The post Here’s Why Tokenized Bank Deposits Don’t Stand a Chance Against Stablecoins appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. BlockchainFintech Traditional banks are finally experimenting with blockchain. Yet their latest innovation, tokenized deposits, may be arriving years too late. Financial institutions envision a future where everyday checking balances live on a distributed ledger. But for Omid Malekan, adjunct professor at Columbia Business School, the concept is little more than a digital illusion — one destined to be eclipsed by stablecoins. The Great Banking Copycat Moment In the last decade, crypto projects built what banks never could: instantly transferable digital dollars that actually work. Now, banks want in — but without giving up control. Their idea is to take customer deposits and issue them as blockchain-based tokens, effectively “on-chain bank balances.” Malekan dismisses the model as self-defeating. Tokenized deposits, he argues, are the blockchain equivalent of a private intranet in an era of global internet connectivity — secure, limited, and ultimately obsolete. These instruments would be usable only among customers of the same institution, fenced in by compliance layers like KYC and transaction permissioning. “What use is a token that can’t travel?” he wrote, describing them as digital checking accounts that stop at the bank’s front door. Stablecoins Already Solved the Problem While banks are still building walled gardens, stablecoins have spent years integrating into open networks that now underpin DeFi, cross-border payments, and on-chain commerce. They are interoperable, composable, and transferable without middlemen. Most importantly, they rely on transparent, full-reserve backing — not fractional banking — to ensure stability. That structure, Malekan argues, makes them safer from a risk perspective. Stablecoin issuers must hold equivalent assets in cash or short-term treasuries, giving them a liquidity profile banks can’t match. Tokenized deposits, by contrast, remain exposed to the same lending risk that defines the traditional system. Why Yields Will Decide Everything The real blow, however, could come from returns. As… The post Here’s Why Tokenized Bank Deposits Don’t Stand a Chance Against Stablecoins appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. BlockchainFintech Traditional banks are finally experimenting with blockchain. Yet their latest innovation, tokenized deposits, may be arriving years too late. Financial institutions envision a future where everyday checking balances live on a distributed ledger. But for Omid Malekan, adjunct professor at Columbia Business School, the concept is little more than a digital illusion — one destined to be eclipsed by stablecoins. The Great Banking Copycat Moment In the last decade, crypto projects built what banks never could: instantly transferable digital dollars that actually work. Now, banks want in — but without giving up control. Their idea is to take customer deposits and issue them as blockchain-based tokens, effectively “on-chain bank balances.” Malekan dismisses the model as self-defeating. Tokenized deposits, he argues, are the blockchain equivalent of a private intranet in an era of global internet connectivity — secure, limited, and ultimately obsolete. These instruments would be usable only among customers of the same institution, fenced in by compliance layers like KYC and transaction permissioning. “What use is a token that can’t travel?” he wrote, describing them as digital checking accounts that stop at the bank’s front door. Stablecoins Already Solved the Problem While banks are still building walled gardens, stablecoins have spent years integrating into open networks that now underpin DeFi, cross-border payments, and on-chain commerce. They are interoperable, composable, and transferable without middlemen. Most importantly, they rely on transparent, full-reserve backing — not fractional banking — to ensure stability. That structure, Malekan argues, makes them safer from a risk perspective. Stablecoin issuers must hold equivalent assets in cash or short-term treasuries, giving them a liquidity profile banks can’t match. Tokenized deposits, by contrast, remain exposed to the same lending risk that defines the traditional system. Why Yields Will Decide Everything The real blow, however, could come from returns. As…

Here’s Why Tokenized Bank Deposits Don’t Stand a Chance Against Stablecoins

For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at crypto.news@mexc.com
BlockchainFintech

Traditional banks are finally experimenting with blockchain. Yet their latest innovation, tokenized deposits, may be arriving years too late.

Financial institutions envision a future where everyday checking balances live on a distributed ledger. But for Omid Malekan, adjunct professor at Columbia Business School, the concept is little more than a digital illusion — one destined to be eclipsed by stablecoins.

The Great Banking Copycat Moment

In the last decade, crypto projects built what banks never could: instantly transferable digital dollars that actually work. Now, banks want in — but without giving up control. Their idea is to take customer deposits and issue them as blockchain-based tokens, effectively “on-chain bank balances.”

Malekan dismisses the model as self-defeating. Tokenized deposits, he argues, are the blockchain equivalent of a private intranet in an era of global internet connectivity — secure, limited, and ultimately obsolete. These instruments would be usable only among customers of the same institution, fenced in by compliance layers like KYC and transaction permissioning.

“What use is a token that can’t travel?” he wrote, describing them as digital checking accounts that stop at the bank’s front door.

Stablecoins Already Solved the Problem

While banks are still building walled gardens, stablecoins have spent years integrating into open networks that now underpin DeFi, cross-border payments, and on-chain commerce. They are interoperable, composable, and transferable without middlemen. Most importantly, they rely on transparent, full-reserve backing — not fractional banking — to ensure stability.

That structure, Malekan argues, makes them safer from a risk perspective. Stablecoin issuers must hold equivalent assets in cash or short-term treasuries, giving them a liquidity profile banks can’t match. Tokenized deposits, by contrast, remain exposed to the same lending risk that defines the traditional system.

Why Yields Will Decide Everything

The real blow, however, could come from returns. As the stablecoin market matures, issuers are finding creative ways to share yields with users — from reward points to staking incentives — even as regulations try to restrict direct interest payouts.

This potential for yield is something banks can’t easily compete with. The average retail savings account in the U.S. or U.K. offers less than 1%, while stablecoin-based products often find indirect methods to return a larger share of Treasury-based earnings to users.

“The banks’ fear is simple,” Malekan explained: “if stablecoins start paying real yield, customers will stop keeping cash in accounts that do nothing.”

A Political Fight, Not a Technological One

The banking lobby has pushed back aggressively, warning that yield-bearing stablecoins could siphon away deposits and threaten financial stability. Critics view it differently. Austin Campbell, a professor at New York University, accused the industry of using regulation as a shield to protect profits, arguing that it’s retail users who lose when competition is suppressed.

The Real-World Asset Boom

Behind this turf war lies a much larger transformation. The tokenization of real-world assets — everything from bonds and real estate to commodities and currencies — is expected to reach $2 trillion by 2028, according to Standard Chartered. Stablecoins are likely to remain the backbone of that ecosystem, serving as the medium through which tokenized assets are traded and settled.

The Verdict

Banks might still succeed in digitizing deposits, but their version of tokenization offers none of the freedom, speed, or interoperability that crypto users expect. In Malekan’s view, the financial sector is trying to retrofit old infrastructure onto new rails — and calling it innovation.

Stablecoins, meanwhile, have already built the roads, vehicles, and traffic rules for the digital economy. What banks are proposing, he suggests, are gated driveways that lead nowhere.


The information provided in this article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice. Coindoo.com does not endorse or recommend any specific investment strategy or cryptocurrency. Always conduct your own research and consult with a licensed financial advisor before making any investment decisions.

Author

Reporter at Coindoo

With over 6 years of experience in the world of financial markets and cryptocurrencies, Teodor Volkov provides in-depth analyses, up-to-date news, and strategic forecasts for investors and enthusiasts. His professionalism and sense of market trends make the information he shares reliable and valuable for everyone who wants to make informed decisions.

Related stories

Next article

Source: https://coindoo.com/heres-why-tokenized-bank-deposits-dont-stand-a-chance-against-stablecoins/

Market Opportunity
Lorenzo Protocol Logo
Lorenzo Protocol Price(BANK)
$0.03942
$0.03942$0.03942
-4.20%
USD
Lorenzo Protocol (BANK) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact crypto.news@mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Bitcoin ETFs Surge with 20,685 BTC Inflows, Marking Strongest Week

Bitcoin ETFs Surge with 20,685 BTC Inflows, Marking Strongest Week

TLDR Bitcoin ETFs recorded their strongest weekly inflows since July, reaching 20,685 BTC. U.S. Bitcoin ETFs contributed nearly 97% of the total inflows last week. The surge in Bitcoin ETF inflows pushed holdings to a new high of 1.32 million BTC. Fidelity’s FBTC product accounted for 36% of the total inflows, marking an 18-month high. [...] The post Bitcoin ETFs Surge with 20,685 BTC Inflows, Marking Strongest Week appeared first on CoinCentral.
Share
Coincentral2025/09/18 02:30
Today’s NYT Pips Hints And Solutions For Thursday, September 18th

Today’s NYT Pips Hints And Solutions For Thursday, September 18th

The post Today’s NYT Pips Hints And Solutions For Thursday, September 18th appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. It’s Thursday and I am incredibly sore and tired after really hitting the weights and the yoga mat hard this week. Sore is good! It takes pain to reduce pain, or at least that’s my experience with exercise. We must exercise our minds as well, and what better way to do that than with a fun puzzle game about placing dominoes in the correct tiles. Come along, my Pipsqueaks, let’s solve today’s Pips! Looking for Wednesday’s Pips? Read our guide right here. How To Play Pips In Pips, you have a grid of multicolored boxes. Each colored area represents a different “condition” that you have to achieve. You have a select number of dominoes that you have to spend filling in the grid. You must use every domino and achieve every condition properly to win. There are Easy, Medium and Difficult tiers. Here’s an example of a difficult tier Pips: Pips example Screenshot: Erik Kain As you can see, the grid has a bunch of symbols and numbers with each color. On the far left, the three purple squares must not equal one another (hence the equal sign crossed out). The two pink squares next to that must equal a total of 0. The zig-zagging blue squares all must equal one another. You click on dominoes to rotate them, and will need to since they have to be rotated to fit where they belong. Not shown on this grid are other conditions, such as “less than” or “greater than.” If there are multiple tiles with > or < signs, the total of those tiles must be greater or less than the listed number. It varies by grid. Blank spaces can have anything. The various possible conditions are: = All pips must equal one another in this group. ≠ All pips…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 08:59
Vitalik Buterin to Ethereum Developers: Build It Like It Has to Last Without You

Vitalik Buterin to Ethereum Developers: Build It Like It Has to Last Without You

Key Takeaways Vitalik Buterin wants Ethereum apps built to survive without developers, corporate servers, or trusted third parties Two major […] The post Vitalik
Share
Coindoo2026/03/07 15:49