Stablecoins are becoming the foundation for microtransactions of AI agents: Visa analysis
The payment ecosystem for artificial intelligence is beginning to take clear shape. Experts from Visa and the blockchain analytics company Artemis have concluded that traditional cards and stablecoins will occupy fundamentally different niches in automated settlements between AI agents. This division is not accidental — it is dictated by the economics of transactions.
Analysts identified two types of operations involving AI agents. The first is purchases made on direct human instruction: booking tickets, managing subscriptions, ordering goods. These transactions are essentially similar to regular online commerce and can be serviced through classic payment cards. The second type is frequent microtransactions worth less than $1 that occur between programs. This includes paying for individual API requests, access to data, computing power, or the use of software tools.
The key conclusion of the report: fixed fees make card infrastructure unprofitable for such micropayments. Meanwhile, on the Base and Solana networks, transaction fees amount to fractions of a cent. This opens a direct path for stablecoins, which could become the ideal means of settlement in this niche.
Protocols and the Hybrid Model
The study examined two open payment protocols: x402, whose activity is concentrated on Base, Solana, and Polygon, as well as the Machine Payment Protocol (MPP). The latter supports settlements both through blockchains and through traditional payment systems. The authors suggest a hybrid model, where cards are used for authorization and large purchases on behalf of humans, while stablecoins are used for instant settlements between programs. Both payment methods could be applied at different stages of executing a single task.
Data from Artemis as of April 21 demonstrates the real scale of the phenomenon. After excluding fictitious and test operations, approximately $15 million passed through x402 across 109.6 million transactions. For MPP, the figures were roughly $25,000 and 115,000 transfers, respectively. The raw data was significantly higher: $135.7 million and 178.3 million operations through x402, as well as over $38,000 and about 184,600 transactions through MPP. The difference is due to thorough filtering of suspicious activity.
The Trust Problem and Risks
The main unresolved issue remains trust. It is still unclear who should bear responsibility for an erroneous or unauthorized purchase: the owner of the AI agent, the platform operator, the model developer, or the seller. Existing payment reversal rules are designed for human operations, and there is currently no established mechanism for disputing thousands of automated transactions per hour. An additional risk is posed by malicious instructions capable of redirecting a payment or forcing an AI agent to make an unplanned purchase.
Recall that earlier, Artemis analysts had already adjusted the x402 statistics, excluding fictitious operations. After filtering, the volume of AI agent transactions turned out to be 15 times lower than Bloomberg's initial estimates. In June, Alchemy and Visa launched the AgentCard service for controlled purchases through AI agents within user-set limits.
My expert commentary: The market for payments for AI agents is in the formative stage, and stablecoins here have an obvious advantage over fiat cards. However, without solving the problem of legal liability for automated transactions, mass adoption will remain in question. The infrastructure is there, but the rules of the game have yet to be written.