Mantle announced that it will launch 'UR' (Neobank, digital bank) in Q3 2025, integrating functions such as fiat-to-cryptocurrency deposits, withdrawals, spending, and savings, allowing for seamless connection between traditional and cryptocurrency funds, officially transforming Mantle into a banking blockchain. (Note: UR has undergone internal testing in Q2, and I am one of the internal testers)
I have simply analyzed the advantages and potential challenges of Mantle UR from an operational thinking and business logic perspective; for basic information about UR, please refer to Mantle's original announcement, and I will not elaborate further here.
Design thinking and potential competitors of UR's one-stop integration
When thinking about product design or entrepreneurial planning, it often approaches from two perspectives: integrated services or segmented tracks?
In the cryptocurrency field alone, common approaches often focus on developing specific tracks, which involves multiple factors: cryptocurrency projects tend to be more innovative (resources and capabilities), market saturation of specific tracks, regulatory compliance requirements (the more singular the risk, the more minimized it becomes), etc.
UR integrates traditional finance and cryptocurrency through a one-stop application, and based on the currently revealed core functions, there are no competitors in the market providing similar one-stop services, belonging to an innovative new market.
Nevertheless, we cannot overlook the competitors of single services, such as:
Deposit and withdrawal services: Localized CEX, international CEX, wallet infrastructure providers (credit card deposits)
Spending: PayFi solutions, cryptocurrency payment cards, exchange payment cards
Savings: On-chain agreements, exchange wealth management, traditional banks (can focus on banks transitioning from stablecoins or private chains to savings)
UR's one-stop design effectively simplifies the operational process, but whether the built-in products have advantages compared to market competitors remains the key to success or failure.
Since UR involves multiple segmented product lines, its capabilities in resource integration, business development, compliance requirements, etc., differ completely from the scale of single-track products. The consumption costs are even more enormous; the larger the market, the greater the risk.
The competitive advantages and potential challenges of Mantle UR
Undeniably, Mantle possesses effective and cost-efficient on-chain advantages (especially after integrating Succinct), providing inherent advantages for large-scale adoption. Additionally, Mantle itself has several characteristics that may influence the development of UR, such as:
Institutional products: MI4 fund specifically designed for institutional investors and the two most globally adopted cryptocurrency derivatives, mETH and FBTC.
Robust treasury: Up to $3 billion, supporting financial expenditures for ecological activities, developers, UR marketing, etc.
Yield products: Diverting to high-yield opportunities such as the new coin pool at partner Bybit, Mantle reward stations, etc.
Institutional collaboration: In addition to existing ecological collaborations of Mantle, it also possesses resources from exchange Bybit and investment institution Mirana.
Based on the aforementioned advantages, Mantle UR may have more flexibility when facing several core challenges, such as:
Bank-grade service infrastructure: Mantle Network
High development, maintenance, and compliance costs: Mantle Treasury
Yield demands of traditional funds: Integration of CEX and DeFi yield products
Multi-faceted business development: Bybit, Mirana, Mantle, and partners
Among the biggest challenges, I think will be regulatory compliance and the business development ability to attract traditional funds.
Since UR needs to provide services across multiple jurisdictions, obtaining regulatory licenses and completing the corresponding compliance requirements will be a significant challenge; moreover, attracting traditional funds into the on-chain will require strong business development capabilities to persuade and prove that the on-chain returns of UR and Mantle are safe, reliable, and superior to traditional finance.
Perhaps this is where Bybit and Mirana come into play.
Impact on MNT
Unfortunately, the current product information of UR seems unable to effectively correspond to the utility of the MNT token, in my view:
Strong correlation: Increased adoption of Mantle on-chain, increased consumption of Gas tokens.
Weak correlation: Increased trading volume and demand in the ecosystem.
The core issue is how to verify that the funds drawn into Mantle through UR can effectively drive ecological development?
If the outflow focused by UR is concentrated on a few products like mETH, FBTC, how will it impact the overall ecosystem?
From my perspective, perhaps Mantle and UR still need to consider:
The default currency for purchasing the MI4 fund should not only include stablecoins but also cover MNT.
UR basic service introduces MNT payment or settlement discounts
Actively incubate and nurture on-chain projects to attract institutional funds to other interesting projects in the ecosystem.
(Excluding the officially supported mETH, FBTC, and two major DEXs, Mantle's on-chain projects are basically stagnant)
Summary
I believe UR's one-stop integration is an innovative attempt, but the risks and challenges it faces are equally significant.
For general users, I believe there are a few points to pay attention to:
Some information mentioned in the announcement, such as stock tokenization and investment products, will not be launched immediately but will be rolled out gradually, with exact timing unknown. (Perhaps Mantle's images in the announcement should clearly indicate the expected launch times of various products to avoid user confusion)
What is the acceptance level of traditional funds? Are there institutions willing to deploy funds into UR services?
Are the compliance and audit details of UR truly capable of being compliant across various jurisdictions? How much will compliance costs consume from the treasury?
How to optimize the on-chain ecological environment to attract more developers to construct institutional-level investment products?
There are too many areas for discussion related to UR, perhaps another article can be written for further exploration.
------------------------
※ The above content does not constitute investment advice; users should operate according to their own risk tolerance, DYOR and participate cautiously in the investment market.
※ The attached diagram is sourced from Mantle, self-made illustration
