Author: CJ_Blockchain; Source: X, @nbblock

Many media reported that Meta plans to return to the stablecoin battlefield in the second half of 2026.

This is not the first time that Meta wants to take the stablecoin cake.

Meta’s first attempt at a stable currency can be traced back to 2019. Although Meta’s stable currency plan was ultimately stopped by the government, Libra’s attempt had a profound impact on the subsequent currency circle.

The famous names in the currency circle, Aptos and SUI, can be regarded as being born from the ruins of Libra.

This time Meta once again enters the stable currency, Circle will face the impact of giants, and life and death may depend on Zuckerberg’s thoughts.

1. Dark past: Why did Libra fail?

To understand Meta’s current plot, we must first review the 2019 Libra (later renamed Diem) experiment that failed miserably.

At the time, Meta (then Facebook) was trying to unite dozens of giants to issue a super-sovereign digital currency backed by a basket of fiat currencies and government bonds as reserves. The core reasons for its failure can be attributed to two points:

1. Touched the reverse scale of monetary sovereignty: The attempt to create a global currency that is independent of the control of a single country directly triggered a joint strangulation by the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank and global regulatory agencies. Regulators are extremely worried that such a platform with billions of users will override the monetary policies of various countries.

2. The pace is too radical and arrogant: By building its own underlying public chain, developing its own Move language, and issuing its own currency, Meta is trying to cover all aspects from underlying infrastructure to front-end applications. This attitude of trying to establish a financial "independent kingdom" has made the traditional financial system feel a huge systemic threat.

2. Yesterday reappears: Meta’s plan to enter stable currency again

After a few years, Meta has once again entered the stablecoin field. Unlike 2019, this time the policy can be regarded as a green light. The Genuis Act was passed last year, and the Clarity Act is expected to be passed in the first half of the year, clearing compliance obstacles for Meta to deploy stablecoins. On the other hand, social + payment is a proven “explicit science”.

Meta owns WhatsApp, Instagram and Facebook, the three largest global traffic portals, with a total of more than 3 billion monthly active users. However, its monetization model still relies heavily on advertising. It lacks a native, low-friction, cross-border payments layer.

• Connecting the creator economy and e-commerce: If WhatsApp can realize seamless transfers like WeChat Pay, and creators on Instagram can directly receive rewards from fans around the world, Meta’s business valuation will be completely reshaped.

• Bypassing the "high tolls" of traditional payments: Cross-border settlements with traditional credit card networks (Visa/Mastercard) are extremely costly and inefficient. Now that Web3's infrastructure has matured and stablecoins have proven their PMF (product market fit) as value transfer tools, Meta just needs to follow suit.

Not to mention, in a large country in the East, another giant known as the "Oriental Meta" has proven with reality how powerful social + payment is.

3. The "birth" of Circle: Meta does not issue stablecoins, but is willing to be the super entrance

If Meta learns the lessons of Libra and chooses the safest and most regulatory-compliant path -not issuing its own native stablecoin, but choosing to cooperate with existing stablecoins and payment providers.

This is also the most likely path based on public market information. The news mentioned that meta has started negotiations with multiple suppliers.

The media speculates that among the partners is Stripe, which acquired Bridge for $1.1 billion at the end of 2024. Its CEO Patrick Collison has joined Meta's board of directors in April 2025. Stripe’s main stablecoin payment partner is Circle.

For Circle, this will be a huge benefit of epic proportions, and can even be said to be the pinnacle of its "life":

1. Access to the world’s largest distribution network: The biggest pain point of stablecoins currently is the lack of real, high-frequency consumption scenarios. Once connected to the Meta system, USDC will instantly reach 3 billion real users. Circle will effortlessly cross the "crossing the chasm" and truly become the basic settlement currency of the global digital economy.

2. The decisive battle to defeat Tether (USDT): Tether currently crushes USDC in market capitalization, but is mainly focused on the cryptocurrency’s on-chain trading and gray production edges. As a listed giant, Meta is absolutely impossible to access USDT due to compliance considerations. It is inevitable to choose USDC with strict audit and full compliance. This will help Circle form a dimensionality reduction attack on Tether in the dimension of "mainstream payment applications".

Of course, in order to achieve cooperation with meta, Circle will inevitably sign a distribution agreement that is more "powerless and humiliating" than Coinbase. All of the incremental revenue brought by Meta will be absorbed by Meta itself, but in terms of grabbing market share in the early stages, this is completely cost-effective.

4. The "death" of Circle: Meta personally ended up reshaping the financial empire

However, if Meta decides to use its own huge ecosystem to issue its own stablecoin, then for Circle, this will undoubtedly be a devastating dimensionality reduction blow.

Although a spokesperson for Meta has stated that it will not issue a new stablecoin, and the layout this time is mainly to cooperate with existing suppliers, but in the context of payment companies such as PayPal issuing their own stablecoins, the obstacle for Meta to issue its own stablecoin is actually very small.

1. Incremental market share disappears: Today, when encryption is generally questioned, Circle’s story of Crypto’s native share growth is no longer feasible. New scale growth must come from external use, such as consumer payments, cross-border payments, etc., which is also the most critical part to support expectations. Once meta enters the market, the bulk of the incremental cake must be eaten by meta. Circle’s incremental story no longer makes sense, and it can only continue to compete in the existing Crypto market.

2. Scarcity disappears: Circle tells a story of compliance to a large extent. It is as compliant as Circle, but its scale is far inferior to Circle. Those larger than Circle are not as compliant as it. However, after meta enters the market, it is very likely to surpass Circle in scale, so the story of the largest scale among the most compliant does not make sense.

5. Life or death

Subjectively, I think judging from the available information, it is a high probability event that Meta will not issue stablecoins on its own. After all, their spokesperson has come out and said so.

Judging from the gossip, the partner is probably Stripe, so it makes sense to connect to USDC.

Meta then signed a distribution agreement with Circle and took all the profits, thus eliminating compliance and operating costs while still receiving benefits.

Looks like a win-win strategy.

The small probability event is that Meta feels that the cake is too big and must eat it alone. Then Circle actually does not have much room for resistance, and it will be difficult to eat the incremental market cake.