Visa Survey: Bank Protections Could Lift Stablecoin Trust From 36% to 56%

Visa has published survey results on how Americans view stablecoins, and the headline number is simple: willingness to use these tokens climbs from 36% to 56% once a platform promises bank-level protection. The survey was run by Morning Consult among 2,192 US-based respondents.

The data landed right as issuers prepare for the GENIUS Act to take effect, the law meant to set the first federal rules for dollar-pegged stablecoins. In that sense, Visa's findings read like a hint to regulators about what the market is still missing for mass adoption.

The reason for the interest is straightforward. Visa itself processes billions of transactions a year, so the company needs to know which piece of trust outweighs user doubts before it commits resources to its own stablecoin settlement infrastructure.

The method has real limits worth keeping in mind. The survey rests on hypothetical scenarios rather than how people actually behave with their own money. The exact numbers could shift once a law is in place, but the direction, trust rising alongside guarantees, is unlikely to reverse.

Visa's survey: 2,192 respondents and one decisive condition

The researchers asked Americans whether they would use stablecoins more often for transfers, payments and storing funds. In the baseline scenario, with no extra guarantees, 36% of respondents said yes. When the researchers added a hypothetical bank-level protection, namely FDIC deposit insurance and fraud compensation, that share jumped to 56%.

The 20-point gap is larger than any other factor tested in the survey. By comparison, a convenient app or a lower fee moved willingness by a much smaller margin.

The researchers deliberately split the conditions into separate scenarios to see which protective element carried the most weight. It turned out that respondents cared less about the transfer technology itself and more about a guarantee their money would come back if something went wrong.

Why 64% trust the brand, not the technology

According to Visa, nearly two-thirds of respondents explained their caution the same way: trust depends on who offers the payment tool, not on the technology running underneath it.

"Nearly two-thirds (64%) say trust depends more on who offers a payment method than on the tech itself."

- Visa, from the survey report published on September 23, 2026

Another finding points the same way. When respondents were offered a stablecoin through a familiar financial provider, such as their own bank, willingness rose from 36% to 45%. That gain is smaller than the boost from deposit insurance, but the direction matches. People want a familiar intermediary, not an abstract protocol.

For stablecoin issuers, the takeaway is practical. Teaming up with a bank or a major payment network can lift trust faster than any technical upgrade to the blockchain a token runs on.

GENIUS Act takes effect in January 2027, but without FDIC

The GENIUS Act, short for Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins, is waiting on final rules from relevant US agencies. Its effective date is set for January 2027.

FDIC insurance will not be part of it.

Even after the law takes effect, dollar stablecoin issuers will not get the guaranteed deposit insurance or fraud compensation that traditional banks offer. The bill leans toward rules against illicit activity rather than a full safety net for coin holders. That gap is exactly what the hypothetical scenario in Visa's survey tries to address.

In practice, the new requirements mean stricter customer checks and transaction monitoring, similar to what banks already run. None of that adds protection for a coin holder against losing funds.

That marks a real break from bank regulation. Banks spent decades proving solvency before gaining a license and access to deposit insurance. The GENIUS Act, by contrast, focuses on reserve transparency oversight rather than requiring issuers to match that level of consumer protection.

Until then, the industry will have to rely on its own reputation, voluntary reserve audits and bank partnerships rather than a government deposit insurance system.

Europe is moving the other way

While the US works out its first federal rules, the European System of Central Banks is proposing to loosen requirements already in place. Stablecoin issuers in the EU currently must hold at least 30% of reserves as bank deposits, rising to 60% for "significant" tokens.

Regulators want to replace that fixed share with liquidity thresholds instead. The reasoning is straightforward: during a sharp withdrawal wave, a fixed share locked in bank deposits could create a problem for banks that a more flexible approach would avoid. The proposed change falls under the MiCA framework, in force since June 2024.

According to payments infrastructure company Decta, the market capitalization of MiCA-compliant euro stablecoins more than doubled over the past year. That happened ahead of the end of MiCA's transition period and suggests stricter rules do not necessarily slow a market down.

The market is closing in on $260 billion

Regulatory uncertainty has not slowed the market down. The combined market capitalization of USDT and USDC is already approaching $260 billion, and these two tokens remain the primary tools for crypto transfers and settlements.

The largest issuers are already trying to get ahead of the law. Both Circle's USDC and Tether's USDT publicly emphasize regular reserve audits, though neither offers coin holders anything like bank-style deposit compensation.

• Main takeaway: without bank-level guarantees, a large share of Americans stays cautious about stablecoins.
• Trust is tied to the intermediary's brand, not to the network a token runs on.
• In the US, the law delays full consumer protection until at least 2027.
• The EU, on the other hand, is moving the opposite way and loosening reserve requirements.

Taken together, these numbers paint an interesting picture. The market keeps growing even though the US still lacks final rules, while Europe remains the one major region where stablecoin requirements are already in force rather than just planned.

For Ukraine's market, the same logic applies without translation. USDT remains the dominant currency for P2P exchanges, and users mostly pick a platform by reputation rather than by the technical details of its network. Anyone planning to exchange USDT for hryvnia usually checks an exchanger's rating and reviews rather than the coin's issuance protocol.

What the industry can expect in the coming months

The GENIUS Act's final rules are not ready yet, and their content will decide how seriously issuers take Visa's findings. If regulators add insurance elements or mandatory compensation, user willingness could climb faster than the survey suggests.

The survey does not say who exactly should provide these guarantees, whether it's Visa itself, a bank partner or a lawmaker. But the direction is clear. The closer a stablecoin looks to a bank product, the fewer reasons people have to avoid it.

The stakes for large payment companies are high. Whoever offers a bank-level guaranteed stablecoin first will gain an edge over rivals still relying solely on the reputation of their technology.

For now, it's a hypothesis on paper.

At Kurslog, we track USDT and USDC rates daily, so any regulatory shift that affects trust in these tokens will show up in our exchanger data right away.