Stablecoin payment volume hit $400B in 2025, 60% from B2B. Regional specialists like BVNK, Conduit, and StraitsX now dominate corridors, forcing treasuries to rethink single-provider models.
Stablecoin payment volume reached $400 billion in 2025, with 60% of that flow coming from B2B transactions. The conventional view that a single US-based API can serve global corridors is now obsolete. The infrastructure has fragmented into regional specialists, each with deep local rail integrations, mobile money networks, and central bank relationships.
For a cross-border treasury team paying suppliers in Lagos, São Paulo, Jakarta, and Dubai, the answer is no longer one provider. It is a regional stack.
The stablecoin orchestration market has changed shape in three years. What started as a handful of US-based APIs has become a dense network of corridor-specific operators. The largest known single-player, Bridge, covers 35 countries. That leaves large portions of the map unserved by one provider.
As industry observer Gaspard Lezin noted on X, “every major payment corridor has its own pure-play, built by people who actually understand local rails, mobile money, central bank relationships, and FX realities on the ground.”
Europe has its own MiCA-native operators. BVNK is processing an annualized $30 billion in volume, a figure that reflects how quickly regulated regional firms gain ground inside a clear legal framework. MiCA regulation gives these operators a compliance advantage. Regulated issuers can hold commercial bank accounts and settle directly, lowering counterparty risk for B2B clients.
Africa presents a case of mobile-money-stablecoin integration. Providers include Yellow Card, Conduit, and Kotani Pay, operating where traditional banking is thin. Conduit alone covers 23 African countries at materially lower fees than global competitors.
Fee structures are the cleanest reason businesses are abandoning single-provider models. Bridge charges up to 1% on FX transactions. Conduit operates at approximately 10 basis points. That is a 90-basis-point gap that compounds heavily for B2B treasury teams moving tens of millions monthly. In Africa, the stablecoin stack connects to mobile money networks like M-Pesa. A supplier in Lagos may not have a dollar account but can receive USDC via mobile money. That layer does not exist in a centralised global API.
Asia-Pacific has its own full stack. StraitsX has processed roughly $30 billion cumulative stablecoin volume, routing payments through FAST and PayNow, Singapore's real-time payment systems. Fasset recently hit $32 billion annualized across more than 50 corridors in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, after a $51 million Series B. Reap was acquired by Kraken for $600 million, validating regional growth. FOMO Pay, Triple-A, and PhotonPay are also deepening local integrations across the region.
Bridge has no local rail presence in APAC at all. A fintech relying on Bridge for Asia payments would need a second provider anyway. StraitsX and Fasset own those corridors.
A B2B treasury team that signs a single API contract thinking it covers the world is paying an implicit tax. The 1% FX fee on high-volume corridors is not a fixed cost; it is a choice. Operators like Conduit and StraitsX prove that corridor-specific infrastructure can charge far less because they integrate directly with local clearing systems and avoid wholesale FX markups.
| Provider | Fee on FX | Coverage | Stated Volume |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bridge | Up to 1% | 35 countries | Not disclosed |
| Conduit | ~10 bps | 23 African countries | Not disclosed |
| StraitsX | Not disclosed | APAC (Singapore, etc.) | $30B cumulative |
| Fasset | Not disclosed | 50+ corridors (Asia, Africa, ME) | $32B annualized |
Note: Fee and volume figures are from operator disclosures or public reports. StraitsX and Fasset volumes may overlap in some corridors.
Rather than force every treasury team to contract with five separate providers, aggregation layers like Borderless.xyz are emerging. They offer a single API that routes payments to the best regional provider for each corridor. This reduces operational complexity without sacrificing local depth.
Key insight: The aggregation layer does not replace the regional specialist. It decouples the treasury workflow from the underlying rail, allowing the team to pick the cheapest or fastest option per corridor without rewriting code.
Two factors will reinforce the regional fragmentation thesis. First, continued regulatory divergence: MiCA in Europe, stablecoin bills in the US, and central bank digital currency tests in Asia will create distinct compliance requirements that favour local operators. Second, fee compression: as more regional specialists enter, the 1% FX fee will become unsustainable outside of captive legacy flows. Operators that cannot get below 50 basis points across all corridors will lose B2B volume.
Risk to watch: A global operator could partner with multiple regional providers and offer a unified lower fee. If Bridge or a large exchange makes deals with Conduit, StraitsX, and BVNK, the regional map may consolidate again – this time under a single API contract. The fragmentation today is real, it is not permanent. The winning strategy is to build a system that is indifferent to the underlying rail, exactly what aggregation layers are doing.
For B2B treasuries, the immediate trade is clear: audit your current stablecoin provider against the $400 billion volume map. If your payments touch a corridor where your provider is absent or charges more than 50 basis points, you are leaving money on the table. Switch to a regional specialist or an aggregation layer before your competitors do.
Prepared with AlphaScala research tooling and grounded in primary market data: live prices, fundamentals, SEC filings, hedge-fund holdings, and insider activity. Each story is checked against AlphaScala publishing rules before release. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.