According to Patrick McCorry, clarity is emerging around the differences between tokenized bank deposits and stablecoins. McCorry highlights that stablecoins give users a claim on a counterparty expected to hold a full reserve of the asset, while tokenized deposits provide users with a claim directly on their bank's balance sheet. This structural distinction affects asset security, risk, and liquidity, which are crucial considerations for traders evaluating on-chain assets and DeFi integrations. The evolving understanding of these instruments could influence both trading strategies and the broader adoption of tokenized assets in the crypto market (source: Patrick McCorry).

According to nic__carter on Twitter, the Financial Times published an analysis arguing that stablecoins are inferior to tokenized bank deposits, despite the latter never being successfully implemented at scale (source: Financial Times via nic__carter Twitter, May 27, 2025). For traders, this highlights ongoing regulatory and institutional skepticism toward stablecoin adoption, which could impact liquidity and stablecoin trading pairs. Current stablecoin infrastructure remains dominant, but such media narratives may influence future regulatory direction and investor sentiment toward stablecoin-backed DeFi protocols.