Stablecoin settlement in emerging markets: liquidity, OTC, and cross-border payments

Mārtiņš Beņķītis, Co-Founder and CEO of Gravity Team, shares more about what institutional crypto liquidity means in emerging-market corridors, how stablecoin and fiat settlement work together in practice, and why the full payment route matters more than speed on-chain.

For readers who may be less familiar with the infrastructure behind crypto payments, what exactly does Gravity Team do?

Gravity Team started with my mother’s holiday. In 2017, I was living in Thailand, where crypto cost about 20 per cent more than in Europe. So I bought Bitcoin with euros in Europe, sent it to Thailand and sold it for baht, and she got about a 20 per cent better exchange rate for her trip.

That premium still exists today, especially in emerging markets carrying an increasingly large share of global flows, and where the correspondent banking network has retreated the most over the past decade. That has meant that emerging-market corridor settlement has become more difficult over the years, which has driven many liquidity providers away. That has, in turn, exacerbated the lack of liquidity and a settlement infrastructure, which is what Gravity Team has built over the past nine years, market by market and relationship by relationship.

What’s become very exciting recently is that we’ve seen demand for emerging-market corridor value movement skyrocket, and our hard-won settlement infrastructure in these markets has become the answer to that demand. We’re seeing strong growth from not just retail and remittances but cross-border businesses like payroll companies, financial institutions, and payment companies. That led us to open up access to our settlement infrastructure via an OTC desk for institutions in August. It brings the same pricing, banking relationships, and local know-how to companies that move money across borders.

Today, we provide liquidity on more than 40 exchanges and in most major emerging markets, we trade more than 25 per cent of local exchange volume.

Gravity Team has built its OTC business around emerging-market corridors and direct relationships with local banks and payment rails. What makes these markets particularly challenging for companies moving money internationally?

In major currency pairs, both currencies can move relatively freely between global venues, but in many emerging-market currencies, local payment-system rules and limited availability of foreign exchange create a different situation. The digital asset may move easily, but the local currency stays within its own market, and somebody needs to have the liquidity, fund that payout, and make a price for the transaction.

You also see local premiums and discounts that do not show up in a simple exchange-rate screen. They reflect the supply and demand for capital in that specific market, along with the cost of moving money through the available local infrastructure. A price that looks good globally may be impossible to execute at meaningful size locally.

That is why local relationships and years of trading the local books matter.

Liquidity is a term that is often used in crypto but not always well understood outside the industry. What does institutional crypto liquidity actually mean in practice?

Liquidity is basically the ability to buy or sell an asset at the size you need, at a price you can rely on, when you need to do it.

For an institution, liquidity means being able to execute a meaningful transaction without the price moving sharply during the trade, with a counterparty able to deliver the asset and complete settlement. The fundamental questions are: how much can actually be traded at that price, where does the liquidity come from, who is on the other side, and how does the money move once the trade is agreed?

That becomes especially important in fragmented markets. A price may look available, yet the amount available at that price can be very small. Good institutional liquidity gives firms a clearer view of what they can execute, what it will cost, and whether the transaction will settle as expected. That is what turns a market price into something usable.

Your new OTC desk offers T+0 fiat settlement in more than 20 currencies, while stablecoin settlement can take under 60 seconds. How does that work operationally?

Basically, a stablecoin payment has two legs. First, there is the on-chain transfer. A counterparty comes to us with a size, a currency pair, and a timing requirement. We quote the trade through an RFQ, agree the settlement instructions, and lock the price for a defined window. Once the stablecoin transfer is broadcast, confirmation can take under a minute.

The more difficult work sits on the fiat side. Someone has to make a price in the local currency, have access to that liquidity, fund the payout, and take responsibility if there is an exception. In markets where local currencies face capital controls or limited convertibility, that is a very different exercise from moving dollars between large global venues.

We have spent nine years trading those local books and building the relationships around them. So we manage the two legs together: the stablecoin transfer, the local price, and the final fiat payment. T+0 means the fiat leg can complete on the same day in applicable markets, subject to local payment-system hours and any compliance checks.

There is growing discussion about companies moving more of their transactions on-chain, including stablecoin settlement, rather than relying on traditional banking infrastructure. Do you expect this to replace parts of the existing system, or will the two continue to work together?

I see the system becoming more layered. On-chain settlement is very good at moving a digital asset around the clock, with a shared record of what has happened. That is useful for cross-border treasury movements, FX conversion and payments where timing, visibility and reconciliation matter.

Existing financial infrastructure will continue to handle a large part of the job. It provides customer accounts, identity checks, credit, local-currency access and the legal framework around a payment. Those are very real functions, especially when a business needs to pay a supplier or employee in the currency they actually use.

In practice, a company may use a stablecoin for the movement of value between two points, then rely on local payment infrastructure for the final payout. The practical question is not whether a payment touched a blockchain but whether the whole route works, from the sender’s account to usable funds at the destination.

That is where we are likely to see the most progress. Companies will use the rail that makes a particular part of the transaction faster, clearer, or less capital-intensive, while the wider financial system continues to provide the local access and accountability around it.

Looking ahead to 2027, what do you think will have changed most in the infrastructure for cross-border payments and digital-asset liquidity?

I think the visible change will be that on-chain settlement is treated as part of normal payments and treasury infrastructure. Companies are already testing it because it gives them an always-on way to move value and reconcile transactions. The work now is connecting that capability properly with their existing accounts, payment processes, and risk controls.

The bigger change will sit beneath the surface. Institutions will become much more focused on the full route: where the liquidity comes from, how a stablecoin converts into local currency, who funds the fiat leg, and what happens when a payment needs attention. That is the difference between a transfer moving quickly on-chain and a payment completing reliably in the real economy.

We will also see liquidity assessed more precisely by corridor and currency. A global headline number tells you very little about whether someone can execute size into a particular local market at a clear price and settle it on time. That is where the market is still doing the hard work.

The technology is moving quickly. The operating infrastructure needs to catch up.

About Mārtiņš Beņķītis

Mārtiņš Beņķītis is Co-Founder and CEO of Gravity Team, a global liquidity and settlement infrastructure provider founded in 2017. Under his leadership, Gravity has grown into a leading emerging-market crypto market maker and liquidity provider, handling more than USD 500 billion in cumulative spot trading volume, with connectivity to over 40 exchanges. He is a senior voice on the institutional pivot reshaping crypto OTC, the structural decline of correspondent banking, and what stablecoin-anchored settlement infrastructure means for institutions moving capital across emerging markets.

 

About Gravity Team

Gravity Team is a global liquidity and settlement infrastructure provider founded in 2017. The firm combines deep multi-asset liquidity with fiat and stablecoin settlement across global and emerging markets, offering a more reliable alternative to traditional rails for global capital movement. With more than USD 500 billion in cumulative spot trading volume, connectivity to over 40 exchanges and deep settlement networks spanning more than 45 key markets, and a boutique institutional OTC desk designed for stablecoin cross-border settlement, Gravity Team provides institutions, payment providers, and fintechs with the infrastructure to move capital at the speed required in modern digital finance. Find out more at www.gravityteam.co.