advantage over incumbent banking infrastructure, demand tends to remain limited even if issuance frameworks (e.g., MiCA) are strong.
Short-term, traders may view this as a relative signal: capital may keep favoring dollar-linked stablecoins for liquidity and savings, while local-currency stablecoins capture transfer demand where frictions exist—potentially weighing sentiment toward euro-linked products.
Long-term, the bearish angle is more about adoption velocity than legality. If euro stablecoins still can’t demonstrate measurable user need, regulatory-compliant launches (Qivalis/MiCA, digital euro ambition) may take longer to scale. The exception would be any new distribution channel or payment corridor that introduces real incremental friction relief for euros.
Net: bearish for euro stablecoins’ growth narrative, neutral-to-limited for the broader stablecoin market (since demand is rotating toward where frictions exist).