Is stablecoin just a hype? Airwallex CEO publicly criticizes stablecoins: they're not cheaper at all.

With the increasing application of stablecoins, Airwallex CEO Jack Zhang recently made a public post questioning the actual utility of stablecoins in cross-border payments, sparking widespread responses from the encryption and TradFi sectors. A debate on "payment efficiency vs system innovation" quickly spread across the community, which is not just a matter of cost calculation, but also concerns the future direction of global financial infrastructure.

Airwallex CEO questions the practicality of stablecoins: they are just regulatory arbitrage.

Jack Zhang, the founder of Airwallex, recently posted that he still has not seen any case where a cryptocurrency has truly "helped". He cited practical examples, believing that if a company wants to transfer from USD to EUR, it ultimately still needs to convert back to fiat currency, and the cost of converting stablecoins during the process (off-ramp) is actually higher than the instant currency exchange offered by traditional banks.

We now cost less than 0.01% of cross-border transfers and do so instantly. How could you possibly be cheaper than free and faster than instant?

It is also added that "even if Stripe develops stablecoins in Latin America or Africa, it is merely taking advantage of the regulatory and financial infrastructure gaps to profit, but it is of no real use for remittances between mainstream currencies (G10)."

(Uber CEO: stablecoin has the potential to become a new tool for international fund transfers )

According to reports, Airwallex is a fintech platform headquartered in Singapore and founded in Australia, providing one-stop solutions for modern enterprises in cross-border payments, foreign exchange conversion, expense management, and embedded finance. It helps over 150 countries and 150,000 enterprise customers to make and receive payments quickly and securely, with 95% of transactions completed within hours.

The company just completed a $300 million Series F financing two weeks ago, with a valuation of $6.2 billion.

Huma Finance founder strikes back at the ailments of the traditional system: Don't deceive yourself.

In response, Huma Finance co-founder Richard Liu hit back at Jack Zhang, urging him not to fool himself, pointing out that what he referred to as the "cost optimization solution" is based on a financial architecture that is already outdated and predatory. He stated bluntly that "the infrastructure of traditional banks is the real problem."

If you and your investors just want to squeeze a little more benefit from optimizing existing foreign exchange processes, then stablecoins may not be of much help. If your clients are still being charged at every step of the process, then you haven't really pushed the foreign exchange costs to their limits.

He added, "The focus of stablecoins is not on 'saving 0.01% compared to existing systems', but on establishing a new global payment model that is decentralized. Such a structure ultimately does not require traditional players, including Airwallex."

(Huma Finance's rise to fame also brings controversies: Is the new PayFi model merely a rebranding of P2P?)

Starting from the user, Editor-in-Chief Wu tells you what is practical.

Colin Wu, the editor-in-chief of Blockchain, also shared his actual experience using Airwallex: "Sometimes cross-border transfers can take up to a week, how can this efficiency compare with stablecoins?"

In markets like Southeast Asia, users pay with stablecoins such as USDT and then exchange for local currency through C2C markets, which is not only faster and cheaper but also avoids the complex processes and high fees of TradFi remittances.

And added, "The problem is not with cryptocurrencies, but with the old financial system itself: 'Compliance barriers are the walls set up by the vested interests of TradFi; stablecoins are not the problem but the solution.'"

Are the fees really low? The community reveals that Airwallex's transaction fees are a hundred times more expensive than Ethereum gas.

Interestingly, other users have pointed out that while Airwallex claims to have low fees, it actually includes hidden costs such as account opening fees, account maintenance fees, and incoming transaction fees, requiring at least 0.2% to 0.5% for fund transfers. When these fees are added up, they simply cannot compete with the low-cost on-chain transfers of stablecoins, especially in low to middle-income markets where these differences are even more critical.

Some users have posted revealing their deposit results, showing that the Airwallex deposit fee is as high as 587 USD.

This reflects that Jack Zhang's position, while reasonable from the perspective of high-frequency trading and mainstream finance, fails to encompass the diverse needs of global users, especially in areas lacking financial infrastructure.

Are stablecoins threatening fintech companies? Preserve valuation or embrace innovation?

The payment industry practitioner Earning Artist succinctly pointed out the core: "Airwallex's moat is its global compliance licenses, and what stablecoins fundamentally challenge is the logic of these licenses."

Jack Zhang strongly denies stablecoins, not because the technology itself is unfeasible, but because once it is acknowledged that this path might be viable, it would shake Airwallex's valuation model.

How do compliance costs crush exchanges? HashKey's financial pressure and layoff controversies expose the gap between ideals and reality.

The heated debate in the encryption community sparked by a single post highlights two roadmaps in the payment industry: pursuing extreme efficiency and minimal compliance costs, or advocating for the promotion of a completely different global financial system framework.

At a time when costs are nearly free and speeds are close to instantaneous, the next step in the payment revolution may require further breakthroughs; this technological war has only just begun.

Is this article suggesting that stablecoins are just a marketing gimmick? Airwallex CEO publicly criticizes stablecoins: they are not really cheaper at all, first appearing in Chain News ABMedia.