Ever since the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act was approved in July 2025, stablecoins have moved from crypto niche to policy priority. In Washington, the debate shifted from “should this exist?” to “how do we regulate and scale it?”
At dgtl Assets, we have been tracking the global traction closely. The real question is not whether stablecoins are coming — they already are — but whether Europe intends to lead, regulate, or quietly constrain their growth under the weight of compliance.
Throughout 2025, momentum gathered across the Atlantic. In Europe, however, the tone has been more cautious, more structured and arguably more strategic — nothing particularly new there. Under MiCA (the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, the EU’s comprehensive framework governing crypto-assets, including stablecoins), the regulatory architecture is now firmly in place. Issuers must be authorised, reserves must be transparent, governance must be robust and redemption rights clearly defined.
Europe has not left stablecoins unregulated. It has institutionalised them.
At Sibos 2025 in Frankfurt, stablecoins were a constant theme. They surfaced in plenary sessions, bank panels, corridor debates and private meetings between treasurers, infrastructure providers and regulators. The discussion was not about speculative tokens. It centred on settlement rails, tokenised deposits and the future of cross-border liquidity.
The question is no longer whether Europe will participate in the stablecoin economy.
The real question is whether it will build its own institutional version or simply regulate everyone else’s.
What has emerged so far can broadly be divided into three models: the Single Bank Model, the Consortium Model and the Hybrid Model.
The Single Bank Model
Société Générale FORGE
Société Générale FORGE represents the clearest example of a traditional European bank issuing digital-native financial instruments within a defined regulatory perimeter. Structured as a fully integrated subsidiary of the group, FORGE operates under EU MiFID II and as an authorised electronic money institution under MiCA.
The approach is deliberate: institutional-grade issuance, full regulatory compliance and end-to-end services for corporates and financial institutions seeking to issue and manage blockchain-based financial products.
This is not disruption, but integration — embedding stablecoins within the existing banking system rather than building around it.
The single-bank model provides control, regulatory clarity and balance-sheet strength. What it does not automatically provide is scale.
The Consortium Model
Qivalis
Qivalis reflects a different strategic calculation. Rather than fragment liquidity across proprietary bank-issued stablecoins, a group of major European banks including BBVA, BNP Paribas, CaixaBank, Danske Bank, DZ Bank, ING, KBC, Raiffeisen Bank International, SEB, Banca Sella and UniCredit — have aligned behind a shared euro stablecoin initiative.
Planned for launch in the second half of 2026 under Dutch authorisation and supervision as an Electronic Money Institution, Qivalis aims to deliver a regulated digital ecosystem supporting payments, settlement and tokenised assets.
The logic is straightforward. Liquidity drives adoption. Adoption drives network effects. A fragmented European approach risks diluting both.
The consortium model attempts to solve Europe’s traditional coordination challenge by pooling institutional credibility and distribution from the outset.
Whether coordination among Europe’s largest banks proves as efficient as the strategy suggests remains to be seen.
The Hybrid Model
AllUnity
AllUnity represents a third path — neither a single-bank issuance vehicle nor a broad retail-facing consortium, but a regulated e-money institution purpose-built to bridge traditional capital markets and digital asset infrastructure.
Established between asset manager DWS, trading firm Flow Traders and digital asset specialist Galaxy, AllUnity combines asset management expertise, liquidity provision and blockchain-native infrastructure under one structure.
Its objective is not retail speculation. It is institutional integration.
AllUnity issues fiat-backed stablecoins designed to integrate directly into treasury operations, instant payment networks and digital asset markets. As tokenisation expands across funds, credit and real-world assets, a compliant on-chain settlement layer becomes essential. Institutional capital may be moving toward digital rails, but it continues to flow through regulated intermediaries.
The hybrid model recognises that reality.
Rather than positioning itself as a disruptive alternative to banks, AllUnity aims to provide the compliant liquidity infrastructure that banks, asset managers and trading firms will require as tokenised markets mature.
This model is less about launching a new currency and more about modernising the settlement layer beneath Europe’s financial system.
Can Euro Stablecoins Challenge Dollar Dominance?
For all the structural progress under MiCA and the growing participation of Europe’s largest financial institutions, one uncomfortable question remains:
Can euro stablecoins realistically challenge the dominance of U.S. dollar liquidity in digital markets?
Today, USD-backed stablecoins account for most global on-chain liquidity. They dominate trading pairs, decentralised finance activity, cross-border settlement and digital asset collateralisation. Liquidity begets liquidity — and the dollar’s network effect in digital markets mirrors its position in traditional global finance.
Europe’s approach is different. It regulates first and scales second. It is institution-led, not retail-driven. It prioritises monetary stability over velocity.
For euro stablecoins to compete meaningfully, they must move beyond compliance credibility and achieve genuine transactional depth across exchanges, payment providers and tokenised asset markets. Without concentrated liquidity, even the most robust regulatory framework will struggle to shift global behaviour.
And if they do succeed?
The primary beneficiaries may not be the issuers themselves.
Custodians, exchanges, treasury technology providers, clearing infrastructure operators and market makers stand to gain from increased euro-denominated settlement flows. European banks could reclaim digital transaction volumes currently intermediated through U.S. platforms. Capital markets infrastructure providers would unlock new revenue streams tied to programmable settlement and tokenised securities.
More subtly, a successful euro stablecoin ecosystem would reinforce Europe’s monetary sovereignty in an increasingly digital financial architecture.
The real strategic question is not simply whether Europe can issue stablecoins.
It is whether it can generate sufficient liquidity and network effects to make the euro a competitive digital settlement currency — rather than a regulated alternative operating in the dollar’s shadow.
