Stablecoins are unlikely to completely replace fiat currency; in the future, they are more likely to form a complementary pattern for the following core reasons:
Technical and Credit Bottlenecks
While stablecoins have advantages in cross-border payment efficiency (settlement in seconds, low fees) and financial inclusion, they rely on centralized reserves (such as USDT's dollar collateral) or algorithmic mechanisms, which pose credit risks (misappropriation of reserve assets) and systemic risks (such as the collapse of TerraUSD). In contrast, fiat currency relies on national sovereign credit, which is irreplaceable in terms of stability and credibility.Regulatory and Sovereign Constraints
Countries are strengthening the regulation of stablecoins (such as the United States' GENIUS Act requiring dollar reserves, and the EU's MiCA setting transaction limits), essentially to maintain monetary sovereignty and financial stability. If stablecoins were to significantly replace fiat currency, it would weaken the effectiveness of central bank monetary policy and disrupt the macro-control system, which is a core barrier that countries find difficult to accept.Scenario Limitations
Currently, stablecoins are mainly used in specific scenarios such as transactions within the crypto ecosystem and payments in cross-border gray areas, while fiat currency has a deeply entrenched position in core areas such as daily life, fiscal taxation, and international trade. Even in the digital economy, the promotion of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) will further squeeze the replacement space for stablecoins.
In summary, stablecoins will continue to permeate in specific scenarios, but the core position of fiat currency as sovereign money cannot be shaken in the short term. The two are more likely to form functional complementarity within a regulatory framework.