New framework sees USDC, AUSD, and USD0 fall short on oversight and reserves
Anchorage Digital has introduced a new tool to assess the risks tied to stablecoins, called the Stablecoin Safety Matrix. The framework aims to help institutions evaluate the structural and regulatory strength of leading fiat-backed stablecoins.
Following its release, Anchorage Digital confirmed it will begin phasing out support for USDC, AUSD, and USD0, citing concerns over regulatory oversight and reserve practices.
The decision was made public in a company notice.
How the matrix works: two key criteria
The matrix compares stablecoins using two primary factors:
- Regulatory oversight: Whether the issuer operates under formal financial supervision and has a proven track record.
- Reserve asset and liability management: The structure of reserves backing the token, including the quality of assets, bank exposure, and the presence of insurance or equity buffers.
Each stablecoin is scored on a scale from 1 to 5 for both dimensions. The ratings are based solely on publicly available information and are intended to offer a point-in-time view as of June 2025.
Which stablecoins performed best
Stablecoins including PYUSD, RLUSD, USDP, and USDG received higher ratings in both categories. These tokens are regulated by authorities such as the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) or the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS). Their reserves are composed mainly of high-quality liquid assets (HQLAs) and are supported by private insurance or equity buffers.
For example, PYUSD, issued by Paxos, received the highest possible reserve management score of 5. It is also regulated by the NYDFS. Similarly, USDP and USDG were recognised for strong reserve practices and regulatory clarity.
Why USDC, AUSD, and USD0 were downgraded
USDC, despite being widely used in decentralised finance and listed on major exchanges, received a regulatory score of 2 and a reserve score of 2. The matrix notes that USDC currently operates under a US state licensing model that does not provide full prudential oversight. It adds that the company’s new MiCA licence in the EU introduces more robust supervision, but the interaction between the EU and US frameworks remains unclear.
AUSD, issued via a British Virgin Islands entity, was given the lowest possible regulatory score of 1. The matrix notes that the issuer claims it does not fall under any formal oversight. It received a reserve management score of 2.5, due to limited collateral and exposure to unidentified banks.
USD0 was also scored 1 for regulatory oversight and 1.5 for reserve structure. The document notes that the token holds a significant portion of non-HQLAs and lacks a sufficient equity buffer to absorb losses.
No recommendations, but clear signals
The matrix stops short of making recommendations. Instead, it describes itself as a factual comparison of observed characteristics that “may influence how institutions assess risk, compliance readiness, and operational fit”.
However, Anchorage Digital‘s actions signal how it may use the tool in practice. In a statement quoted by Cointelegraph, Rachel Anderika, Head of Global Operations at Anchorage Digital, said:
“Following our Stablecoin Safety Matrix, USDC, AUSD, and USD0 no longer satisfy Anchorage Digital’s internal criteria for long‑term resilience. Specifically, we identified elevated concentration risks associated with their issuer structures—something we believe institutions should carefully evaluate.”
The launch of the matrix reflects rising expectations for transparency and regulatory alignment in the stablecoin market. Institutions are increasingly expected to justify their token choices not only in terms of liquidity and functionality, but also in terms of counterparty risk and oversight.
The matrix may also be used as a template by other custodians and service providers. Its release follows broader developments in regulatory clarity, including the GENIUS Act in the US and MiCA in the EU, both of which introduce stablecoin-specific frameworks
