Stablecoin rails

RLUSD, USDC, USDT: Choosing a Settlement Asset for B2B Payments

Issuer, redemption mechanics, chain availability, liquidity depth by corridor, and regulatory treatment — what to weigh when you have to pick one stablecoin and defend it to an auditor.
6 min read · Modality

The short answer

There is no single "best" stablecoin. The right choice is the one whose issuer, redemption path, chain presence and liquidity depth match the corridors you actually settle — and whose regulatory posture your compliance team will sign off on. For B2B settlement, reserve quality and redemption reliability beat yield.

What actually differs

Three things separate settlement-grade stablecoins: who issues and backs them, how you redeem at par, and where the liquidity actually is.

DimensionWhy it matters for settlement
Issuer & reservesCash and T-bills vs. mixed reserves. The first redeems predictably under stress.
RedemptionDirect issuer redemption vs. secondary-market only. Direct is what "1:1" actually rests on.
ChainsWhere the token lives decides gas, confirmations and which fiat legs connect.
Liquidity by corridorDeep on USD pairs, thin on exotic ones. Your corridor is the real test.
Regulatory treatmentLicensed issuance (e.g. MiCA, NYDFS) changes what your auditor will accept.

The trap: optimising for yield

Settlement is not treasury. You hold the token for minutes, sometimes not at all — the conversion is the point, not the carry. A higher yield usually means riskier reserves or thinner redemption, neither of which helps a payment that has to land today. Pick the asset you can redeem at par when the market is ugly, not the one that paid most last quarter.

What we abstract

On a stablecoin settlement rail, the choice of asset is ours to make per corridor and per chain — routed so you get the same quoted rate regardless of which token moves underneath. You name the currency pair; the intermediary is our implementation detail, not your problem to defend.

You shouldn't need an opinion on chain depth to send an invoice. That's the part a layer is supposed to absorb.

The bottom line

Choose on redemption reliability and corridor liquidity, not yield. And if you'd rather not choose at all, build on a layer that routes the asset for you and quotes the rate before you commit.

Name your pair

We'll tell you honestly whether we can move it — including when the answer is no.

Get a demo