In comparing USDC and USDT, we often mention their respective market cap, trading volume, and regulatory compliance. Let’s get real, are we seriously discussing the true cost of selecting one option versus the other? Particularly when that choice is not in fact a choice for millions of people globally?

Whose Safety Are We Ignoring?

Think about it. While here in the West, we argue over the fine points of reserve attestations and the contours of regulatory frameworks. We have options. We live in places that have the privilege of enjoying stable banking systems. When the dollar equivalent of a stablecoin de-pegs, it’s an inconvenience, perhaps a loss, but hardly ever apocalypse.

What opportunities and challenges does this entrepreneur in Accra encounter as he uses cryptocurrency to create value? Due to outdated banking procedures, they are out of reach or cost prohibitive. Or the family in Nepal using mobile money — through stablecoins — for cross-border travel since it is quicker and less expensive than using PayPal?

For them, a stablecoin is not merely a newest tool to trade Bitcoin. It's a lifeline. And that lifeline needs to be secure.

USDT's dominance, especially in regions with limited financial infrastructure, isn't some organic market phenomenon. It's a consequence of accessibility and availability. It's often the only option. Its opacity poses a systemic risk to its most vulnerable constituents.

Picture Emily, who lives in Accra and operates an online market stall. She accepts USDT because at the end of the day, she’s a business owner operating in her local environment and that’s the most liquid stablecoin. Sure, she’s heard the rumors about Tether’s black box of reserves—but what other option does she have? Her customers use USDT. Her suppliers use USDT. But the whole ecosystem she’s working in is built on USDT.

Now, picture the consequences if USDT unexpectedly de-pegs by 20% overnight due to something unexpected. Emily's working capital evaporates. Her business grinds to a halt. Her family's livelihood is threatened. This isn’t just hypothetical—this is in fact reality.

Blind Faith or Informed Choice?

As advocates of innovation and decentralization in the crypto space, we are excited to see this development. We have a duty of care to more vulnerable users. The defense of “people should just research it themselves” doesn’t hold water either. When there are no places to go, and when access to information is restricted, it’s nearly impossible to be safe.

USDC is committed to transparency and maintaining rigorous security and regulatory standards. Given its smaller market share, this commitment goes far in making it a safer alternative. Although USDC and USDT have kept their peg, the trust and perception of safety is key. Rest assured with the knowledge that your assets are supported by fully verifiable reserves. This promise is particularly critical in the current context of uncertainty and instability.

Yes, USDT has more trading volume and is overall more accessible. But at what cost? In doing so, are we putting convenience and accessibility ahead of protecting those most dependent on these digital assets?

It’s the difference between flying on a budget airline whose safety records are probably already on your phone versus a better known carrier with higher standards. The low-cost carrier could provide cheaper tickets and more convenience. If that’s saving you money at the expense of your safety, are you really saving money?

Beyond Market Cap: A Moral Imperative

We need to shift the conversation. It takes more than market cap and trading volume. It's about the ethical implications of promoting – or, through inaction, condoning – a system that disproportionately impacts vulnerable populations.

  • We need greater awareness: Educate users about the risks associated with opaque stablecoins.
  • We need regulatory pressure: Demand greater transparency and accountability from stablecoin issuers.
  • We need alternative solutions: Support the development and adoption of transparent, regulated stablecoins in developing nations.

The dominance of USDT isn’t an indication that it’s better. Under this system, market share is the prime consideration. It ignores the safety of users, including for those living in the Global South, like Emily in Accra. It's time we acknowledge the real cost of ignoring reserve transparency and demand a better, more equitable future for everyone.

Let's reframe the narrative.… so let’s not discuss USDT’s liquidity, but its liability. Let’s not get hung up on USDC’s market cap, let’s think about where its moral compass is pointing. The future of finance depends on it.