Crypto news

The stablecoin market is on the verge of a major reshuffling. A consortium of over 140 companies, led by Open Standard, is preparing to launch a new dollar stablecoin — Open USD (OUSD). Participants include Stripe, Visa, Mastercard, BlackRock, and Coinbase — in other words, those shaping the infrastructure of global payments. The stated goal is to challenge the dominant players, Tether and Circle, which account for the vast majority of the market turnover. The market has already reacted: Circle shares (CRCL) plummeted 17.55% in a single day, with losses reaching approximately 40.34% over the past month.

Now, we will analyze in detail what OUSD is, who stands behind it, and how justified the talk of its ability to "kill" USDC and USDT really is.

What is OUSD and who created it

Open USD is a dollar stablecoin scheduled for launch by the end of 2026. The operator is Open Standard, with Zach Abrams, co-founder of the startup Bridge (acquired by Stripe for $1.1 billion in 2025), serving as interim CEO. The blockchain for issuance has not been officially disclosed, but according to available data, the project will launch on the Base network, owned by Coinbase.

The key difference between OUSD and current leaders (USDC and USDT) is its economic model. Typically, the issuer retains the interest income from the reserves backing the stablecoin. Open USD flips this logic: almost all yield from the reserves, minus a small management fee, is returned to distributor participants. Additionally, zero fees for token issuance and redemption have been announced.

What makes this story particularly striking is the composition of the participants. The project has been backed by Circle's closest partners. BlackRock manages about 80% of USDC's reserves through the Circle Reserve Fund, Coinbase is a co-founder of USDC and receives approximately $908 million annually for distribution, and custodian bank BNY Mellon has also joined the initiative. Independent analyst Shanaka Anslem Perera believes the main reason for CRCL's collapse is not the mere emergence of a competitor, but the composition of its participants — the blow came from within the partner network.

Two notable industry figures have commented on the launch of OUSD. Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino reacted with irony, greeting the newcomer condescendingly and with pointed calm, without any hint of concern for USDT's position. Bitcoin maximalist Samson Mow suggested the project could prove to be a worthy competitor.

Why Circle suffered more than Tether

Circle's business model makes the company vulnerable to attack. The issuer earns almost exclusively from interest on reserves totaling approximately $74 billion in cash and short-term U.S. government bonds. If distributors can capture yield directly through OUSD, the economic rationale for cooperating specifically with Circle becomes diluted.

An additional risk factor is Circle's contract with Coinbase, which is up for renewal in August, with negotiations set to take place with a partner that has just helped bring an alternative to market.

A technical factor has added to the pressure. During the annual rebalancing of Russell indices on June 26, 2026, Circle was excluded from five key growth indices, including the Russell 1000 Growth and Russell 3000 Growth. Index funds and ETFs mechanically sell such securities to align portfolios with the new basket, creating additional supply regardless of fundamental performance. This sell-off coincided with the intensification of competition.

At the same time, USDC retains liquidity, a regulated status, and demand, while Circle's CEO insists the market is large enough for several major players.

Can OUSD be called a "killer" of USDC and USDT

The "killer" label still seems premature. Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire is confident of this. His argument is that stablecoin networks are platform businesses with network effects, where the market tends toward a "winner takes most" structure. Such networks are built over years through developer integrations, liquidity, and regulatory infrastructure.

According to data from Artemis, cited by Allaire, in the first quarter of 2026, USDC processed approximately $30 trillion in on-chain transactions, accounting for 80% of all dollar stablecoin operations, while USDT accounted for the remaining 20%, and all other dollar stablecoins combined for less than 0.5%.

Allaire also challenges three key advantages of OUSD:

• Zero redemption fees, in his view, are undermined by market reality, as a stablecoin with strong redemption infrastructure and no fees becomes a framework for competitors.
• He considers the full income distribution model a recipe for chronic underinvestment in infrastructure.
• And he calls the consortium format historically weak, citing that large companies coordinate poorly, have divergent interests, and slow down product development.

Some commentators agree that the consortium idea sounds right, but the differing interests of participants doom such projects, while independent teams move faster. Others note that competition is increasingly shifting to the arena of marketing and economics: good incentives can attract users, but replacing years of integrations, liquidity, and trust is far more difficult.

A legal argument has also been raised — those who first meet MiCA requirements and obtain licenses shape the market structure as much as popularity among developers, making compliance as much a barrier to entry as the volume of money.

The most skeptical remarks boil down to the idea that a newcomer has no right to claim global licenses without decades of work on infrastructure, audits, and institutional trust.

Bottom line

At this stage, OUSD is unlikely to destroy the leaders. However, the stablecoin's creators have made a serious bid to reshape the market from within its own major participants.

The real threat to Circle and Tether lies not in the launch of an alternative stablecoin itself, but in whether the consortium can overcome the internal disagreements of collective governance and replicate the network effects accumulated by the leaders.

Analytical conclusion: OUSD is not just another stablecoin, but a symptom of market maturity, where key infrastructure players realize they can redistribute profits in their favor. However, it will only become a "killer" if the consortium can act as a single organism, which historically is its weakest point.