What’s the Difference Between the Stablecoin Networks Plasma and Stable?

In June 2025, two new blockchain networks burst onto the scene aiming to revolutionize stablecoins: Plasma and Stable. Both projects want to create dedicated ecosystems for stablecoin transactions, promising faster, cheaper, and more scalable transfers than existing general-purpose chains. Both even share backing from Tether/Bitfinex leadership. At first glance they appear similar – but on closer inspection, Plasma and Stable take very different approaches. One is building an open, Bitcoin-integrated hub for all stablecoins; the other is a laser-focused network optimized for USDT and institutional use. Here we compare Plasma vs. Stable and how each plans to improve stablecoin usage, as well as their connections to Tether.

• Niche Blockchains for Stablecoins: Plasma and Stable are both developing specialized Layer-1 blockchains tailor-made for stablecoin operations, to overcome limitations of using Ethereum, Tron, etc. for stablecoins.
• Tether/Bitfinex Backing: Both projects have financial and strategic backing from Bitfinex and are closely linked to Paolo Ardoino (CTO of Tether/Bitfinex). This suggests they’re part of a broader Tether ecosystem push, even if officially presented as independent efforts.
• Multi-Chain USDT (USDT0): A new multi-chain version of USDT, called USDT0, has been announced alongside these networks. It’s an omni-chain USDT that operates independently of Tether’s usual issuances. Both Plasma and Stable plan to support USDT0 from day one, enabling seamless transfers of liquidity across chains.
• No Native Gas Token Needed: Neither network will require a proprietary coin for transaction fees. Users won’t need to hold a native token to pay gas – both support using popular currencies (like USDT or BTC) for fees. Additionally, both promise free peer-to-peer stablecoin transfers for basic transactions (more on how this works below).

Background: Why New Stablecoin Networks?

By 2025, stablecoins have exploded in use far beyond crypto traders. Retail users use them for savings and payments, corporations hold them, and even governments are exploring them. The total stablecoin market cap now exceeds $240 billion, an all-time high, with Tether’s USDT still dominant at over 60% market share. However, current stablecoins mostly live on general blockchains like Ethereum, which are not optimized for high-volume stablecoin transactions. Users and businesses face issues like high gas fees and network congestion during peak times (for example, sending USDT on Ethereum can become slow and costly when the network is busy).

Plasma and Stable emerged to tackle these pain points by building networks specifically for stablecoins. In essence, they ask: what if we had a blockchain where moving stablecoins was near-instant, feeless, and as straightforward as possible? Both projects launched in the same month (June 2025). Plasma made a big splash with its fundraising and token sale, while Stable quietly announced itself after a year in stealth development.

It’s worth noting the Bitfinex/Tether connection:

• Plasma raised $24 million from investors including Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund, Bitfinex, and Tether’s Paolo Ardoino.
• Stable’s funding is undisclosed, but it’s known Bitfinex and USDT0’s issuer (Everdawn Labs) and investor Gabriel Abed provided backing.
  Officially, Tether is not running these chains. But given the shared investors and that Stable is exclusively about USDT, it’s likely these projects align with Tether’s vision to extend its stablecoin dominance via better tech.

Despite their similarities in origin and goal, Plasma and Stable occupy different niches and have significant technical differences. Let’s break down each one:

Plasma – A Bitcoin-Secured, EVM-Compatible Stablecoin Hub

Plasma is positioned as an independent Layer-1 blockchain fully EVM-compatible, but with a twist: it leverages the Bitcoin network for additional security. In fact, Plasma functions as a sort of Bitcoin sidechain dedicated to stablecoins.

Key features of Plasma:

• Bitcoin-Anchored Immutability: Plasma periodically writes a hash of its latest state into Bitcoin’s blockchain (using techniques akin to Bitcoin “inscriptions”). By anchoring state roots in Bitcoin blocks, Plasma gains Bitcoin’s immutability and security assurances – an attacker would have to alter Bitcoin’s ledger to tamper with Plasma’s history. This is similar in spirit to how some protocols timestamp data in Bitcoin for posterity.
• Native BTC Bridge: Plasma includes a built-in bridge that lets users move Bitcoin into the Plasma network as a wrapped asset. Bitcoin holders can lock BTC on Bitcoin and receive equivalent wrapped BTC on Plasma to use in DeFi or transfers. This bridge, along with Plasma’s consensus, is secured by Plasma’s validators. Essentially, Plasma wants to bring Bitcoin’s liquidity into the stablecoin chain, enabling BTC users to transact in a stablecoin environment seamlessly.
• PlasmaBFT Consensus: Plasma uses a proprietary consensus algorithm called PlasmaBFT, based on the HotStuff protocol. It’s a proof-of-stake BFT consensus which is robust even if >33% of validators are compromised (HotStuff is also used in Facebook’s Diem and Aptos, known for strong safety). This algorithm is optimized for high throughput by streamlining how nodes agree on blocks. Initially, Plasma will start with a permissioned set of validators (a few trusted nodes) to ensure stability. Over time, they plan to open this up to a more decentralized set of validators as the network matures.
• Two-Tier Transaction Model: Plasma introduces an innovative two-layer execution for transactions:Users can choose: send via the free pathway (and potentially wait longer) or pay a fee for immediate confirmation. To prevent abuse of the free tier (spam transactions that could bloat the chain), Plasma will enforce rate limits, minimum balance requirements, and consensus-level ordering rules on free transactions. Think of it as an economy class vs. express lane: most small everyday transfers (like paying a friend $10 in USDT) could be done free on Plasma if you’re willing to wait a bit, whereas traders or dApps can pay to get fast execution.
  • Layer 1: Handles normal smart contract operations, complex transactions, and priority payments. These require a fee (gas) like any blockchain.
  • Layer 2: (Within Plasma’s design, not to be confused with Layer-2 scaling) Dedicated to simple stablecoin transfers that carry no fee. These free transfers are processed in a queued manner, not instantly.
• Shielded Transactions (with Compliance): Plasma plans to offer shielded transfers, meaning users can send stablecoins without revealing transaction details publicly. This is likely similar to Monero or Zcash-style privacy for stablecoin payments. However, Plasma emphasizes it will implement this “in full compliance with regulatory requirements.” This suggests a design where transactions are private on-chain, but can be decrypted or traced by authorities if needed (perhaps via view keys or a semi-trusted audit authority). The backdrop is that many regulators are moving to ban fully anonymous crypto transactions, so Plasma is treading carefully to enable privacy and appease regulators.
• XPL Token (But Not Required for Users): Plasma will have a native token, XPL, used for staking (validator collateral) and possibly governance and paying fees. However, importantly, users don’t need to hold XPL to use the network. Plasma will allow gas fees to be paid in popular currencies like USDT or even BTC. This is a big user-experience win – you can come to Plasma with just the stablecoins you already have, and transact without ever touching a new token.
• Open Stablecoin Hub: Plasma is not limited to USDT. It’s a general EVM chain, so theoretically any Ethereum-based stablecoin or DeFi protocol can deploy on Plasma. The team has already signaled openness by partnering with BiLira (TRYB), a Turkish lira stablecoin, as a launch partner. That implies other fiat-pegged coins, and potentially EUR stablecoins, algorithmic stablecoins, etc., could live on Plasma. Furthermore, with EVM compatibility, Plasma can host DEXes, lending markets, collateralized debt protocols and all sorts of DeFi that revolve around stablecoins. It could even become a DeFi hub for Bitcoin liquidity: Bitcoin holders bridge in BTC and then use stablecoins and Bitcoin in lending/borrowing or liquidity pools on Plasmai.

In short, Plasma’s niche is to be a “universal stablecoin blockchain” – a one-stop network where any stablecoin can transact cheaply, and where Bitcoin’s security and liquidity are leveraged. It’s like building a new home for stablecoins that combines the best of Bitcoin (trust) and Ethereum (flexibility) technologies.

Given these ambitions, one might wonder: if Plasma can handle USDT transfers with zero fees and high speed, why would Tether need another chain? That brings us to Stable.

Stable – A Purpose-Built USDT Transaction Network

Stable is another Layer-1 blockchain launched in mid-2025, but it’s laser-focused on one thing: USDT (Tether’s dollar stablecoin). In fact, it centers on a special variant of USDT called USDT0. Where Plasma aims to be broad and open, Stable aims to be fast and strictly optimized for USDT movement, likely with a strong element of centralized control to ensure reliability and compliance.

Key characteristics of Stable:

• Consensus and Speed: Stable uses a custom consensus called StableBFT, built atop CometBFT (formerly Tendermint). This suggests it’s a Byzantine Fault Tolerant proof-of-stake mechanism with instant finality. They boast sub-second finality already, and plan to upgrade to an even more advanced DAG-based protocol named Autobahn to exceed 200,000 transactions per second and halve finality time. These figures are extremely high – 200k TPS is an order of magnitude beyond most current chains – indicating an emphasis on throughput for small transactions. Autobahn (with a DAG structure) might allow parallel processing of transactions for throughput gains.
• dPoS Validators: Stable will run on a Delegated Proof-of-Stake model. This means a fixed (likely small) number of validators produce blocks, and they are chosen by stakeholders who delegate tokens to them. It’s not fully permissionless – it’s somewhat akin to EOS or Tron in governance. Validators get rewarded via transaction fees. The relatively centralized validator set aligns with Stable’s enterprise focus (easier to coordinate a known group of validators for performance and compliance).
• EVM via Module: While Stable will support smart contracts, it does so through a module called StableEVM rather than at its core. So the base chain handles the core payment ledger, and an add-on module provides EVM compatibility for those who want to deploy Ethereum-like contracts. This separation possibly allows the core to be lean and fast for payments, while still giving developers an option to build on it if needed. The team is also working on precompiles – basically built-in contracts that allow interacting with core functions like minting USDT on chain (useful for issuing tokens or bridging).
• USDT0 as Native Token: Here’s the crux – USDT is effectively the native currency of Stable. They implement this via a mechanism called gasUSDT. Users on Stable pay fees in USDT, but under the hood the network converts those to a gas token. For the user, it feels like USDT itself is gas. This is novel – imagine Ethereum where you pay gas in DAI stablecoin instead of ETH. On Stable, if Alice sends Bob 100 USDT, the network might take e.g. 0.001 USDT out of that and burn it as gas (or send to validators), but Alice doesn’t need any other coin. The team promises that P2P transfers of USDT will be free for users likely meaning the gas for simple transfers is zero or subsidized by the system, and gasUSDT is mainly for contract interactions or priority service.
• Guaranteed Blockspace: Stable plans a feature called “guaranteed blockspace” for enterprise clients. This means a business can pay or reserve capacity such that their transactions will always be processed even if the network is congested. It’s like QoS (quality of service) for blockchain: an institution could ensure, for example, that their large payroll transaction or bulk transfer gets into blocks despite traffic. This appeals to businesses that need reliability for critical payments.
• Shielded Transfers with Compliance: Like Plasma, Stable will offer shielded (private) transactions, but with the ability to reveal details to comply with KYC/AML rules. They explicitly mention adherence to KYC/AML and likely integration with Bitfinex’s verification systems. This ties into USDT0’s nature (only verified users can get it). Essentially, Stable transactions can be confidential among users, but regulators or authorized entities could trace them if required.
• User-Friendly Wallet (Web2.5): Stable is developing a “Web 2.5” wallet for an easy user experience. This wallet will allow account creation via social logins (Google, etc.) or email, abstracting away seed phrases for newcomers. It also introduces Stable Name Service – human-readable addresses (like an ENS domain, e.g. “alice.stable”) so that sending stablecoins is as easy as sending an email. This indicates that Stable is targeting a more mass-market, possibly non-crypto-savvy audience who just want a simple app to send money.
• USDT0 – The Exclusive Asset: The only stablecoin on Stable at launch will be USDT0. USDT0 is a new variant of Tether on LayerZero’s Omnichain Fungible Token standard. Notably, USDT0 is issued by Everdawn Labs (not Tether) and only accessible via Bitfinex after full KYC. This highly controlled issuance means USDT0 users are verified; it’s a permissioned stablecoin. USDT0 acts as a bridge token: you can seamlessly swap it to native USDT on any supported chain through the LayerZero infrastructure, with Stable handling the gas and conversion. In effect, Stable chain becomes a clearing house for USDT – you could hold USDT0 on Stable and send value to, say, Solana USDT, and the system will convert and deliver it without you needing to touch an exchange. This opens up Tether’s entire liquidity pool from one place. It’s like Stable is the SWIFT network for USDT: one account (USDT0) can reach any blockchain’s USDT.The heavy centralization around USDT0 (Bitfinex gating access, Everdawn issuing) means Stable is not a general-purpose chain – it’s almost an extension of Tether/Bitfinex’s platform but on public infrastructure. It gives Tether fine control (they can ensure compliance, freeze if needed, etc. through Bitfinex accounts) while still achieving decentralization of transaction processing.

In sum, Stable’s niche is high-speed, compliant stablecoin payments, primarily serving Tether’s ecosystem and TradFi clients who want to use USDT as a settlement currency. It’s less about hosting a variety of tokens (at launch it’s USDT0-only) and more about delivering a better payments network using USDT. You can think of Stable as an attempt to create a crypto version of Visa or FedWire for stablecoins – extremely fast, low-cost transfers, but within a somewhat closed user universe (since to use it fully, you end up using USDT0 which requires verification).

Practical Differences and Use Cases

So how do Plasma and Stable stack up against each other, and where might each be used?

Technological Approach: Plasma is EVM-first, leveraging Bitcoin for security, and embraces a more decentralized ethos (at least eventually). Stable is speed-first, using a classic BFT consensus and later DAG, with a smaller validator set and modular EVM. Plasma’s design is like building a new Ethereum sidechain anchored to Bitcoin, while Stable’s design is more akin to a high-speed permissioned ledger opened up just enough to use on public blockchain.

Stablecoin Scope: Plasma is a multi-stablecoin hub. It’s open to USDT, USDC, Dai, Euro T, BiLira, and even wrapped assets like wBTC – all potentially coexisting and interacting. Stable is single-stablecoin (USDT0) focused. In fact, it’s essentially part of USDT’s internal infrastructure, not a generic chain for other issuers (at least for now). This means if you want to build, say, a DeFi protocol for multiple stablecoins, Plasma is the natural choice. If you specifically want to integrate deeply with USDT treasury or Bitfinex offerings, Stable might offer unique features.

Target Users: Plasma will appeal to crypto-native users and developers who want a better chain for stablecoin DeFi – think yield farming with zero gas fees on stable swaps, or trading with minimal fees, or moving liquidity between Bitcoin and stablecoin pools easily. Its free-transfer tier can attract retail users in emerging markets looking for feeless remittances (if they can tolerate some delay). Stable, on the other hand, is clearly angled towards TradFi and fintech clients. Its selling points like guaranteed blockspace, KYC integration, and user-friendly wallets suggest it’s trying to court businesses (fintech apps, payment processors) and even banks to use USDT for fast settlements. For example, a fintech app could integrate Stable’s wallet SDK, letting users send dollars globally in seconds with no fees, all within a compliant framework. Meanwhile, that fintech or a bank could be comfortable knowing the network has circuit breakers and identities attached.

Governance and Control: Plasma, by virtue of being more open, could evolve with community input – e.g., XPL token holders might influence its direction. Stable, tied to Tether/Bitfinex, will likely be guided by those entities’ strategic decisions. It’s essentially infrastructure for Tether, so decisions like adding support for something other than USDT0 would depend on Tether’s plans.

Privacy: Both offer “shielded” transfers with regulatory caveats. No big difference here; both acknowledge regulators (the EU, etc.) are banning anonymous crypto, so they build in optional transparency. Possibly the technical method differs, but conceptually similar.

Current Status (as of mid-2025): Plasma conducted a hugely popular token sale deposit event in June 2025, attracting around $1 billion in deposits within minutes a sign of strong market interest (though it also drew criticism for favoring whales in early rounds). It is in testnet and gearing up for mainnet beta. Stable emerged from stealth around the same time; it did not do a public sale and remains more of a dark horse with details mainly from docs. It likely will launch quietly and possibly even directly integrated in Bitfinex products.

Relation to Tether: Both networks can be seen as extensions of Tether’s strategy to maintain USDT’s dominance. By solving scalability (Plasma) and user experience/compliance (Stable), Tether can preempt competitors. If all USDT users gradually move to transacting on Plasma/Stable networks, USDT becomes even stickier (why switch to another stablecoin when USDT is now as fast/cheap as any alternative?). Also, the introduction of USDT0 suggests Tether (via Bitfinex/Everdawn) wants to separate retail flow from institutional/back-end flow: USDT0 could be the pipeline connecting all chains (with KYC), while normal USDT remains on each chain but fungibly linked.

To illustrate their differences with an analogy used by some analysts:

• Plasma is like the “HyperEVM” (referring to Hyperliquid’s open EVM mode) – it’s an open platform that can do lots of things (many assets, smart contracts), not unlike a public city square where anyone can set up shop.
• Stable is like the original “Hyperliquid” – a specialized environment purpose-built for one experience (like Hyperliquid built a custom chain for its exchange). Stable is more closed, streamlined for its specific use (USDT payments).

In practical terms:

• If you are a DeFi user wanting to farm yield on stablecoins or trade them without Ethereum fees, you might gravitate to Plasma, where a whole ecosystem of stablecoin-centric dApps could flourish.
• If you are a corporation or fintech looking to adopt crypto for cross-border payments or treasury management, you might prefer Stable, where you can get guaranteed throughput, no exposure to gas token volatility, and an out-of-the-box compliance framework (via USDT0 and Bitfinex’s KYC).

Both networks underscore a larger trend: the rise of “stablecoin-specific blockchains.” Just as some projects built chains for specific DeFi niches (order-book exchanges like Hyperliquid, or app-chains for gaming), now stablecoins – arguably crypto’s killer app – are getting custom infrastructure. This could herald a phase where stablecoin transactions migrate off general chains (Ethereum, etc.) onto these tailored networks, much like how certain trading moved from Ethereum to dYdX’s StarkEx or similar.

Ultimately, Plasma and Stable are complementary more than direct competitors. In fact, they are linked by USDT0, meaning a user might leverage both: e.g., use Stable’s wallet to onboard and get USDT0 with KYC, then move USDT0 into Plasma to participate in DeFi, all with conversions handled behind the scenes. It’s conceivable that Tether envisions an ecosystem where Stable is the regulated portal and fast payment rail, while Plasma is the open playground for crypto innovation – both anchored by USDT liquidity.

For everyday users and developers, the emergence of these networks is promising:

• Users should eventually see cheaper and faster stablecoin transactions, whether it’s paying friends, remitting overseas, or moving funds between exchanges. Imagine sending $100 in USDT to anyone, instantly, with no fee – that’s the goal.
• Developers get new canvases without the limitations of legacy chains – they can build apps where transaction fees or speed aren’t deal-breakers, opening the door to microtransaction use cases, high-frequency trading, or IoT payments using stablecoins.
• Traditional businesses gain a bridge to digital assets that is regulated and convenient. Stable’s integration of identity and guaranteed performance could ease corporate treasurers or fintech product managers into using stablecoins instead of slow bank wires.

And notably, all this reinforces Tether’s position. If USDT (via USDT0) becomes the common denominator across a multi-chain stablecoin network (with Bitfinex providing convertibility and liquidity), it’s a moat against competitors like USDC or others. Tether effectively would own the infrastructure layer as well as the asset layer.

In conclusion, Plasma vs. Stable can be summarized thus:

• Plasma – the open stablecoin “standard” chain: EVM-compatible, anchored to Bitcoin, multi-asset, aiming for a broad DeFi-centric ecosystem around stablecoins.
• Stable – the fast payments chain for USDT: ultra-high throughput, USDT-native gas, institutional orientation, aiming to modernize how money (via USDT) moves, especially for TradFi needs.

Both are likely to coexist, serving different audiences, and together they mark a significant evolution in the stablecoin sector. By building dedicated infrastructure, stablecoins could become more scalable, user-friendly, and integrated with traditional finance than ever before. For the crypto industry, this specialization could foster innovation (no more relying on clogged Ethereum for stablecoin use), and for users globally, it means stablecoin technology inching closer to fulfilling its promise as a universal digital cash network.