#成长值抽奖赢iPhone17和周边

In a new phase of intense volatility in the global cryptocurrency market, the "stability" of stablecoins has once again come under the spotlight.

Recently, the international rating agency S&P Global Ratings downgraded the stability rating of the world's largest stablecoin USDT to the lowest level "Weak/Weak (C grade)". This rare move quickly drew widespread attention from the industry.

For a stablecoin with a circulation of over 100 billion dollars, which occupies a major liquidity position in the cryptocurrency market, this downgrade undoubtedly has an industry-wide impact and has sparked ongoing discussions about whether "stablecoins are still stable."

This event is not isolated, but rather a concentrated outbreak of long-standing controversies surrounding stablecoin reserve disclosures, asset security, redemption capabilities, and regulatory progress over the past few years.

Is the "blow-up concern" regarding USDT reasonable? Is the stability of stablecoins being eroded in the future? This is the most urgent question the market needs answered right now.

Why did S&P downgrade its rating? The stability foundation of USDT is shaking.
S&P stated in its latest report that the overall stability of USDT is at its weakest level, mainly due to significant changes in its reserve structure and transparency.

USDT has consistently claimed to be backed by low-risk assets such as "cash and cash equivalents, short-term U.S. Treasury bills," but the latest disclosures indicate that the risk exposure of its reserve assets is rapidly increasing.

Among the most notable is the significant increase in the proportion of Bitcoin holdings. According to the report, approximately 5.6% of the USDT reserves consist of Bitcoin, while its formulated excess collateral ratio is only about 3.9%.

This means that once the price of Bitcoin drops significantly, the reserve coverage of USDT will not be able to effectively absorb such volatility. This is also one of the key reasons why S&P has specifically named USDT.

Moreover, the reserves of USDT also include more volatile or credit-sensitive assets such as precious metals, corporate bonds, and secured loans. S&P noted that the proportion of high-risk assets in USDT is rising from about 17% in the past to approximately 24%, creating a significant structural risk.

At the same time, S&P emphasizes that Tether still lacks transparency, auditing mechanisms, custody structures, and counterparty risk disclosures. Compared to money market funds and commercial paper in the traditional financial system that can be strictly regulated and audited regularly, the collateral portfolio of USDT resembles "a basket of unregulated investment-type assets."

Against this backdrop, S&P made the decision to downgrade the stability rating of USDT to the lowest level. Although the rating agency still acknowledges that USDT has demonstrated relative stability during dozens of extreme market conditions in the past, this cannot offset the fact that its structural risks are expanding.

Why is USDT becoming increasingly "risky"?
From an industry perspective, the shift of USDT's reserve structure towards high-risk assets is not accidental, but an inevitable extension of its business model.

The profit model of USDT mainly relies on the interest margin generated by its issuance volume. As global interest rates fluctuate, Tether has gradually increased the proportion of non-traditional collateral assets such as Bitcoin, gold, corporate bonds, and structured credit in its search for higher-yielding assets to maintain profit margins and expansion capability. This behavior can create a positive cycle during the prosperity of the crypto market, but it may bring significant vulnerability when the market is under pressure.

The deeper reason lies in the fact that USDT itself is not subject to unified global financial regulations.

Unlike banks, money market funds, or regulated compliant stablecoins, USDT does not need to undergo regular audits by government agencies, nor does it need to disclose its asset custody pathways or more detailed counterparty information. The lack of sufficient regulation gives it greater freedom, but also means that its risk level is more reliant on the issuer's own decisions.

In this situation, when regulation tightens and the market still has high demand, a simple question arises: Does Tether have the motivation to maintain a sufficiently high safety margin? The conclusion from S&P is clearly pessimistic.

Is the risk of a USDT crash high? Are the market's concerns exaggerated?
Although the downgrade in ratings has a significant impact, it does not mean that USDT will immediately "collapse". On the contrary, from the perspective of short-term market performance, USDT still maintains its 1:1 redemption stability, and there has been no obvious contraction in demand and liquidity.

The advantages of USDT still include:

Huge market share and use cases

Maintained anchoring despite multiple experiences of market panic.

Massive exchanges and cross-chain protocols rely on it as a fundamental liquidity.

The operational capabilities brought about by sustained high profits

These factors determine that USDT remains the "core liquidity hub" of the global cryptocurrency market, and a comprehensive run or credit collapse is unlikely to occur in the short term.

However, "short-term stability" does not mean "long-term worry-free."

The downgrade by S&P reveals structural risks rather than current payment ability issues. As regulatory policies tighten, the volatility of risk assets such as Bitcoin increases, and competitors (like USDC, government stablecoins, and bank digital currencies) rise, the pressure on USDT will continue to increase.

In a sense, this is more like a "early warning bell."

Are stablecoins still stable? The future direction of the industry is changing.
The rating event of USDT has once again sparked a core question from the outside world: Is the stablecoin still "stable"? The regulatory directions of various countries around the globe are providing a clear answer, which is that "stablecoins must be more transparent, more regulated, and must disclose risks like financial products."

From the United States, the European Union to the UAE, South Korea, and Singapore, regulators are demanding:

Regular audits are mandatory.

Must be supported by highly liquid assets.

Must disclose custodial and counterparty information.

Regulatory agencies must be allowed to intervene.

In other words, stablecoins are moving towards normalization and financialization, while the "free issuance era" of the traditional cryptocurrency industry is coming to an end.

In this major trend:

The future pressure of the "black box reserve model" represented by USDT will continue to rise,

Conversely, stablecoins issued by banks or government regulatory agencies may gradually gain higher market trust.

Conclusion: USDT has not exploded, but the risks have been highlighted.
The "explosion" of USDT has not occurred, but its risks have been marked by regulators, rating agencies, and the market.

The downgrade by S&P is not a death sentence for it, but rather a risk reminder—prompting the market to examine the essential question of whether "stablecoins are truly stable."

For investors and institutions, what really deserves attention is not whether "USDT will collapse," but rather:

In a future financial system that is stricter and more transparent, can USDT continue to maintain its dominant position?

Will the stablecoin industry undergo a transformational revolution?

It is certain that stablecoins will remain the core of the global crypto financial system, but their "stability" will increasingly belong not to the market, but to regulation, transparency, and asset quality.

The battle for stablecoins has just begun.