Visa has released new survey results suggesting that stablecoin adoption among Americans could rise meaningfully if issuers offered protections that resemble the banking system—particularly fraud safeguards and deposit insurance.

In a study of 2,192 US-based consumers conducted by Morning Consult between February and March, Visa found that “adoption intention” for stablecoins could increase from 36% to 56% under a hypothetical scenario that includes bank-level fraud protection and deposit insurance.

Key takeaways

• Visa/Morning Consult’s survey points to higher stablecoin willingness when consumers associate the product with bank-style fraud safeguards.
• Adoption intention rises from 36% to 56% in Visa’s hypothetical scenario with deposit insurance and fraud protection.
• Trust, in the survey results, is strongly linked to who provides the payment service—not to the underlying technology alone.
• Europe is also debating stablecoin reserve rules under MiCA, with central bank representatives arguing for changes to bank-deposit thresholds.

Why “bank-like” protections could unlock more stablecoin demand

Visa’s findings center on what drives consumer trust and willingness to use stablecoins for cross-border payments. According to the company, the survey asked participants about financial terms such as stablecoins and compared baseline responses with scenarios that introduced traditional safety features.

Visa reported that nearly two-thirds (64%) of respondents said trust depends more on the payment provider than on the technology itself. That framing matters because it suggests stablecoins may face adoption friction not only from technical complexity, but from a perceived mismatch with familiar consumer protection norms.

Consistent with that idea, Visa said willingness to use stablecoins increases from 36% to 45% when stablecoins are offered through an existing financial provider—an environment where consumers may expect established safeguards, oversight practices, and recourse.

The US policy backdrop: GENIUS and the question of insurance

Visa’s survey arrives as US regulators prepare for the implementation of the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act. Visa pointed to the timing of GENIUS rulemaking as companies work toward eventual execution, with finalized guidance from key US financial agencies expected ahead of an effective date targeted for January 2027.

The survey’s “hypothetical scenario” also highlights a real regulatory tension: stablecoins are not currently treated the same way as bank deposits. Unlike traditional bank accounts, stablecoins do not inherently come with protections such as FDIC deposit insurance for consumer funds.

Under GENIUS, the expectation is that US stablecoins will not automatically include FDIC insurance or explicit fraud protection as of January. Instead, the framework is described as including guidelines aimed at addressing illicit activity risk, while still leaving open the broader consumer protection question that Visa’s survey suggests could influence adoption.

For market participants, this distinction is important. If consumer intent is highly sensitive to perceived safety mechanisms, then the effectiveness of stablecoin regulation may depend not just on compliance around reserve management and illicit finance controls, but on whether the final rules produce outcomes that consumers recognize as meaningful safeguards.

Visa’s full study is published through the company’s investor relations site: “Safeguards Could Boost Stablecoin Use Among Americans, Finds Visa Study”.

Europe debates reserve rules for stablecoins under MiCA

While the US focuses on how stablecoins should fit into national rules, Europe is also refining how it expects stablecoin reserves to be structured. On Tuesday, the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) called for changing rules that require stablecoins to back reserves with a specific minimum portion held as bank deposits—30% for most tokens, and 60% for “significant” stablecoins.

Instead of a deposit-heavy requirement, the ESCB proposed shifting the focus toward liquidity thresholds for reserve assets. The rationale, as described in coverage of the ESCB position, is that users could withdraw funds quickly, creating risks tied to deposit composition rather than asset liquidity overall.

The discussion sits within the broader Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) framework, which began enforcing stablecoin-related rules in June 2024. MiCA’s implementation has been a central factor in how euro stablecoins structure compliance, issuance, and reserve practices across European markets.

What the US and EU debates suggest for stablecoin adoption

Taken together, Visa’s consumer research and the ESCB’s reserve-rule commentary underline a recurring theme in stablecoins: adoption depends on trust and practical risk management, not only on speed or cost.

Visa’s survey suggests that consumers view the identity of the provider as a key safety signal. In that light, bank-like arrangements—whether through stronger fraud controls, clearer protections, or stablecoin distribution via established financial institutions—may reduce perceived uncertainty for cross-border use cases.

Meanwhile, Europe’s call to adjust deposit-based reserve requirements reflects a different but related concern: stablecoin frameworks must account for fast-moving redemption behavior, and reserve composition should support liquidity when demand spikes.

For readers tracking where the sector is headed, the next critical variable is how regulators operationalize these policy goals. In the US, GENIUS rulemaking and the final shape of requirements around fraud and consumer protections will determine whether stablecoin issuance becomes more “recognizable” to consumers. In Europe, MiCA-linked reserve thresholds could influence how euro stablecoins manage liquidity and risk—and how compliant issuers design their reserve strategies.

As these developments progress, investors and builders should watch for whether regulatory frameworks translate into protections that consumers actually perceive—since Visa’s results imply that intention can shift dramatically when stablecoins look and feel more like an extension of the traditional payments and banking safety net.

President Donald Trump disclosed purchasing $50,001 to $100,000 worth of Strategy shares in July, according to a US Office of Government Ethics filing released Tuesday.

The filing shows Trump bought $50,001 to $100,000 worth of Strategy shares on July 27, following a smaller $1,001 to $15,000 purchase three days earlier. Strategy is the world’s largest publicly traded corporate Bitcoin holder, with 846,000 BTC, according to BitcoinTreasuries.net data.

Trump also disclosed transactions involving several other crypto-linked companies, including a Coinbase stock purchase and sales of Bitcoin miners MARA Holdings and CleanSpark in July. The July 27 Strategy purchase was the largest of the crypto-linked transactions identified in the filing.

Top 10 Bitcoin treasury companies. Source: BitcoinTreasuries.NET

The transaction matched Trump’s largest previously disclosed Strategy purchase, a $50,001 to $100,000 buy on Feb. 12, according to BitcoinTreasuries.NET. His accounts have also reported several smaller purchases and sales of Strategy shares this year.

The filings do not show how many Strategy shares remain in Trump’s portfolio, as transactions are reported in value ranges rather than as a running share balance.

Strategy purchase a small part of broader portfolio activity

The Strategy purchase represented a small portion of Trump’s broader portfolio activity in July. The filing shows sales of $5 million to $25 million each of Microsoft and Amazon stocks on July 20, along with several purchases and sales valued at between $1 million and $5 million.

On Tuesday, the White House told CNBC that Trump’s stock and bond portfolio is independently managed by third-party financial institutions, without input from Trump or his family.

Strategy shares have rallied nearly 30% over the past five trading days and about 37% over the past month, according to Yahoo Finance data.

Strategy (MSTR) stock. Source: Yahoo Finance

Disclosure comes amid crypto policy push

Trump’s Strategy disclosure comes as his administration has pursued a series of policies aimed at supporting the US crypto industry, even as comprehensive market structure legislation remains stalled in Congress.

Although the Senate failed to advance the CLARITY Act on Sept. 15, federal regulators have moved ahead using their existing authority. Two days after the failed cloture vote, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) cleared limited onchain trading of tokenized US stocks under a temporary exemption, while the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) eased registration requirements for certain software providers offering access to regulated derivatives markets.

The CFTC separately sent a broader crypto market rulemaking initiative for White House review on Sept. 17. Dubbed “Regulation Crypto Asset Transactions and Regulation Crypto Asset Markets,” the initiative is still in its preliminary stages and has yet to become a formal proposal.

Source: CFTC

The administration’s crypto push has also extended to Bitcoin itself. Last week, the House Financial Services Committee voted 28-21 to advance legislation that would codify Trump’s Strategic Bitcoin Reserve into law and require Bitcoin placed in the reserve to be held for at least 20 years.

The US government currently holds an estimated 324,527 BTC, according to Arkham Intelligence data.

Magazine: Winners and losers of the SEC’s new tokenized stocks rules

Bitcoin has held a dense $85,000–$86,500 buyer cost range after reaching $87,392, but Bitfinex analysts have said continued ETF and corporate purchases are needed to confirm a new bull market.

Bitfinex Alpha said in its Sep. 23 report that Bitcoin’s advance from its July 1 low of $57,803 has reached a test that separated lasting bull markets from failed recoveries in previous cycles. The analysts have identified the $85,000–$86,500 range as the largest concentration of recent buyer cost bases. Holding that area would show that buyers who entered during the rally are willing to keep their positions through a pullback.

Why Bitcoin’s $85K buyer range matters

According to Bitfinex, about 633,000 BTC last changed hands between $85,000 and $86,500, creating the largest cost range in its price distribution data. Buyers also moved roughly 2.95 million BTC into profit over four trading sessions as Bitcoin climbed. The amount of supply concentrated between $80,500 and $82,500 fell from 252,000 BTC to 170,000 BTC per $1,000 price band between Sunday and Tuesday.

For the analysts, the new concentration beneath spot price offers a more useful test than the speed of the rally itself. A drop through the range would put many recent buyers back at a loss; sustained buying above it would show that demand is continuing after the breakout.

The distinction matters because forced purchases by traders closing short positions can lift prices quickly without creating a lasting source of demand. In earlier coverage of the rally, crypto.news reported that Nansen senior research analyst Nicolai Sondergaard attributed part of Bitcoin’s move above $84,000 to a short squeeze alongside renewed ETF buying. He warned that weaker fund inflows or rising U.S. Treasury yields could leave the advance exposed to a reversal.

Bitfinex places the next price test near Bitcoin’s yearly open of $87,722. Its analysts expect a hold above the $85,000–$86,500 range to leave $90,000 in view if ETF inflows continue and futures funding stays neutral. Below the buyer range, they identify the corporate treasury cohort’s cost near $80,500 as the first support area. A sustained move below $81,300, particularly alongside ETF outflows, would challenge their reading of the breakout.

ETF and corporate purchases need to continue above cost

U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs took in $999 million on Sep. 21 and another $714.7 million on Sep. 22, Bitfinex reported. Monday’s dollar inflow was the largest since Oct. 6, 2025, when Bitcoin reached its all-time high. Across four sessions ending Sep. 22, the funds absorbed $2.31 billion, equivalent to roughly 27,900 BTC at each day’s average price, according to the report.

The buying followed a $450.4 million ETF outflow on Sep. 15, which Bitfinex called the funds’ largest daily withdrawal since June. For U.S. investors using listed spot funds, the next flow figures will show whether purchases continue now that the aggregate ETF investor cost basis is near $86,000. Bitfinex said the ETF and corporate treasury cohorts held profitable positions at the same time this week for the first time since January.

Corporate filings provide a second measure. As reported in Strategy’s SEC filing, the company bought 950 BTC for $75.7 million during the week ending Sep. 20, lifting its holdings to 846,000 BTC. The filing also showed $174 million spent repurchasing STRC preferred shares. Strategy used existing cash for both transactions and made no sales through its stock offering programs that week.

Bitfinex also counted Strive’s purchase of 1,355 BTC between Sep. 14 and 18. Together, the two companies acquired 2,305 BTC in one week, compared with roughly 5,900 BTC acquired by all public treasuries over the preceding three months, the report said. Both purchases were executed below the analysts’ estimated $80,500 average cost for the corporate treasury cohort.

“The critical test will be whether both cohorts maintain continuous net buying above their respective cost basis,” Bitfinex said. Purchases that appear only after prices fall below investors’ average entry may support a decline, but the analysts said they would not establish the continuing demand needed for a sustained advance.

Holder data has yet to confirm a bull market

On-chain readings give Bitfinex another way to check whether the rally survives its first setback. The share of Bitcoin supply held at a profit rose from 63% on Sep. 17 to 78.2% on Sep. 22. The analysts want the measure to stay above 75% during the first correction; a fall below that line would indicate that holders newly returned to profit had sold into the move.

Bitcoin’s market value relative to its realized value, or MVRV, stood at 1.62 on Sep. 22, below its long-run average of about 1.8, according to Bitfinex. The analysts associate that average with a Bitcoin price near $95,000 at the current realized price. They said crossing and holding it alongside ETF inflows would strengthen the bull-market case, while a failed attempt would resemble earlier recoveries that ran out of demand.

Recent buyers remain in profit as well. Bitfinex put short-term holder MVRV at 1.20 against a cohort cost basis of $71,763. The report said readings of 1.3 to 1.4 would correspond to a price above $93,000, an area where recent buyers have historically become more likely to take profits.

Long-term holders offer a less settled signal. Bitfinex said the group sold coins through late August, and its aggregate position change remained negative, though selling had slowed. Its latest available long-term holder spent-output profit ratio was 0.77 on Sep. 16, meaning coins spent by that group were changing hands below their average acquisition cost. The analysts want the ratio to rise above 1.0 while Bitcoin holds its price, showing that the market can absorb sales from holders taking profits.

Bitfinex identified $87,000–$90,000 as the break-even area for buyers from January whose coins have since aged into the long-term holder group. Its report also put Bitcoin about 12% above the $76,677 True Market Mean and 63% above the $52,785 realized price as of its analysis.

Justin Sun-owned HTX claimed in its September proof of reserves (PoR) that it held 360949.90 USDS in 0xdaa4393013f359fd63a133a3b893d311aba4e471 at a block height of 25876316‎.

However, that address at that block height actually contained 0 USDS.

The only transaction where this address actually received USDS was at a block height of 25889452. This was on September 2, after the PoR which is dated September 1.

This isn’t the only problem in this PoR.

Additionally, it claims that there were 44,975,772.00 of the Sun-founded USDD in 0x18709e89bd403f470088abdacebe86cc60dda12e at a block height of 25876316.

However, this address actually had 44,886,000 USDD in that address at that block height.

Read more: Tether has publicly listed a company that partially controls USDS

These are also not the only mistakes that HTX has made in its PoR historically.

As Protos has previously reported, it previously claimed a certain amount of STEAK-USDC in its May PoR, however it didn’t have any STEAK-USDC in that address at the claimed block height.

However, it did have an equivalent amount of sUSDS in that address, suggesting it had confused its disclosures between these assets.

All of these issues raise serious concerns about HTX’s PoR process, and especially how it makes certain that all assets are matched to liabilities at all times.

Protos reached out to HTX for comment on this discrepancy, but it didn’t respond before publication.

Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news and investigations, follow us on X, Bluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Hsin-Ju Chuang, a former partner at crypto venture firm Hack VC, was pronounced dead on Aug. 24 and recently became public after a local newspaper, Hoodline, reported the news this month and circulated on social media.

Her body was found by the California Highway Patrol inside a vehicle in the desert, according to the report.

Chuang, 37, of North Las Vegas, was pronounced dead at the scene at 9:47 p.m. local time last month, a coroner’s release said. The coroner directed further questions to the California Highway Patrol. Authorities have not announced a cause of death, revealed the results of an autopsy, or provided further details about the circumstances, Hoodline said.

The California Highway Patrol spokesperson referred CoinDesk’s request for further comment to the CHP’s Inland Division, which is handling the investigation.

Her death has drawn attention across crypto social media because Chuang, a longtime operator in the crypto industry, published a lengthy X post on Aug. 23, stating that she had rejected a settlement with Hack VC that would have required her to remain silent about her experience at the firm.