Stablecoins for Cross-Border Payments: Cost, Speed, Limits

What cross-border payments cost today

In Q3 2025, the latest World Bank Remittance Prices Worldwide data, sending $200 cost 6.36% on average worldwide. Banks were the most expensive channel at 14.99%. Digital services averaged 4.59%, against 7.30% for non-digital ones. The UN and G20 target is 3% by 2030.

Measure (World Bank, Q3 2025)	Average cost of sending $200
Global average	6.36%
Banks	14.99%
Non-digital remittances	7.30%
International money transfer operators	5.52%
Digital remittances	4.59%
Target (UN SDG / G20, by 2030)	3% average, no corridor above 5%

Progress is slow. The global average was 6.49% in Q1 2025, so it fell only 0.13 points in six months. Speed has its own targets: the G20 roadmap aims for 75% of remittances and retail payments to be available within one hour by end-2027, with the rest within one business day, and for retail cross-border payments to cost no more than 1% on average. In October 2025 the Financial Stability Board conceded that satisfactory global improvement is unlikely to arrive on the 2027 timetable.

Why correspondent banking is slow and costly

A bank transfer abroad usually passes through a chain of correspondent banks, each holding pre-funded accounts with the next, checking compliance and taking a fee or an FX margin. Each hop runs on its own hours and cut-off times, so a payment can wait overnight or over a weekend.

Each bank in the chain has to keep money parked in foreign "nostro" accounts to pay out at the other end. That idle liquidity is a cost the sender ends up paying. Add compliance checks repeated at each hop, FX spreads that are often not disclosed upfront, and settlement only when domestic payment systems are open, and the 14.99% bank average stops looking surprising. It is why digital money transfer operators, which pre-fund local payout partners and price competitively, undercut banks.

What the percentages mean on a $200 transfer

On a $200 transfer, the World Bank averages translate to about $12.72 in total cost at the global average, nearly $30 through a bank, $9.18 through a digital service, and $6 at the 3% target. The Stellar network fee for the transfer itself is a fraction of a cent.

Channel (World Bank, Q3 2025)	Average cost	On $200
Banks	14.99%	$29.98
Non-digital remittances	7.30%	$14.60
Global average	6.36%	$12.72
Money transfer operators	5.52%	$11.04
Digital remittances	4.59%	$9.18
UN / G20 target for 2030	3.00%	$6.00

These are averages over many corridors and include both fees and the FX margin. A stablecoin route has to beat the relevant row in the specific corridor, end to end. The on-chain fee is not the issue: at 0.00001 XLM per operation it does not register at this scale. What matters is what the on-ramp, the currency conversion and the off-ramp charge, and those are set by businesses, not by the network. When comparing, ask for the total amount the recipient receives in local currency, not the advertised fee, because a "zero-fee" transfer can carry its cost in the exchange rate.

How a stablecoin payment works

The sender converts local money into a stablecoin through an on-ramp, sends it on a blockchain, and the recipient converts it to local currency through an off-ramp or spends it directly. The middle step settles in seconds for a tiny fee; the two conversions carry the real cost.

1. On-ramp. Cash or a bank transfer becomes USDC (or EURC) through an exchange, an anchor or a cash agent.
2. Transfer. The stablecoin moves on-chain. On Stellar the network minimum fee is 100 stroops, or 0.00001 XLM, per operation, and ledgers close every few seconds, every day of the year.
3. FX. If the recipient needs another currency, someone converts: an anchor, an exchange, or an on-chain market such as Stellar's order book or an Aquarius pool.
4. Off-ramp. The recipient withdraws to a bank or mobile-money account, or collects cash.

The structural gain is that there is no chain of correspondents and no nostro pre-funding for the transfer itself: the stablecoin is the settlement asset. The structural risk is that you now depend on the stablecoin's reserves and the ramps' reliability. For how the dollar value is maintained, see how stablecoins hold their value.

Stellar in practice: MoneyGram, anchors, aid

Stellar's best-known example is MoneyGram, which since June 2022 has let users of Stellar wallets cash USDC in and out at its locations. Stellar standardises the ramps through "anchors" and SEP protocols, and aid agencies have used Stellar USDC to pay recipients directly.

MoneyGram. MoneyGram launched its crypto-to-cash service on Stellar on 10 June 2022 in Canada, Kenya, the Philippines and the US, using Circle's USDC for settlement and wallets including Vibrant and LOBSTR, with zero fees for the first 12 months. The Stellar Development Foundation later reported that the service operated in over 170 countries and had facilitated nearly $30 million in volume, with top markets including the US, Canada, Poland, Ukraine, Colombia, Mexico, Uganda, the UK and Ecuador. On 22 April 2026 the two extended the partnership: a MoneyGram app with a USD stablecoin balance is live in Colombia and launching in El Salvador, with more Central and South American markets planned during 2026. MoneyGram cites nearly 500,000 retail locations across 200+ countries and territories.

Thirty million dollars over several years is small next to global remittance flows. The value of the MoneyGram case is that it proves the cash edge can be connected, not that volume has moved.

Anchors and SEPs. An anchor is, in Stellar's words, an on- and off-ramp connecting the network to traditional financial rails. Standard interfaces let any compatible wallet use any anchor: SEP-24 for hosted deposits and withdrawals, SEP-6 for programmatic ones, and SEP-31 for cross-border payments between institutions. Stellar anchors explained covers how they work and what to check.

Disbursements and aid. The Stellar Development Foundation reports that organisations including UNHCR and the IRC have distributed aid as USDC straight to recipients' wallets, and that workers have been paid in USDC through the Stellar Disbursement Platform.

Scale on Stellar is still modest: DefiLlama counts about $341M of USDC and €4.8M of EURC on the network as of 2 October 2026. The full list of coins is in stablecoins on Stellar.

Where stablecoins still fall short

Stablecoins fix the middle of a cross-border payment but not the ends. Off-ramps are thin in many corridors, converting into a local currency still costs a spread, compliance applies at every ramp, and the regulatory status of stablecoins differs country by country.

• Off-ramp depth. A transfer is only as cheap as the most expensive conversion. In corridors with few anchors or agents, cash-out fees and spreads can erase the savings from the on-chain leg.
• FX is still FX. Most stablecoin supply is in dollars: over 99% of DefiLlama's tracked stablecoin value is USD-pegged. Sending dollars to someone who spends pesos or shillings means a currency conversion, and thin local-currency markets mean wider spreads.
• Compliance at the edges. Ramps are regulated businesses that must verify identity; Stellar's SEP standards streamline KYC but do not remove it.
• Regulation is uneven. The EU's MiCA rules for e-money tokens have applied since 30 June 2024. The US GENIUS Act takes effect in practice on 18 January 2027 (see the GENIUS Act, explained). Many receiving countries have no specific framework, or restrict dollar-denominated instruments.
• Issuer and custody risk. Holding a stablecoin means trusting its reserves and the issuer's power to freeze addresses. Holding it in a wallet means managing keys; see Stellar wallets and DeFi risks.

Questions to ask before using a stablecoin route

Before relying on a stablecoin transfer, check the total landed amount in local currency, who operates each ramp and under what licence, how long cash-out takes in the recipient's country, and what happens if a ramp is unavailable. The cheapest route on paper is only cheap if both ends work.

• Landed amount. How much local currency arrives for a given amount sent, after every fee and spread?
• Who runs the ramps? Is the anchor or exchange licensed where it operates, and does it publish its fees?
• Cash-out time and hours. The chain runs 24/7; a bank payout may not.
• Which stablecoin? Know the issuer and how its reserves are reported.
• Fallback. If the off-ramp pauses, can the recipient hold the stablecoin safely, or sell it elsewhere?

The takeaway

The economics are clear on the part of the journey stablecoins control: settlement in seconds for a fraction of a cent, around the clock, with no correspondent chain. Whether a real payment ends up cheaper than a 4.59% digital remittance depends on ramps, FX and regulation in the specific corridor. Stellar has spent years building those edges, through MoneyGram and the anchor standards, and they are now the part that decides the outcome.

Sources: World Bank Remittance Prices Worldwide (Q1 and Q3 2025 reports); Financial Stability Board, G20 targets for enhancing cross-border payments and consolidated progress report (9 October 2025); MoneyGram press releases (10 June 2022; 22 April 2026); Stellar Development Foundation, "Three years with MoneyGram"; Stellar developer docs (fees; anchors and SEPs); ESMA (MiCA application dates); DefiLlama stablecoins API (2 October 2026).