Stablecoin-funded remittances cost around 84% less than traditional transfers in a comparison attributed to Borderless.xyz. The report puts the cost of sending $200 through stablecoin-funded routes at $2, compared with $12.72 using an older World Bank benchmark.
Borderless.xyz’s third-quarter 2026 report puts the median stablecoin-funded remittance cost at 1% of the amount sent. The World Bank’s global average was 6.36% in the third quarter of 2025.
The difference amounts to $10.72 on a $200 transfer, or a calculated saving of about 84.3%. However, the figures cover different periods and use different measures: Borderless reports a median, while the World Bank figure is an average.
The comparison suggests that stablecoins could reduce transfer costs, but actual savings depend on the destination, provider, payment size and fees charged along the way.
Stablecoin remittance costs vary by region
The report puts stablecoin-funded remittance costs in Sub-Saharan Africa at 2.9%, compared with a traditional-transfer benchmark of 8.46%.
For a $200 transfer, those rates translate to $5.80 through the stablecoin-funded route and $16.92 through the traditional comparison. That is a calculated saving of $11.12, or about 65.7%.
In Latin America, the reported stablecoin-funded cost was 1.25%, while the traditional benchmark stood at 5.64%. On a $200 payment, that means costs of $2.50 and $11.28, respectively, giving a calculated saving of $8.78.
The World Bank’s figures also show that costs differ significantly across traditional payment services. In the third quarter of 2025, its digital-remittance index stood at 4.59%, while its digital-only money-transfer-operator index was 3.54%.
Comparing Borderless’s 1% stablecoin median with those benchmarks produces calculated savings of approximately 78.2% and 71.8%, respectively. These comparisons do not establish the price available for a specific transaction because the data covers different periods and may not represent identical payment routes.
Banks were the most expensive remittance-provider category in the World Bank’s report, with an average cost of 14.99%. International money-transfer operators averaged 5.52%, while digital-only operators were cheaper at 3.54%.
Business transfers can also benefit from stablecoins
For a $10,000 business payment to the eurozone, Borderless’s reported comparison identifies a stablecoin-funded transfer costing as little as $26 through the cheapest provider.
A separate figure puts the median cost at $52 across all corridors. The report compares traditional bank wires with costs ranging from $135 to $150, including transfer fees and an assumed 1% foreign-exchange margin.
On a $10,000 payment, a 1% currency-conversion margin alone represents $100.
Using those figures, the $26 eurozone transfer would save $109 to $124 compared with the quoted bank-wire range. The $52 median would imply savings of $83 to $98, although that figure covers a broader group of corridors rather than only eurozone payments.
Provider choice can make a significant difference. In earlier research published in July, Borderless estimated that selecting a median-priced provider instead of the cheapest available route could add $2,330 to the cost of transferring $1 million.
That study covered 260 payment corridors across 108 countries and 59 currencies. On the USDT-to-Brazilian-real route, the cheapest provider changed 34 times during an 88-day observation period.
Borderless calculates delivery costs by comparing provider payout rates with a reference exchange-rate midpoint, then adding recorded payment-network fees and local taxes. Costs can vary with transaction size because fixed charges make up a larger share of smaller payments.
Its second-quarter research also distinguished between available payment infrastructure and the systems actually used for completed transfers. The company listed 131 local payment rails across 70 countries, but recorded completed deliveries using 22 payment schemes during the quarter.
This means the lowest advertised rate is not necessarily available to every sender. The final cost depends on the route, provider, transfer amount and local payment arrangements.
Faster payouts do not guarantee successful delivery
Borderless’s reported data also highlights differences in payout speed and completion rates across local payment networks.
Brazil’s PIX and Colombia’s PSE recorded median payout times of two minutes, while Mexico’s SPEI took three minutes. The report compared these results with traditional SWIFT transfers, which typically settle by the next business day, with the slowest 10% taking three business days.
The reported completion rates varied more widely:
- Mexico’s SPEI: 98.6%
- Brazil’s PIX: 97.8%
- Colombia’s PSE: 79%
- Costa Rica’s SINPE: 73%
The difference between the highest and lowest reported rates was 25.6 percentage points.
These figures describe the payment sample covered by the report. They should not be treated as universal success rates for every transaction using those domestic networks.
Stablecoins may help speed up the movement of funds between financial institutions, but the final payout still depends on local banking systems and the service providers involved.
Companies are testing stablecoins for corporate settlement
Businesses are also exploring stablecoins for payments between international subsidiaries and financial institutions.
In July, Hyundai Card reported a $20,000 intercompany remittance trial between Hyundai Motor’s U.S. and Mexican operations. The transaction used USDT on Avalanche and reportedly completed in about seven minutes.
Hyundai Motor America converted dollars into USDT before transferring the tokens to its Mexican unit, where the funds were converted back into dollars. Hyundai Card handled the regulatory reviews, legal and tax assessments, internal controls and payment design.
Another trial involved Lloyds Banking Group and Visa. Separate reporting published Oct. 1 described a seven-day pilot in which the companies settled $750,000 using USDC, with the funds reportedly reaching Visa in under an hour, including over the weekend.
Lloyds identified the counterparties as its Corporate Markets branch in Jersey and Visa in the United States. The bank purchased USDC through Archax, a UK-regulated exchange, before transferring the settlement funds to Visa.
These trials show how stablecoins are being tested for corporate payments and settlement outside ordinary banking hours. However, pilot transactions do not by themselves establish that the same speed, cost or operational results can be achieved at scale.
Overall, Borderless.xyz’s findings point to a potential cost advantage for stablecoin-funded remittances, particularly where traditional providers charge high transfer fees or foreign-exchange margins. The size of that advantage will depend on the payment corridor, the provider used and the costs of converting funds into and out of stablecoins.
