Ripple’s Monica Long: Stablecoin Surge Mirrors 2020-2021 NFT Boom, Driven by Fragmentation, Branded Coins and Payment-Focused L1s

Ripple president Monica Long, who oversees the company’s Business, Product and Engineering organizations, has weighed in on the current wave of enthusiasm surrounding stablecoins. In her view, the market is being reshaped by three converging forces: accelerating fragmentation, a surge of “branded” stablecoin initiatives from traditional financial institutions, and the emergence of purpose-built Layer 1 blockchains designed specifically for payments. Taken together, she argues, these trends echo the speculative momentum that defined earlier cycles in crypto.

Monica Long on stablecoins: “It feels a lot like the 2020–2021 NFT boom”
In a post shared as a thread on Oct 03, 2025, Long acknowledged that stablecoin-based payments have become a signature, high‑traction use case for blockchain technology. Both traditional finance and DeFi platforms have increasingly adopted stablecoins for settlement, remittances, and treasury flows, and references to stablecoin strategies now routinely appear on banks’ and payment companies’ earnings calls as well as across crypto Twitter. Yet she cautioned that parts of the landscape are already showing signs of froth. Much like the NFT gold rush of 2020–2021, the market is seeing a proliferation of new issuers—many of whom have not articulated a differentiating purpose or a concrete user benefit. The ecosystem doesn’t need a hundred indistinguishable USD‑pegged options, she suggested, and a number of launches appear to be driven more by fear of missing out than by real customer demand.

That caution aligns with broader market commentary. As previously reported by U.Today, analyst and investor Nic Carter has argued that the entrenched USDT/USDC duopoly is unlikely to last forever, implying more competitive pressure and structural change ahead. Even so, Long emphasized that practical, business‑first deployments do exist and are gaining traction. Interbank settlement and loyalty or rewards programs, for example, are clear fits for stablecoins because they address tangible pain points around speed, reconciliation, and cross‑border reach. However, for many organizations, moving to stablecoins can still be resource‑inefficient—particularly when retrofitting legacy operations, navigating compliance, and standing up robust custody and controls.

Big‑brand stablecoins don’t automatically solve Web2/Web3 friction
Long also highlighted the rise of stablecoin initiatives tied to major fintech and payments brands. While these efforts can lend credibility, distribution, and institutional know‑how, they don’t inherently dissolve the frictions that sit at the boundary between Web2 and Web3. On‑ and off‑ramping remains a critical challenge, and the experience can still feel like traditional correspondent banking—just with a blockchain veneer. In other words, settlement might be faster on‑chain, but access constraints, counterpart risk, and jurisdictional limitations don’t disappear simply because a ledger is involved. This is especially acute for money services businesses and payment providers that lack licenses in specific markets, where onboarding bottlenecks and compliance overhead continue to slow adoption.

Purpose‑built L1s for stablecoins: narrow advantages, heavy lift
A further trend Long called out is the move to create dedicated blockchains tailored for stablecoin payments. Networks such as Tempo, Plasma, and Arc have been cited as examples of purpose‑designed infrastructure that promises predictable fees, high throughput, and feature sets aligned with enterprise payments. The appeal is clear: if you can tightly control performance, governance, and interoperability, you can design for stablecoin use cases from the ground up. Yet Long questioned whether building an entirely new Layer 1 is justified in most cases. Launching and securing a new chain requires substantial capital, ecosystem incentives, and long‑term maintenance—all while mature, widely used blockchains already exist that can meet many of the same requirements. In her view, a bespoke L1 only makes sense if the payment use case demands capabilities that general‑purpose chains truly can’t deliver at scale.

Market milestones: stablecoins hit fresh all‑time highs
Despite the challenges, the market’s growth remains striking. The combined capitalization of all stablecoins recently pushed past $310 billion, a new all‑time high, underscoring the sector’s central role in crypto liquidity and settlement flows. Two issuers still dominate: USDT and USDC together account for more than 80% of that total, reflecting deep network effects in trading venues, wallets, and merchant integrations. Yet the expanding long tail of assets indicates that issuers, exchanges, and payment firms continue to pursue specialized niches, regional strategies, and differentiated compliance models as they search for product–market fit.

Ripple’s RLUSD gains traction across Ethereum and XRP Ledger
Against this backdrop, Ripple’s own stablecoin, RLUSD—issued on both Ethereum (ETH) and the XRP Ledger (XRPL)—has seen steady growth. Over the past month, RLUSD’s market capitalization climbed by more than 11%, with circulating supply approaching $790 million. By operating on two widely used networks, RLUSD aims to meet developers and institutions where they already build and transact, while benefiting from the liquidity and tooling those ecosystems provide. Long’s broader point, however, is that distribution and interoperability must be paired with real‑world utility: the most durable stablecoin projects will be those that solve concrete problems for businesses and end users, not merely those that can check a multi‑chain box.

Where the stablecoin narrative goes next
Long’s assessment is neither purely bullish nor dismissive. Stablecoins