ReadingResearchRadarInvestment framework
Sign in / Sign up
← Back to reading
NewsTopic · 国际清算银行稳定币研究2 min read·2026-10-19

BIS Study Finds Rising Bank Deposit Rates May Slow Stablecoin Growth

BIS Working Paper 1382 uses weekly U.S. data from 2019 to 2025 to estimate the semi-elasticity of stablecoin market capitalization with respect to deposit rate changes, employing local projections and instrumental variable methods. The results show that the two are partial substitutes: deposit rate increases predict slower stablecoin growth, with USDC responding more strongly than USDT. The authors also emphasize that the analysis concerns the allocation of funds between assets and does not establish that stablecoin growth necessarily reduces aggregate bank deposits or lending.

ImportanceMaterialEvidenceE2 unreplicatedWrite-upQuick

2026-10-13 20:00 GMT+8

Stablecoins are digital tokens designed to maintain a stable value, usually against the US dollar. Like bank deposits, they can provide payment and liquidity services, but they generally pay little or no interest. Bank deposits likewise provide liquidity and can pay interest. Do the two compete for the same funds? In BIS Working Paper 1382, published in October 2026, economists Rashad Ahmed and Iñaki Aldasoro provide an empirical answer using U.S. weekly data.

Their core finding is that stablecoins and bank deposits are partial substitutes. When banks raise deposit rates, the growth of stablecoin market capitalization slows. Specifically, against average ten-week stablecoin growth of 15%, ordinary least squares estimates imply a reduction of roughly 3 percentage points per basis point of deposit repricing; instrumental variable estimates are approximately three times larger and pass a placebo test using non-stablecoin cryptocurrencies.

The key identification strategy exploits the nonlinear way in which banks pass changes in policy rates through to deposit rates. Whereas other money market rates track the federal funds rate roughly linearly, banks reprice deposits more aggressively once it exceeds approximately 3%. This nonlinearity provides an exogenous source of variation for the instrumental variable, helping to address the endogeneity arising from possible two-way causality.

Sign in / Sign up
ReadingResearchRadarInvestment framework

A notable difference is the varying strength of response between USDC and USDT: USDC is more sensitive to deposit rate changes. The authors attribute this to USDC's closer ties to U.S. depositors. In addition, cross-sectional variation in repricing across deposit tiers provides independent evidence of substitution.

The authors explicitly delineate the boundaries of their conclusion: the analysis concerns the allocation of funds between assets and does not establish that stablecoin growth necessarily reduces aggregate bank deposits or lending. In other words, stablecoins may attract incremental funds rather than diverting existing deposits. The authors also note that if stablecoins become more widely used, they could affect banks' funding conditions and the transmission of monetary policy—but this is a conditional inference, not a confirmed result.

For investors, this working paper identifies a trackable mechanism: deposit pricing influences the growth speed of the stablecoin sector to some degree. In a declining rate cycle, stablecoins may enjoy a more favorable growth environment; in a rising rate cycle, the interest advantage of deposits may slow stablecoin growth. This mechanism is useful for understanding the cyclicality of the stablecoin industry, but the paper remains at the working-paper stage and has not yet undergone independent replication.

Sources

  • 原始出处bis.org↗
Topic

国际清算银行稳定币研究

国际清算银行(BIS)发布工作论文指出,美国银行存款利率上升会显著抑制稳定币市值增长,证实两者存在部分替代关系。研究发现,存款利率每提高1个基点,未来10周稳定币平均增长率下降约3个百分点;若采用工具变量法估算,降幅可达9个百分点。其中,U…

3 steps1 piecesUpdated 2026-10-20 08:49

How it got here

  1. 2026-10-13BIS发布第1382号工作论文《稳定币和银行存款是替代品吗?》,提出存款利率上升预测稳定币增长放缓。
  2. 2026-10-17Wu Blockchain等媒体引用论文数据,指出IV模型下1基点加息致稳定币增长降9%,且USDC反应强于USDT。
  3. 2026-10-18crypto.news报道详细拆解OLS与IV估计差异,并提及样本截止2025年6月,未涵盖近期稳定币奖励机制变化。

What is still unsettled

  • 当美联储进入降息周期时,稳定币是否会出现对称性的回流,还是因基础设施切换成本而保持粘性?
  • 随着Open USD等提供类似国债收益率的“奖励型”稳定币普及,无息假设失效后,替代弹性将如何变化?
  • BIS论文中工具变量的第一阶段F统计量略低于常规阈值,这一计量瑕疵是否影响长期政策制定的可靠性?
Read the full topic →
Continue researching →