Onigiri Weekend Digest: Institutional Lens #25

🌐 Website | 💼 Linkedln | 📰 Past Editions

Good weekend, and welcome back to Stablescope Weekend Edition.

This week’s two headlines look separate on the surface, but they are really telling the same story from two different angles.

Recap this Week's Headliners

SS #81 - USDC Flips Tether as Stablecoin Volume Hits $1.8T Record

SS #82 - Circle Up 49% YTD, Bernstein Sees 60% More Upside

On one side, USDC has overtaken Tether in transfer volume, helping push monthly stablecoin transfer activity to a record $1.8 trillion in February, with USDC accounting for roughly $1.26 trillion and around 70% of that total. On the other, public equity markets are beginning to price Circle less like a crypto proxy and more like a regulated financial infrastructure company: CRCL is up roughly 49% year-to-date, Bernstein has reiterated an Outperform rating with a $190 price target, and Circle’s market cap has reached roughly $30 billion even as broader crypto markets remain softer.

The deeper point is this: stablecoins are no longer being valued only by how much supply exists, but by how much economic activity they intermediate. That matters because market cap tells you who people hold; transfer volume tells you what money is actually being used for. 

USDT still leads by outstanding supply, but USDC’s volume lead suggests that a growing share of high-frequency, institutional, payments, exchange, and settlement activity is being routed through the more regulated, compliance-forward rail. Circle’s public listing only sharpens that distinction, because USDC growth is now being watched not just by crypto markets, but by equity analysts, payment partners, and institutions allocating around regulated dollar infrastructure.

Enjoy the read!

You read and share. We listen and improve. Send us feedback at [email protected].

🍙 Onigiri Take

Our view is that these headlines are not mainly about “USDC beating Tether.” They are about the market beginning to separate stablecoin utility from stablecoin inventory.

Tether still dominates as the largest offshore dollar inventory pool. It is deeply embedded in exchange liquidity, offshore trading, and crypto-native reserve behavior. But USDC’s outperformance in transfer volume indicates that the next phase of stablecoin competition is increasingly about velocity, trust, and institutional legibility, not just float. That is a meaningful shift. A smaller balance sheet asset moving more value is exactly what you would expect if it is becoming the preferred rail for payments, treasury transfers, collateral movement, settlement, and institution-facing workflows.

This is also why Circle equity is rallying. The market is not simply rewarding a stablecoin issuer for printing more supply. It is rewarding the possibility that Circle sits at the center of a broader regulated stack: reserve income, payments infrastructure, enterprise integrations, custody and trust-bank ambitions, and distribution through traditional financial institutions. Circle’s latest results highlighted strong revenue growth, higher USDC circulation, and expanding integrations, while its conditional OCC approval and GENIUS Act positioning reinforce the idea that it is becoming part of regulated U.S. financial plumbing rather than remaining a peripheral crypto company.

Our house view remains the same: stablecoins are becoming payment and treasury infrastructure before they become consumer money. What changes this week is that the evidence is becoming harder to ignore. When transfer volume breaks records, exchange balances rise, minting accelerates, and public markets begin assigning fintech-style upside to the issuer, the conversation has moved beyond speculative crypto cycles. It is now about which stablecoins, issuers, and rails are becoming the most trusted operating layer for digital dollars.

🍙 Winners & Losers: Institutional Outlook

🍙 Under the Hood: From Stablecoin Supply to Stablecoin Throughput

The most important nuance in the first headline is that USDC did not flip Tether by supply; it flipped it by throughput. That distinction matters because supply is a stock variable, while transfer volume is a flow variable. A token can have a very large market cap because it is widely held as reserve inventory, but another token can create more economic value if it turns over more often across payments, exchange settlement, DeFi collateral, treasury transfers, or merchant flows. In February, that higher-velocity token was USDC.

That helps explain why Circle’s equity story has become so powerful. If USDC were merely a passive wrapper around dollars, then a ~$30 billion public valuation would look difficult to justify. But if USDC is the base asset sitting inside a wider regulated network—reserve income, payments rails, institutional APIs, settlement integrations, enterprise treasury products, and potentially trust-bank-backed infrastructure—then the market is underwriting not just supply growth, but platform expansion. Circle’s latest results support that broader interpretation, with revenue growth driven by stronger circulation and reserve income, while management continues to position the company around global payments, institutional infrastructure, and programmable finance.

There is also a strategic asymmetry between Circle and Tether that becomes more visible here. Tether’s strength historically came from being the most liquid, most widely accepted offshore crypto dollar. Circle’s strength increasingly comes from being the most legible onshore regulated crypto dollar. As stablecoins move from trading infrastructure into treasury and payments infrastructure, the value of legibility rises. That does not mean Tether disappears; it means the market may segment more clearly into offshore liquidity dollars and regulated operating dollars.

The broader implication is that stablecoin competition is entering a new phase. The first phase was issuance. The second was exchange adoption. The third is what we are seeing now: integration into mainstream financial workflows. In that phase, the winning stablecoin is not simply the one with the biggest float, but the one that can be held by institutions, embedded by developers, approved by regulators, and routed by banks without breaking existing compliance architecture. That is why Circle’s regulatory posture, bank partnerships, and public-market visibility matter so much more now than they did two years ago.

🍙Stablecoin ≠ Crypto — Stablecoin Is Becoming Regulated Dollar Infrastructure

The cleanest way to frame this week is not that stablecoins are “doing well inside crypto.” It is that stablecoins are increasingly becoming a digital extension of dollar infrastructure.

Crypto markets still provide much of the early demand, liquidity, and experimentation. But the growth narrative is no longer confined to trading. Circle is being rerated because the market sees stablecoins moving into a much larger addressable space: payments, remittances, treasury management, enterprise settlement, collateral mobility, and eventually machine-native commerce. Bernstein’s upside case is effectively saying that if stablecoins continue to penetrate these domains, then Circle should be valued less like a cyclical crypto asset and more like a scaled financial network.

That does not mean the market has already proven the full thesis. It means investors are beginning to price the possibility that regulated digital dollars will sit alongside cards, wires, ACH, correspondent banking and money-market infrastructure as part of the new financial stack. The GENIUS Act, the OCC trust-bank pathway, and Circle’s growing institutional ecosystem all reinforce that direction.

🍙 Institutional Risks & Unknowns

Despite the progress, several open questions remain:

1. Valuation outrunning monetization. Circle’s stock performance is impressive, but a large part of the bull case depends on transfer volume and supply growth turning into durable, scalable revenue rather than narrative momentum. A stablecoin can move huge value without every dollar of throughput being directly monetizable at high margins. That is especially relevant if rates fall over time and reserve-income tailwinds weaken. Reuters noted that Circle’s reserve income remains a major earnings driver, even as management frames lower rates as better for long-term adoption and money velocity.

2. Over-interpreting transfer volume. High transfer activity is a strong signal, but it does not always equal sticky end-user adoption. Some of that volume can reflect exchange rebalancing, collateral flows, treasury rotation, or other high-turnover behavior rather than durable payment utility. USDC’s leadership is important, but the quality and persistence of that volume matter more than a single monthly print.

3. Regulatory concentration. Circle benefits from being aligned with U.S. regulatory direction, but that also makes its strategy more sensitive to supervisory expectations, capital treatment, reserve rules, listing standards, and future interpretations of stablecoin law. Regulatory clarity is supportive, but it can also raise operating costs and narrow flexibility.

4. Competitive response. Tether is not standing still, and neither are banks, fintechs, or future bank-issued tokenized deposits. If stablecoins become critical financial infrastructure, then the market should expect heavier competition not just from crypto issuers, but from the traditional financial system itself. The long-term winner may not be a single token; it may be the ecosystem with the strongest distribution, compliance, and integration stack. That makes this a market-structure race, not merely a stablecoin-brand race.

Onigiri Capital (onigiri.vc), a US$50 million blockchain-focused investment fund, launched by Saison Capital, the venture arm of Japan’s Credit Saison. Onigiri Capital is on a mission to chart the next chapter of finance and invest in seed and Series A blockchain startups in stablecoins, payments, RWAs, DeFi and financial infrastructure. The fund’s strategy emphasizes connecting startups to Asia’s growing digital asset markets.

If you'd like to discuss or contribute to the next Institutional Lens, contact us at [email protected]

Disclaimer: All the information presented in this publication and its affiliates is strictly for educational purposes only. It should not be construed or taken as financial, legal, investment, or any other form of advice.