Airwallex CEO’s Bearish Take on Stablecoins Ignites Public Outcry: Why Is Traditional Finance Getting Anxious?

#Airwallex #crypto #web3

On June 8, Jack Zhang, co-founder and CEO of Airwallex, publicly voiced deep skepticism about the value of stablecoins. Here’s what he posted on X:“Investors keep asking me about stablecoin, and how that can reduce FX fees; if you send money from USD to EUR, and the receiving end still requires to receive EUR in their bank, I can’t see any ways stablecoin can reduce fees — off ramping from stablecoin to recipient currency are far more expensive than the FX interbank market.”

In fact, back on June 7, Zhang had already expressed doubts about stablecoins, stating:“Stablecoins can’t reduce remittance costs between major fiat currencies; crypto has failed to present a clear real-world use case in the past 15 years.”
His post on the 8th was clearly an extension of his stance from the 7th.

Jack Zhang is clearly bearish on stablecoins. He believes crypto as a financial product is overly abstract, unanchored from tangible social value — a purely zero-sum game, a castle in the sky. This triggered massive backlash across the crypto community, which responded swiftly and fiercely.

The crypto community argued that Airwallex, Zhang’s company, is part of the traditional cross-border payments sector, representing the old financial system. From their perspective, Airwallex has an inherent bias against the freedom brought by emerging payment infrastructures. After several days of debate, this incident has evolved into a very public face-off between legacy and crypto-native payment systems.

At the same time, it reflects a broader reality: crypto finance has grown from an ignored niche into a core battleground of mainstream finance — one that now poses a real challenge to the dominance of traditional players.

• Click to register SuperEx
• Click to download the SuperEx APP
• Click to enter SuperEx CMC
• Click to enter SuperEx DAO Academy — Space

Traditional Finance Through the Lens of Jack Zhang

Airwallex is a leading global platform for enterprise-level cross-border payments, with operations spanning over 50 countries. Its core offerings include international collection accounts, multi-currency corporate cards, and global transfers. In May 2025, Airwallex completed a Series F round of financing, bringing its valuation to $6.2 billion and total funding to $1.2 billion, with backers like Tencent, Sequoia China, DST, and Hillhouse Capital.

As Airwallex’s founder and CEO, Jack Zhang has long operated in the heart of global fintech. His stance is not hard to understand: the business model he’s built is fundamentally reliant on the existing global financial infrastructure — a complex system of multi-currency clearing, interbank liquidity pools, and compliance licensing. Within that framework, Airwallex holds a highly advantageous position, especially with its licenses and local settlement capabilities across jurisdictions. In short, it is a beneficiary of the old financial order.

From his point of view, crypto assets — particularly stablecoins — have yet to pose a real threat to fiat FX corridors between G10 currencies. Today’s interbank FX markets are highly liquid, with ultra-low costs (Airwallex claims its cross-border transfer fees can be as low as 0.01%). Under such conditions, stablecoin alternatives seem redundant.

But the issue is: Jack Zhang’s assessment is rooted in the assumption that traditional clearing systems are sufficient. He overlooks the core value of crypto payments — not to replace SWIFT with a faster version, but to build a permissionless, globally accessible, and sovereign-free financial architecture. This is where the fundamental divide in worldview lies between crypto advocates and traditional finance professionals.

The Crypto Community’s Fierce Rebuttal

Zhang’s bearish comments on stablecoins sparked immediate backlash from the crypto space. Prominent figures and project founders stepped forward to refute not just his technical assumptions, but also the entire financial paradigm he represents.

Matt Sorg, Head of Technology at the Solana Foundation, pointed out that cross-currency settlements via stablecoins are already functional on-chain. Euro stablecoin projects can now enable conversions with just a few basis points in cost. Numerous wallets and payment apps are developing seamless bridges from stablecoins to traditional bank accounts. Under the hood, this represents a disintermediation of payment layers — undermining the value proposition of firms like Airwallex.

A more direct response came from Huma Finance co-founder Richard Liu, who stressed that while traditional payment platforms claim high efficiency, that efficiency is built on layers of compliance and market access barriers. For many underserved users — particularly small merchants, migrants, and freelancers in developing nations — Airwallex’s services remain costly and limiting. In contrast, stablecoins offer them a new window of financial possibility.

Others argued that the “killer app” for stablecoins isn’t replacing Visa or banks — but building a global financial operating system that doesn’t rely on bank accounts at all. In this context, USDT and USDC are not just on-chain mirrors of the dollar — they are permission slips for the average person to participate in global economic activity. That’s the real disruptive power of stablecoins.

Interests Define Positions: This Is a Turf War Between Payment Empires

This debate around stablecoins isn’t just a difference in opinion. It reflects a real conflict of interest between traditional financial stakeholders and the rising forces of new financial technology.

If stablecoins go mainstream and become a standard for cross-border payments, they would fundamentally disrupt the revenue model of entities like Airwallex, Wise, and SWIFT. As more young users worldwide adopt on-chain wallets and crypto accounts, traditional players will see their customer base erode and their long-tail markets shrink rapidly. That’s what’s really making Jack Zhang nervous.

More importantly, stablecoins are no longer confined to crypto-native circles. Jurisdictions like the U.S., Hong Kong, and Singapore are actively rolling out regulatory frameworks for stablecoins. Players like Circle are moving toward IPOs. The march toward full compliance is accelerating. What was once seen as a fringe financial tool is now becoming a legitimate, regulated asset class recognized by capital markets.

Companies like Airwallex now face the reality of a blockchain-based financial world — one that doesn’t depend on banks or SWIFT. As crypto KOL BroLeon aptly put it:“Airwallex runs on the rules of the old world. Stablecoins are laying the foundations of a new one.”

That’s why Zhang’s remarks stirred such a fierce reaction — not just a battle of opinions, but a struggle over status and order. At this turning point between old and new paradigms, any dismissive view from traditional incumbents is inevitably seen as a defensive maneuver.

Conclusion

Jack Zhang’s comments undoubtedly made waves across the financial and crypto sectors. But in the grand scheme of things, this stablecoin debate represents a paradigm collision between the old financial world and the emerging one.

Stablecoins are not perfect payment solutions. But the values they represent — global access, decentralization, transparency, programmability, and permissionless innovation — are being embraced by a growing number of people. As the U.S. dollar moves toward digitalization, assets like USDT and USDC are becoming the foundational tools for cross-border trade, savings, investment, and spending.

At its core, this debate marks a historical turning point — from closed systems to open finance, from license-based monopoly to technological neutrality. Whether you’re a financial elite like Jack Zhang or a crypto-native builder, you’re part of this transformation.

The future hasn’t arrived yet — but it’s getting closer.
Whether stablecoins are a castle in the sky or the engine of a payments revolution, will ultimately be determined by the market, by users, and by time.

What’s certain is: this battle has only just begun.

（Disclaimer:The views and analysis presented in this article are for market commentary and discussion purposes only. They do not represent the official position or endorsement of SuperEx.）