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

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.

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)
$0.04224
$0.04224$0.04224
-1.35%
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 service@support.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

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For

The post The Channel Factories We’ve Been Waiting For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Visions of future technology are often prescient about the broad strokes while flubbing the details. The tablets in “2001: A Space Odyssey” do indeed look like iPads, but you never see the astronauts paying for subscriptions or wasting hours on Candy Crush.  Channel factories are one vision that arose early in the history of the Lightning Network to address some challenges that Lightning has faced from the beginning. Despite having grown to become Bitcoin’s most successful layer-2 scaling solution, with instant and low-fee payments, Lightning’s scale is limited by its reliance on payment channels. Although Lightning shifts most transactions off-chain, each payment channel still requires an on-chain transaction to open and (usually) another to close. As adoption grows, pressure on the blockchain grows with it. The need for a more scalable approach to managing channels is clear. Channel factories were supposed to meet this need, but where are they? In 2025, subnetworks are emerging that revive the impetus of channel factories with some new details that vastly increase their potential. They are natively interoperable with Lightning and achieve greater scale by allowing a group of participants to open a shared multisig UTXO and create multiple bilateral channels, which reduces the number of on-chain transactions and improves capital efficiency. Achieving greater scale by reducing complexity, Ark and Spark perform the same function as traditional channel factories with new designs and additional capabilities based on shared UTXOs.  Channel Factories 101 Channel factories have been around since the inception of Lightning. A factory is a multiparty contract where multiple users (not just two, as in a Dryja-Poon channel) cooperatively lock funds in a single multisig UTXO. They can open, close and update channels off-chain without updating the blockchain for each operation. Only when participants leave or the factory dissolves is an on-chain transaction…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:09
How COAI’s price can rally by 45% after hitting THIS key resistance

How COAI’s price can rally by 45% after hitting THIS key resistance

The post How COAI’s price can rally by 45% after hitting THIS key resistance appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Journalist Posted: February 15, 2026 As the broader
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/02/15 12:03
Hong Kong Monetary Authority and Fed Cut Interest Rates by 25 Bps

Hong Kong Monetary Authority and Fed Cut Interest Rates by 25 Bps

Detail: https://coincu.com/markets/hong-kong-fed-rate-cuts-2025/
Share
Coinstats2025/09/18 10:40