In the world of cryptocurrencies, a firmly established belief holds that stablecoins are a panacea for international transfers, capable of bypassing expensive banking intermediaries. However, a recent study conducted using the "mystery shopper" method demonstrates that reality is far from clear-cut. The Central Bank of Italy conducted a large-scale experiment, the results of which call into question the main argument of stablecoin proponents—their economic efficiency.
As part of the study, ten real transfers of 200 USDC each were made along routes connecting Italy with Argentina, Brazil, South Africa, the UAE, and Japan. Researchers tracked every stage of the operation, from topping up an account on an exchange to disbursing cash to the recipient. The findings proved instructive.
Main costs lie outside the blockchain
Total transfer costs ranged from 0.3% to 9% of the amount. The blockchain transfer itself averaged only 0.4% of total costs. However, the bulk of the money went toward account funding, currency conversion, and cash disbursement. These stages still depend on traditional banks and exchanges, negating the advantages of decentralized technology.
The most telling route was from the UAE to Italy. A bank transfer to the sender proved unavailable, forcing the use of a credit card. The fee for funding it amounted to 3.8%, pushing the final cost of the transaction to nearly 9%. At the same time, compared to the World Bank's global averages (6.4% transfer fee), stablecoins proved cheaper than traditional channels on all routes except the UAE. However, when compared to the Wise service, stablecoins won on only three out of seven routes.
Speed is also not always an advantage
Transfer speed also varied significantly. Where instant payment systems operate, such as Brazil's Pix or Europe's TIPS, funds arrived in less than 20 minutes. In South Africa, however, where no such infrastructure exists, stablecoin transfers took one to two business days—the same as a regular bank transfer.
The study's results complicate the picture in which stablecoins are already quietly displacing bank payment systems. The technology still relies on the very institutions it seeks to bypass. This also applies to regulation: Europe's MiCA is one of the most well-developed models, but stricter rules in Japan did not reduce demand—they merely "drove" users into unregulated wallets.
Expert comment: This experiment is a sobering signal for the market. Stablecoins are not a "silver bullet" for cross-border payments as long as their onboarding and offboarding depend on traditional financial infrastructure. A real revolution will only occur when decentralized and cheap gateways for entering and exiting cryptocurrencies emerge; otherwise, we will witness merely a cosmetic improvement of the old system.