De-dollarization: Payment Systems Diversify

Key Takeaways

• China’s CIPS processed RMB 175.49 trillion ($24.47T) in 2024, up 42.6% year-on-year.
• SWIFT’s ISO 20022 migration completed November 2025 - 97% of cross-border payments now use the new MX format.
• B2B stablecoin payments surged from under $100M monthly in early 2023 to over $6B monthly by mid-2025.
• Total stablecoin transaction volume reached $33 trillion in 2025, a 72% increase from 2024.
• Domestic instant payment systems like UPI and Pix are expanding cross-border, fragmenting settlement infrastructure by region.
• Alternative payment rails are supplementing, not replacing, dollar-denominated infrastructure.

What Is De-Dollarization?

De-dollarization is the process of reducing reliance on the US dollar as the dominant currency in international finance. It can take various forms: adopting alternative currencies for trade settlement, building new payment infrastructure, developing digital currency systems, and creating financial institutions that operate outside dollar-denominated networks.

This process has accelerated significantly since 2023, driven by geopolitical fragmentation, the weaponization of financial infrastructure through sanctions, the rise of digital payment systems in emerging economies, and a pragmatic desire among trading partners to reduce single-currency dependency. What was once theoretical is now measurable.

For analysis of how the US dollar’s reserve currency share is shifting, see BRICS Currency vs USD: Is De-Dollarization Real?

The De-Dollarization Landscape in 2026

Several parallel developments have reshaped cross-border payment infrastructure:

• The expansion of cross-border payment systems that operate independently of SWIFT, most notably CIPS (China) and SPFS (Russia).
• The adoption of digital currencies and stablecoins as practical settlement tools, with stablecoins cross-border settlement now exceeding $6B monthly where speed and cost advantages are most pronounced.
• The expansion of domestic instant payment systems - India’s UPI, Brazil’s Pix, and ASEAN’s QR-based interoperability networks - into cross-border corridors.
• The completion of SWIFT’s own ISO 20022 migration in November 2025, modernizing the incumbent system’s data standards to compete with newer alternatives.

The INSTEX Lesson: Why Payment Infrastructure Is Hard to Build

One notable failure illustrates the difficulty of building alternative payment infrastructure. INSTEX, the European special-purpose vehicle created in 2019 to facilitate trade with Iran outside US sanctions, completed only a single transaction before its ten shareholder states voted to liquidate it in March 2023.

The failure was instructive. Political obstruction and insufficient commercial incentive proved fatal - the system lacked enough participating institutions to generate meaningful transaction volume, and European companies remained reluctant to risk secondary sanctions exposure. Commercial adoption must precede political ambition in payment infrastructure development. For more on unexpected obstacles facing digital payment platforms, see An Unforeseen Challenge. Compare this with CIPS, where Singapore’s three major banks joined in December 2025 - not for geopolitical reasons, but because their clients needed RMB settlement infrastructure.

Alternative Payment Systems: Global Comparison

The question of what alternatives exist to SWIFT for cross-border payments now has a more complex answer than it did even two years ago. The following systems represent the most significant alternatives in operation or development:

Payment System	Operator	Launch	Coverage (2025)	2024 Volume	SWIFT Alternative?	Source
CIPS	China (PBoC)	2015	100+ countries, 1,573+ indirect participants	RMB 175.49T ($24.47T)	Yes	PBoC
SPFS	Russia (CBR)	2014	24 countries, 177 foreign participants	Not disclosed	Yes (limited)	Bank of Russia
UPI	India (NPCI)	2016	India + 8 countries (expanding)	16.6B transactions (domestic)	No (domestic focus)	NPCI
Pix	Brazil (BCB)	2020	Brazil (150M+ users)	63.8B transactions (domestic)	No (domestic)	Banco Central do Brasil
BRICS Pay	BRICS+	Pilot	BRICS+ nations (pilot phase)	N/A	Yes (planned, target 2030)	BRICS Summit communiques

For analysis of the BRICS Pay consumer payment network and its fintech implications, see Synergy or Strife: BRICS Pay and Fintech

CIPS vs SWIFT: How Do They Compare?

The comparison between CIPS and SWIFT is not a simple replacement narrative. CIPS operates as a clearing and settlement system for RMB-denominated cross-border transactions. SWIFT is a messaging network that facilitates communication between financial institutions. They serve different but overlapping functions, and CIPS still relies on SWIFT for approximately 80% of its messaging traffic.

That said, the two systems represent fundamentally different models for cross-border payment infrastructure - one controlled by a central bank with specific geopolitical interests, the other by a cooperative subject to multilateral governance.

Dimension	CIPS (China)	SWIFT (Belgium)
Transaction volume (2024)	RMB 175.49T ($24.47T), 8.22M transactions	~$150T annually, 11.9B messages (2023)
Network coverage	100+ countries, 1,573 indirect participants	200+ countries, 11,500+ institutions
Primary currency	Chinese yuan (RMB)	Multi-currency (USD dominant)
Transaction speed	Near real-time for direct participants	Historically 1-5 business days; improving with gpi
Cost structure	Lower for RMB-denominated transactions	Correspondent banking chain fees; multiple intermediaries
Political independence	Operated by PBoC; not subject to Western sanctions	Belgium-based cooperative; has complied with US/EU sanctions (e.g., Russia disconnection 2022)
Sanctions exposure	Independent of Western sanctions framework	Subject to US/EU sanctions directives
Messaging dependency	Still relies on SWIFT for ~80% of messaging	Self-contained messaging infrastructure
ISO 20022	Native support	Migrated November 2025 (97% adoption)

CIPS: How China’s Payment System Processed $24 Trillion in 2024

The most consequential development in alternative payment infrastructure is the growth of China’s Cross-Border Interbank Payment System. In 2024, CIPS processed 8.22 million transactions totaling RMB 175.49 trillion ($24.47 trillion) - increases of 24.25% and 42.60% year-on-year respectively. By mid-2025, daily clearing volumes exceeded RMB 750 billion across approximately 23,000 daily transactions.

To put this in perspective, CIPS has grown 36-fold from its initial RMB 4.8 trillion in 2015. The system now connects 210 direct participants and 1,619 indirect participants across 130 countries (June 2026). By mid-2025, Singapore-based banks including UOB had joined as direct CIPS participants, signaling the system’s expansion beyond politically motivated adoption into commercially driven participation.

CIPS does not need to replace SWIFT to be strategically significant. It provides a parallel rail that reduces single-point-of-failure risk for countries and institutions that want optionality in their payment infrastructure. For institutions that handle significant RMB flows - trade finance, commodity settlement, or cross-border treasury management - CIPS offers faster settlement and lower cost than routing RMB through SWIFT’s correspondent banking chain.

SWIFT’s ISO 20022 Migration: What Changed in November 2025

SWIFT itself underwent its most significant infrastructure upgrade in decades. On 22 November 2025, ISO 20022 became the exclusive standard for cross-border payments and reporting, replacing legacy MT message formats. Within two days, 97% of payment instructions sent through SWIFT used the new MX format.

The migration matters because ISO 20022 carries structured, standardized data that enables faster settlement, reduced manual checking, easier fraud detection, and richer remittance information. It narrows one of the key advantages that newer systems like CIPS had over legacy SWIFT messaging.

For platforms operating across multiple payment rails, ISO 20022 compatibility is now table stakes. The upgrade does not eliminate the case for alternative rails - political independence, sanctions exposure, and cost structure remain differentiators - but it does remove the data-quality gap that newer systems previously exploited.

How Stablecoins Became a $33 Trillion Payment Rail

Perhaps the most unexpected development in payment diversification has been the emergence of stablecoins as practical B2B settlement tools. Total stablecoin transaction volume reached $33 trillion in 2025 - a 72% increase from 2024 - with USDC accounting for $18.3 trillion and USDT recording $13.3 trillion.

Stablecoin Cross-Border Payment Growth

Metric	2023	2025	Growth	Source
Total stablecoin transactions	~$19T	$33T	72% YoY	Bloomberg
B2B monthly volume	<$100M	$6B+	60x	FXC Intelligence
USDC annual volume	N/A	$18.3T	-	Circle
USDT annual volume	N/A	$13.3T	-	Tether
Stablecoins pegged to USD	>90%	>90%	Stable	Artemis Analytics

B2B Stablecoin Use Cases

B2B stablecoin payments surged from under $100 million monthly in early 2023 to over $6 billion by mid-2025 (FXC Intelligence). Cross-border transfers emerged as the most mature use case, with three primary applications:

• Invoice settlement. Businesses in emerging markets use stablecoins to settle supplier invoices in minutes rather than the 3-5 day window typical of correspondent banking. The cost savings are most pronounced in corridors with limited direct banking relationships - Africa to Southeast Asia, Latin America to the Middle East - where traditional transfers may pass through three or four intermediary banks.
• International payroll. Companies with distributed workforces use stablecoins to pay contractors in jurisdictions where banking access is limited or where currency controls create delays. Settlement in minutes rather than days, at a fraction of wire transfer costs.
• Treasury rebalancing. Multinational companies use stablecoins to move liquidity between entities across jurisdictions without the FX conversion fees and settlement delays inherent in traditional banking infrastructure.

The Dollar Paradox

Ironically, over 90% of all stablecoins are pegged to the US dollar. This creates a counterintuitive dynamic: the growth of stablecoin payment rails simultaneously undermines and reinforces dollar dominance. De-dollarization in payment infrastructure does not necessarily mean de-dollarization in unit of account.

What stablecoins actually disintermediate is not the dollar itself but the dollar-denominated banking infrastructure - the correspondent banking chains, the SWIFT messaging fees, the multi-day settlement windows. A business settling an invoice in USDC is still transacting in dollars, but it has bypassed the traditional banking rails that historically controlled dollar-denominated cross-border payments. For institutions evaluating alternative payment infrastructure, this distinction between currency dominance and infrastructure dominance is critical.

Regulatory Clarity Is Accelerating Institutional Adoption

Two regulatory frameworks are creating the compliance certainty that institutional adoption requires. The GENIUS Act in the United States establishes a federal licensing framework for stablecoin issuers, including reserve requirements and audit standards. The EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation, fully in force since mid-2024, sets capital and reserve requirements for stablecoin issuers operating within the European Economic Area.

These frameworks matter for B2B adoption because they resolve the regulatory ambiguity that previously kept institutional treasuries on the sidelines. For cross-border payment platforms, stablecoin integration under clear regulatory frameworks becomes a commercial necessity rather than an experimental feature.

For a deeper look at how regulatory frameworks affect cross-border fintech operations, see Navigating Regulatory Compliance with Aerapass

Domestic Instant Payment Systems Going Cross-Border

A parallel development is reshaping the payment landscape from the bottom up. Domestic instant payment systems - originally built for domestic retail transactions - are expanding into cross-border corridors.

India’s UPI is now live in eight countries including Singapore, the UAE, France, and Sri Lanka, with additional corridors in development. The system processed 16.6 billion domestic transactions in 2024, and its cross-border expansion is driven by India’s large diaspora populations and NPCI’s commercial licensing model.

Brazil’s Pix, which serves over 150 million domestic users and processed 63.8 billion transactions in 2024, is developing Pix Internacional for cross-border payments. The system’s instant settlement and zero-cost structure for individual users has driven adoption rates that most payment systems require years to achieve.

ASEAN regional QR interoperability is connecting national instant payment systems across Southeast Asia. Thailand’s PromptPay, Singapore’s PayNow, Malaysia’s DuitNow, Indonesia’s QRIS, and the Philippines’ InstaPay are building bilateral and multilateral linkages that allow QR-based payments across borders without SWIFT, correspondent banking, or currency conversion intermediaries.

The pattern is clear: payment infrastructure is fragmenting by region rather than consolidating under a single global alternative to SWIFT. Each domestic system optimizes for its own currency, regulatory environment, and use cases - then extends outward through bilateral agreements rather than building a universal network.

What Multi-Rail Settlement Means for Cross-Border Finance

De-dollarization is not a zero-sum game. The emerging reality is a multi-rail world where SWIFT, CIPS, stablecoin networks, and domestic instant payment systems coexist and occasionally interoperate. The US dollar’s share of global reserves has declined gradually - from 72% in 2000 to approximately 58% in 2024 according to IMF COFER data - but it remains dominant by a wide margin.

For businesses and financial institutions operating across borders, the strategic imperative is optionality: the ability to settle in multiple currencies, across multiple rails, with compliance infrastructure that adapts to jurisdictional requirements. The institutions that will struggle most in this multi-rail environment are those locked into a single payment network or settlement currency.

Aerapass continues to adapt its payment and settlement infrastructure to this multi-rail reality. The platform enables transactions in various fiat currencies and integrates digital assets including stablecoins and asset-backed tokens for settlement purposes. These capabilities, combined with cross-border payment solutions across 120+ countries, position the platform for a world where no single payment rail dominates.

Frequently Asked Questions

Will the US Dollar Lose Its Reserve Currency Status?

The dollar’s share of global reserves has declined gradually - from 72% in 2001 to approximately 58% in 2024 (IMF COFER data) - but it remains dominant by a wide margin. No single currency is positioned to replace it. The euro holds roughly 20%, the yen approximately 6%, and the yuan just 2.2% despite China’s economic weight. At the current rate of decline (~0.6% per year), reserve parity with other currencies would take decades. The more likely outcome is a multi-currency reserve system where the dollar remains the largest single component but no longer holds majority share.

What Are the Main Alternatives to SWIFT for Cross-Border Payments?

The primary alternatives are CIPS (China, $24.47T processed in 2024), SPFS (Russia, 24 countries connected), and emerging systems like BRICS Pay (pilot phase, targeting 2030). India’s UPI has expanded cross-border to 8 countries, and Brazil’s Pix serves 150M+ domestic users with Pix Internacional in development. Stablecoins have also emerged as practical settlement tools, with B2B volumes exceeding $6B monthly by mid-2025. ASEAN’s regional QR interoperability network is connecting national instant payment systems across Southeast Asia. None of these individually replaces SWIFT, but together they create a multi-rail landscape that reduces single-point-of-failure risk.