What Banks Need To Include in Stablecoin Strategy

Stablecoins may diversify payment rails, but they also give fraudsters a new place to try old tactics—and introduce risks that are specific to digital assets. 

In “New Currency, Same Dangers: Stablecoins and Familiar Risk Vectors,” published in the June 2026 ProSight Executive Report, Katie Kuehner-Hebert examines the decisions facing banks as they consider issuing stablecoins, participating in consortiums, or connecting customers to existing networks. The scale of illicit activity underscores the stakes: Chainalysis estimated that crypto scams and fraud generated $17 billion in stolen funds in 2025, while stablecoins accounted for roughly 84% of all illicit on-chain volume. 

For banks weighing their options, the risk considerations begin here: 

Expect old schemes in a new environment. Social engineering, phishing, malware, mule accounts, and synthetic identities remain part of the playbook. Criminals can use stolen private keys to access wallets or move fiat currency onto stablecoin platforms and convert illicit stablecoins back into traditional currency. 

Prepare for risks native to blockchain networks. Fake tokens, spoofed addresses, and smart contract vulnerabilities add another layer. A customer may unknowingly interact with fraudulent versions of legitimate infrastructure, while a flaw in a decentralized application can lead to unrecoverable losses. 

Account for limited recovery options. Stablecoin users currently lack some protections available for conventional currency transactions, including mandated unauthorized-transfer protection and required error-resolution processes. As Wipfli partner Anna Kooi explains, “Stablecoin transactions are also irreversible, so once funds are off-ramped, recovery odds collapse.” 

Match controls to the operating model. A bank issuing its own stablecoin gains greater control and visibility, along with direct responsibility for onboarding, sanctions compliance, transaction monitoring, reserves, cybersecurity, and fraud prevention. Consortium participation can spread operational demands but introduces questions about governance, liability, reimbursement, and incident response. Connecting to an outside network reduces the operational burden while increasing dependence on the issuer’s controls, transparency, and security. 

Keep responsibility in view when outsourcing. Third-party arrangements do not remove the bank’s exposure. “The bank’s name is the one on the relationship,” Kooi says. Strong programs may require wallet screening, behavioral analytics, real-time transaction monitoring, sanctions screening, and robust third-party risk management. 

The takeaway: Stablecoin planning reaches well beyond the payment itself. As Chainalysis’s Caitlin Barnett puts it, successful institutions will treat adoption as “a modernization of financial crime compliance and fraud prevention infrastructure.” 

Financial-services leaders at banks and credit unions can also participate in ProSight’s inaugural State of Fraud Prevention Survey. The confidential survey takes about 10–15 minutes, and participants will receive exclusive access to key findings before the public release.