2026-01-18 20:21:17

I've been following various public chain projects lately and realized that the current market is basically stuck in a vicious cycle—everyone is competing over who has higher TPS and lower costs, and this arms race never ends. It wasn't until I came across the Plasma XPL project that I suddenly saw the light; they aren't trying to compete in that arena but have opened up a completely new direction.

In simple terms, this is a Layer1 designed specifically for stablecoin settlement. Instead of following the path of general-purpose public chains, they pivot into the vertical track of payments. This choice itself is quite interesting.

From a technical perspective, the design details are very meticulous. Full EVM compatibility means Ethereum developers and applications can migrate seamlessly, reducing learning and redevelopment costs to zero. Sub-second finality guarantees make stablecoin transfers truly instant, which is a must-have for high-frequency payment scenarios.

The most intriguing features are twofold—gas-free USDT transfers and a priority gas mechanism for stablecoins. A friend of mine involved in Southeast Asian cross-border e-commerce was recently complaining about the slim profit margins due to gas fees on small transfers. This design directly targets that pain point.

Another detail worth noting is that it adopts a Bitcoin-pegged security model. In an environment with heavy compliance pressure, this approach is quite clever—leveraging Bitcoin’s hash power to enhance censorship resistance and neutrality. For payment institutions and financial organizations that require regulatory approval, this provides a very convincing security guarantee.

I believe the core value of Plasma XPL isn’t in "disruption," but in "targeted" solutions. It doesn’t try to swallow the entire crypto payment ecosystem in one bite but precisely addresses the real needs of stablecoin payments, tackling technical challenges one by one. This small but refined vertical breakthrough is indeed quite rare in the current public chain market.

XPL-6,63%

ETH-3,15%

BTC-2,4%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

7 Likes

Reward
7
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

HalfBuddhaMoney

· 4h ago

Wow, finally someone is not obsessed with TPS anymore. This mindset is really clear-headed. --- Stablecoin Layer 1? Feels like capturing the core pain point of payments. --- Gasless USDT transfers—Southeast Asian guys would be crying if they heard about this. --- Bitcoin anchoring is indeed clever; passing compliance is the key. --- Not following the arms race, but instead vertically breaking through a single track—that's real innovation. --- EVM compatibility saves the hassle of reworking; developer migration costs are directly reduced to zero. Good idea. --- Sub-second finality—really what high-frequency payments need. --- Small but refined vertical breakthroughs? Indeed, projects like this are rare nowadays. --- Can't keep up with TPS? Turning to payment scenarios is also a way out. --- Gas issues have really killed many small transfers; this design hits the mark.

View OriginalReply0

ser_ngmi

· 11h ago

Wow, finally someone is not obsessed with TPS, feeling refreshing. Are you tired of the obsession? Me too. In the payment sector, being more vertical is actually more practical. Gas fees eat up half of the profit. My friend also mentioned this. The design of XPL really hits the point. Regarding Bitcoin backing, in today's strict compliance environment, it indeed has persuasive power. Not overthrowing but targeting—this philosophy I like, much more reliable than those bragging. Stablecoin payments are a necessity; there's no need to make everything a universal chain. Specialization is more competitive. EVM compatibility simplifies things; developers can migrate directly, which shows thoughtful planning. Sub-second finality really fits payment scenarios, unlike some chains that just talk but don’t practice. Precise targeting > comprehensive solutions. There are too many all-in-one players in the market now, which is actually dead weight. I'm a bit looking forward to the future development of this chain, although I don't know if the ecosystem can keep up. Payment is a niche but essential path; early deployment should benefit from the dividends.

View OriginalReply0

SandwichDetector

· 11h ago

Well, finally someone is thinking outside the box. This approach is indeed clear-headed. --- Stablecoin payments—after waiting so long, someone is finally taking action. --- Gasless USDT transfers? If this can really be implemented, cross-border small merchants will be saved. --- The Bitcoin anchoring move truly shows an understanding of the current compliance landscape. --- Vertical tracks are good, but I worry it will just become another PPT project. --- Instead of competing on TPS, focusing on payment scenarios—this reverse approach looks promising. --- The key still depends on execution. No matter how good the technical architecture is, if users don’t buy in, it’s all for nothing. --- Designing around pain points > blind racing; this logic makes sense. --- Small but refined... I’ve heard too many such promises. Let’s wait until the ecosystem is built. --- EVM compatibility reduces costs, which actually lowers the risk of ecosystem migration.

View OriginalReply0

HashRateHermit

· 11h ago

The idea of a vertical track is indeed clear, and not competing on TPS with everyone is truly the way to go. The necessity of payment scenarios is solid, and I think the priority mechanism for stablecoins works. However, can the Bitcoin anchoring system really convince institutions? It still depends on subsequent actions. Solving the Gas fee issue is the key for cross-border payments to truly take off. Your friend's pain point is actually a market gap.

View OriginalReply0