Tokenised deposit vs EMT stablecoin: the debate the HSBC report leaves open
The HSBC report neutralises the debate under the label “digital money continuum”. A convenient narrative that masks structural differences in governance, risk and distribution between the tokenised deposit and the MiCA-regulated EMT stablecoin.
On-chain settlement, DvP of tokenised assets, cross-border, crypto markets
The “continuum” is a reality of use for the treasurer, not of architecture: the two models will coexist, segmented by use case.OpenbanQ reading
03What is at stake behind the “continuum”
Defending the bank balance sheetThe tokenised deposit protects the deposit franchise and money creation; the EMT moves value out to sterilised reserves. HSBC's choice is as defensive as it is technological.
The treasurer's trade-offCounterparty and guarantee, cut-offs, remuneration, TMS/ERP integration, accounting treatment: the two instruments do not meet the same needs, so treasurers will have to mix them.
Interoperability: the real battlegroundWithout a common interbank scheme (standards, directories, bridges), tokenised deposits remain silos per bank. EMTs win by default on network openness.
The European regulatory horizonEBA on EMTs, the Eurosystem (Pontes / Appia) on wholesale settlement: the grey zone of tokenised deposits outside MiCA will not last. Better to anticipate than to be caught out.
Sources : HSBC report on digital money; EURCV and EURXT MiCA white papers; OpenbanQ analysis.