Is the market saturated with too many stablecoins?

[BayAngelo]

Nope, the raise of stablecoins is getting scary lately with usdt  minting new tokens without control. i wasn't happy when Tron joined the Usther blockchain. they will mess the whole thing out of control. USDC is my preffered choice because it has a solid transparency and a redefined structure.

[Synerggy]

Having Many stable coins in crypto market won't do any damage, some will definitely fail but I prefer transparency stable coin projects like USDC which is from Coinbase and BUSD which is from binance team

[MCDev]

In fact, there are too many stable coins being launched in the market and people cannot know them all. However it is necessary and good for everyone and for the cryptocurrency market, competition will see development projects and investors benefit from that.

[acdc]

The market is fine with so many stable coins. With many stable coins around the market, people would have many options that they can choose to save their money value. I don't think that the market is saturated with too many stable coins because I think that can be a hard competition between each stable coin. We will see what people choose with so many stable coins, and maybe with that, we will know what stable coin which will be worth holding for the money value in any situation.

Yes, competition will facilitate development.
When stabecoin projects compete fairly, we will know which projects are good and which are of poor quality. Besides having more competition will increase the choice for everyone.

[cabron]

If anyone knows how to use stablecoin like USDT, you know how to make money on exchanges. Its not just USD that is pegged these days but also the other fiat currencies like Yuan and Ruppee. AS long as exchanges are using these stablecoins, it will appear like its safe to use them despite being unaudited.

Tether.io can print more USDT though and then use it to buy BTC when the price drops then it's going to be a huge profit for them. There has to be reserve auditing for these stablecoins because they are not like DAI.

[Ozero]

Even if the number stable coins reach 1000 it won't hurt crypto at all, the use case of stable coins is to backed your assets at 1:1 USD price which is very useful for traders, you just have to decide which one you've prefer between centralized USD coins or decentralized USD coins

But how can we actually trust every stable coin which is backed by USDs even the project tether is printing more money and injecting them into the crypto market which will surely affect the prices of altcoins because USD value is getting diluted here in the form of stable coin.

We need to figure out which stable coin to use. In addition, now about 80 percent of all states are working on the creation of their national stable coins, that is, their digitized currencies. Their use will be much safer. Private and commercial stable coins will disappear much more often what is the default of the state.

[Abiky]

With more numbers, we would have better options. As you already stated, Tether is the most used stable coin but it's been pointed out several times that Tether is issuing coin without having an equivalent escrow holding of USD. This makes it an unsecure option, yet people are using it. It's mostly because they can't find a better solution. For a truly stable coin, it should be backed by the thing it's pegged on. USD stablecoin escrowed with Ethereum don't make sense. What if ethereum go zero overnight?

Good point. DAI could go down the drain if ETH's price goes all the way to zero. Based on this flaw, centralized stablecoins would work better with Fiat reserves instead of being backed by a highly-volatile cryptocurrency on the market. Personally, I'm not quite a fan of Tether because of its lack of transparency. Yet, people seems to use it more than anything else because it's the biggest stablecoin on the crypto market. The Tether company might be artificially pumping its token to keep it on the top spots in market cap. If its bubble bursts someday, it'll be a huge blow to the entire crypto market as we know it. There are far better options to choose from which have a greater level of legitimacy than Tether itself.

For instance, Gemini Dollars and Binance USD are widely regulated in the mainstream world. They're backed by reputable crypto companies in the Fintech space, unlike Tether USDT. Regulation is what is needed in order to keep the industry as legitimate as possible. There may be many stablecoins on the market right now, each with their own level of legitimacy. I think it's better to have lots of stablecoins on the market in order to ramp up the competition. The more stablecoins there are, the more options will be available for everyday people. The same could be said to traditional altcoins on the market. Time will tell which stablecoins will remain in the space and which will fade into oblivion. Only those that keep their promises will be actively used in the mainstream world. Just my thoughts

[alani123]

I don't think anyone in crypto would need to be worried about that.
Already the biggest volumes are with direct pairs with USD. Any deviation from actual FIAT is in my opinion a good move. Pegged currencies of course aren't a great improvement but at least they are not a direct endorsement of the bank system. Some of them are even more centralized and trust based too! But that's why it's good to have currency competition.
The more stable-coins there are, the more competition there will be for better products, and the more pressure on banks to be more accepting of crypto or lose deposits to their competitors.

[havoc928]

The market is fine with so many stable coins. With many stable coins around the market, people would have many options that they can choose to save their money value. I don't think that the market is saturated with too many stable coins because I think that can be a hard competition between each stable coin. We will see what people choose with so many stable coins, and maybe with that, we will know what stable coin which will be worth holding for the money value in any situation.

Yes, competition will facilitate development.
When stabecoin projects compete fairly, we will know which projects are good and which are of poor quality. Besides having more competition will increase the choice for everyone.

Agree! I don't think the existence of stable coins in the cryptocurrency world will harm our market. Otherwise, many fiat-backed stable coins on the market can give traders more choices in investing and exchanging their money based on the differences in the exchange rate. I would doubt if a trader worries about the appearance of stable coins, isn't it beneficial for us?

[jrrsparkles]

Even if the number stable coins reach 1000 it won't hurt crypto at all, the use case of stable coins is to backed your assets at 1:1 USD price which is very useful for traders, you just have to decide which one you've prefer between centralized USD coins or decentralized USD coins

But how can we actually trust every stable coin which is backed by USDs even the project tether is printing more money and injecting them into the crypto market which will surely affect the prices of altcoins because USD value is getting diluted here in the form of stable coin.

We need to figure out which stable coin to use. In addition, now about 80 percent of all states are working on the creation of their national stable coins, that is, their digitized currencies. Their use will be much safer. Private and commercial stable coins will disappear much more often what is the default of the state.

Stable coins created by respective countries have border restrictions so it won't affect the adoption of centralized stable coin like tether, the only problem will be the coin will be burst at some point due to excessive printing of them with no limitations.

[Aaroenz0r]

Stable coins created by respective countries have border restrictions so it won't affect the adoption of centralized stable coin like tether, the only problem will be the coin will be burst at some point due to excessive printing of them with no limitations.

True! I can't think of any negative effects of stable coins backed by real money for the cryptocurrency world. The problems of fiat-backed stable coins stick with the problems of its own countries. The cryptocurrency market is considered as the most independent market that doesn't rely on any particular national economy. That's why it's expected to be a worldwide currency. Therefore, nothing to worry about when there are more stablecoins in this market.

[Abiky]

I don't think anyone in crypto would need to be worried about that.
Already the biggest volumes are with direct pairs with USD. Any deviation from actual FIAT is in my opinion a good move. Pegged currencies of course aren't a great improvement but at least they are not a direct endorsement of the bank system. Some of them are even more centralized and trust based too! But that's why it's good to have currency competition.
The more stable-coins there are, the more competition there will be for better products, and the more pressure on banks to be more accepting of crypto or lose deposits to their competitors.

Agree. The more stablecoins on the market, the greater the competition will be. I'd imagine that renowned banks will launch stablecoins of their own for the whole world to use. COVID-19 has just increased the popularity of crypto/Blockchain tech, so I wouldn't be surprised to see more stablecoin offerings in the future. As far as centralized stablecoins go, I would think twice before putting all my hard-earned money on them. Apparently, stablecoins like USDC and USDT are too centralized to the point where the stablecoin issuer can freeze your assets on the Blockchain. Centre has already done this a while ago (link to article), while Tether has followed suit (link to article). It shows us that most centralized stablecoins are subject to a single point of failure, effectively bringing traditional banking to the Blockchain (Banking 2.0).

Considering that centralized stablecoins are too vulnerable towards manipulation, I'd say that decentralized ones could take the world by storm in the future. As far as I know, there's only one decentralized stablecoin backed by decentralized crypto assets. And that one's called "DAI". The market may be saturated with centralized stablecoins, but it's in need for more decentralized options. Believe me, once people face the same situations as traditional banks by using a centralized stablecoin, they'll leave the game. Blockchain tech is all about decentralization than anything else. While at some point regulation is necessary for the industry to thrive, sometimes it's taken too far than usual. Time will tell us whenever stablecoins have been a failed idea or all the other way around. Just my thoughts