The Central Bank of Italy conducted a large-scale empirical study that calls into question one of the crypto industry's main narratives that stablecoins automatically provide savings on cross-border transfers. The results turned out to be unexpected even for many market optimists.
As part of an experiment conducted using the "mystery shopper" method, regulator analysts sent transfers of 200 USDC across ten real routes connecting Italy with Argentina, Brazil, South Africa, the UAE, and Japan. The final costs of the operations ranged from 0.3% to 9% of the transfer amount — a spread that completely negates blockchain's advantages over classic channels.
The key problem is not the blockchain, but the fiat "gateways"
The transfer itself over the distributed ledger cost on average only 0.4% of the amount. However, the main costs arose at the peripheral stages: topping up an account on an exchange, currency conversion, and cash withdrawal by the recipient. These processes remain tied to traditional banks and payment services, which charge fees that negate the benefits of decentralization.
The route from the UAE to Italy is telling, where a bank transfer to the sender was unavailable, and a credit card had to be used. A 3.8% fee was charged for topping it up, bringing the total cost of the operation to almost 9%.
When compared with the Wise service on the same routes, stablecoins turned out to be cheaper on three routes but more expensive on four. The researchers' conclusion is unequivocal: there is no systematic benefit to speak of. However, even in this form, digital assets in most cases beat the global average fee of 6.4% recorded by the World Bank, although the UN's target benchmark of 3% remains unattainable.
The regulatory paradox
The analysis of regulation deserves special attention. Europe's MiCA is called one of the most well-developed models, but its rigidity has a downside: stricter rules in Japan did not reduce demand for stablecoins but merely drove users into unregulated wallets. This shift poses a difficult question for lawmakers — how to balance investor protection with maintaining the attractiveness of legal platforms.
My comment: This study is an important signal for the market. It shows that infrastructure costs, not technology, are the main obstacle to the mass adoption of stablecoins in money transfers. As long as fiat "gateways" do not become cheaper and faster, cryptocurrencies will remain a niche tool rather than a full-fledged alternative to traditional payment systems.