For more than a decade, banks have been experimenting with blockchain. But now, with the rise of stablecoins and tokenised finance, the conversation is shifting from experimentation to real transformation. Joining me is Xavier Gomez, Board Member at Banque Delubac & Cie, Founder of MUWPAY and Co-Founder of INVYO. Xavier, it is good to have you back.
Thank you, Bassel.
What exactly is the great banking shift?
For 15 years, banking focused on simple settlements — managing many ledgers with custodians, depositories, and middle offices. That is why settlement takes so much time. Thanks to the blockchain, you can make a settlement in one second through smart contracts. But it is very difficult for the banking system to challenge that quickly.
Why do you think this time it is actually going to be different?
Because once you have a regulatory framework — from the US to Europe to Dubai. In Europe you have MiCA since the 1st of July. In Dubai you have VARA — a very smart regulator with high-level specialists. And in the US you have the GENIUS Act with stablecoin law application in January 2027. Second point — demand. With AI agents, you have instant payment requests and movement of cash faster than any information in the world. That is the game changer.
Stablecoin supply has stayed around $300 billion. Some say the hype is fading. What do you think?
This number is more or less stable. But what is interesting is to look at how many transactions happen on one stablecoin per month. One stablecoin moves 30 times per month on average across different blockchains — that is huge. JP Morgan and Citi research shows the enormous turnover behind just one stablecoin.
What metric would you look at to evaluate how a stablecoin is performing?
Look across different protocols — there are many blockchain information platforms showing how much stablecoins move. And do not forget the stablecoin market is very concentrated — two main issuers, Circle and Tether, cover 90 to 95% of offerings. And only one currency — the US dollar. That concentration is a risk.
Are traditional banks at risk of losing their role?
The problem for banks is clearly the balance sheet and the cost of settlement with former infrastructure. If you master your liquidity, apply compliance, and try to do business while managing the cost of capital — it becomes challenging for the future.
What can actually go wrong?
Two concentration risks — issuer concentration and asset concentration, only US dollars. And the non-adoption of agentic systems and modernisation of infrastructure. Now when you sit on a board, the right question should not be can I implement this or not. The question is when — in the next three to five years.
Who benefits most?
Clearly not the technologists. It will be the compliance people. Because if compliance becomes fully programmable in a smart contract — the job changes entirely.
Xavier, it is always good to have you on the show. Thank you very much.
Thank you for the invitation.
