● Chartered banks are consolidating around shared deposit-token rails, while fintechs and card networks are backing a common stablecoin.● The Clearing House network brings JPMorgan, Citi, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and other banks together around a planned 2027 tokenized deposit launch.● Open USD brings more than 140 businesses into a shared stablecoin backed by Stripe, Visa, Mastercard, Coinbase, and several banks.● The GENIUS Act gives stablecoin issuers a clearer federal framework, while banks continue to assess reserve rules, deposit treatment, and the role they can credibly support.● Vendor selection, deposit insurance treatment, and interoperability between the two networks remain unresolved.

The market just split into two camps

Two coalitions now define the 2026 market. Large chartered banks are building shared tokenized deposit infrastructure through The Clearing House, while payment companies, fintechs, and crypto firms are backing the Open USD stablecoin network. Neither coalition has established a market standard yet, but both have moved beyond isolated institutional pilots.

The Clearing House initiative brings JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo into a shared network scheduled to launch in the first half of 2027. The broader participant roster includes BNY, BMO, Citizens Financial, Fifth Third, HSBC, Huntington, KeyBank, PNC, Regions, Santander, TD Bank, Truist, and U.S. Bank. Participating banks plan to clear and settle tokenized deposits around the clock, support automated payments, and connect the network with The Clearing House’s RTP and CHIPS infrastructure. The group has not selected a blockchain vendor.

Open Standard took a different route on July 1. The Bridge-led consortium introduced Open USD with more than 140 participating businesses, including BNY, Stripe, Visa, Mastercard, Coinbase, and Ripple. Other participants include U.S. Bank, Huntington, Citizens, Chime, American Express, and Adyen. The consortium plans to launch the stablecoin later in 2026 with free, uncapped minting and redemption. A partner board will govern the network, and participating businesses will share reserve earnings after a management fee.

Membership overlaps because several institutions want access to both models. BNY, U.S. Bank, Huntington, and Citizens appear in both coalitions. Their participation suggests that the market divide concerns infrastructure and commercial roles more than exclusive institutional allegiance. The Clearing House preserves bank deposits and interbank settlement within regulated banking channels. Open USD gives payment and commerce companies a common token that they can distribute through cards, apps, exchanges, and merchant platforms.

These coalitions therefore represent two active approaches rather than a settled winner. One extends the bank deposit model onto shared blockchain rails. The other pools governance, distribution, and reserve economics around a stablecoin intended for broad circulation.

Why chartered banks are converging on deposit tokens

Chartered banks favor deposit tokens because the model preserves the economics and legal treatment of a conventional bank deposit. A deposit token remains a liability on the issuing bank’s balance sheet, can pay interest, and may qualify for deposit insurance when the underlying account meets existing requirements. Banks can add on-chain transfer and settlement without replacing a familiar funding source.

The GENIUS Act makes payment stablecoins less suitable for yield-sensitive bank customers. Section 4(a)(11) bars payment stablecoin issuers from paying interest or yield, while the Act requires issuers to hold eligible reserves against every token. Payment stablecoins also lack FDIC insurance. By contrast, tokenized deposits can retain interest and applicable deposit protections, which gives banks a clearer reason to modernize deposits instead of issuing a separate payment instrument.

Existing bank programs show how the model works in practice. Kinexys by J.P. Morgan processes more than $5 billion each day for institutional clients. Citi Token Services already supports instant cross-border payments, and BNY launched a tokenized deposit service for institutions in January 2026. These live bank programs give their operators technical and compliance experience before shared interbank rails arrive.

Regulatory uncertainty still limits how broadly banks can deploy deposit tokens. The FDIC’s 2026 proposal asks how deposit insurance rules should apply to tokenized deposits, so banks cannot assume every token design inherits the treatment of its underlying account. Even with that question unresolved, deposit tokens usually fit a chartered bank’s balance sheet, customer relationships, and interest-bearing products more directly than a bank-issued stablecoin.

Why fintechs and payment networks are converging on stablecoins

Fintechs and payment networks increasingly treat stablecoins as an infrastructure play rather than a proprietary product. A useful payment rail needs broad distribution, deep liquidity, reliable redemption, and acceptance across competing platforms. No single issuer can establish those conditions alone. Shared stablecoin rails let each participant build its own payment or commerce products without creating a separate token and persuading the market to adopt it.

Open USD applies that model through shared governance and reserve economics. Open Standard announced the stablecoin in July 2026 with more than 140 participating businesses, including Stripe, Visa, Mastercard, Coinbase, BNY, and U.S. Bank. A partner-composed board will govern the network, while participants will split reserve earnings after a management fee. Open USD will also offer uncapped minting and redemption without fees, according to the consortium’s announced design. The coalition therefore enters the market with distribution partners and economic incentives already attached.

Card activity provides evidence that stablecoin payment rails already carry meaningful volume. By late 2025, Visa’s on-chain stablecoin settlement for issuers had reached an annual run rate of about $3.5 billion. Visa also carried more than 90 percent of on-chain crypto card volume across over 130 programs. Meanwhile, Rain and Reap reduced their reliance on sponsor-bank intermediaries and reached annualized volumes above $3 billion and $6 billion, respectively, according to reported card-market data.

Direct network access lets fintechs retain more interchange, foreign-exchange spread, and reserve income. Shared stablecoins can support that model while reducing the cost and adoption risk of launching separate currencies. Current momentum therefore reflects operating economics and existing payment volume, rather than announcements alone.

What regulatory clarity and ambiguity are each doing to the decision

The GENIUS Act already settles one economic question. Payment stablecoin issuers cannot pay holders interest or yield, while tokenized deposits can remain interest-bearing bank liabilities. Payment stablecoins also lack FDIC insurance. Those rules make deposit tokens a better fit for banks that want to preserve deposit economics, while stablecoins fit payment and distribution use cases where yield is secondary. The Act takes full effect no later than January 18, 2027, or 120 days after implementing rules are issued, whichever comes first, according to the statutory timeline and structural requirements.
Federal regulators have provided direction without completing the framework. The OCC proposed standards in February 2026 for becoming a permitted payment stablecoin issuer, including reserve, redemption, liquidity, and governance requirements. The FDIC issued separate proposals for applications and prudential standards, while the NCUA proposed requirements for credit-union-affiliated issuers. Each agency was working toward the Act’s July 18, 2026 rulemaking deadline, but several implementation questions remained open.
The FDIC’s treatment of tokenized deposits remains a material source of caution. Its April proposal requested comment on how deposit insurance rules should apply to tokenized deposits and stablecoin reserve deposits. Comments closed June 9, 2026, but no final rule had resolved the issue by mid-2026. Banks therefore lack a final answer for structuring customer claims and disclosures on tokenized deposit products, even though the deposit model otherwise fits existing bank balance sheets. The FDIC proposal also leaves cross-agency consistency open.
Banks are responding through three strategic postures. A full issuer accepts the capital, reserve, governance, and technology obligations attached to permitted payment stablecoin status. A custody or operations provider supports approved issuers without assuming the entire issuance burden. A fintech partner supplies regulated banking infrastructure while another company manages distribution and the customer experience. Large chartered banks can credibly pursue deposit-token networks or direct issuance, while smaller institutions may find service and partnership roles more practical until final rules reduce the remaining uncertainty.

What's still unresolved

The Clearing House still has to turn bank participation into working infrastructure. The proposed network has no selected blockchain vendor, and participating banks have not published common technical or governance standards. Its targeted launch in the first half of 2027 leaves major design and testing work unresolved.

Regulators have not finalized how deposit insurance applies when banks represent deposits as tokens. The FDIC proposal asks how insurance coverage and other deposit rules should treat tokenized deposits, but the agency has not issued a final rule. Banks can develop pilots under existing authority, but production launches still carry uncertainty around disclosures, recordkeeping, and failure scenarios.

Bank-led and fintech-led rails also lack tested interoperability. The Clearing House network aims to settle liabilities among participating banks, while Open USD brings banks, fintechs, card networks, and crypto companies into a shared stablecoin structure. Neither announcement explains how users will move value between those networks, who will provide conversion liquidity, or how institutions will reconcile different claims on funds.

Both camps therefore remain live experiments. The GENIUS Act takes full effect no later than January 18, 2027, while bank networks are working toward their own 2027 milestones. Industry watchers should track final rules, operating standards, and cross-network settlement before treating either model as established infrastructure.

Where this leaves bank executives right now

Bank executives should begin with coalition fit and regulatory posture before choosing a token model. A large chartered bank may have the balance sheet, regulatory relationships, and network access to support a shared deposit token rail. A regional bank may instead participate as a custodian, service provider, or partner to a stablecoin issuer. Each posture creates different requirements for reserve management, compliance responsibility, and customer access.

Early participation also requires technical capacity that many mid-market institutions lack in-house. Banks must connect token infrastructure with core systems and establish controls for custody, settlement, and transaction monitoring. They must also adapt the build as federal agencies clarify their rules.

Readers who need the underlying technical distinction can turn to the cluster’s deposit token versus stablecoin explainer. The separate decision framework helps institutions compare issuance, partnership, and service-provider paths against their charter and operating model. Restart Fintech supports both paths as a fractional CTO and implementation partner, helping institutions plan and build token infrastructure without hiring a full internal blockchain team.