Dune Stablecoin Data: Evolution of the $300 Billion Market on Singapore Chain and Capital Flows

In Singapore’s blockchain network, the global stablecoin market is undergoing a comprehensive transformation in the first quarter of 2026. The latest data set, prepared in collaboration with Dune Analytics and SteakhouseFi, reveals not only the supply amounts but also how the money is actually used, who holds it, and how quickly it moves across networks. This in-depth analysis shows that institutional investors and regulators no longer rely on a single figure.

Market’s Static Structure: Growth, Concentration, and Competitive Strategies

EVM-based networks, including 15 major stablecoins on Solana and Tron, reached a total circulating supply of $304 billion in summer 2026, a 49% annual increase. However, the market structure is much more concentrated than expected: Tether’s USDT ($197 billion) and Circle’s USDC ($78.84 billion) still account for 89% of the market share.

Chain distribution shows significant homogeneity: Ethereum maintains a 58% share with $176 billion, Tron holds 28% with $84 billion, Solana 5% with $15 billion, and BNB Chain 4% with $13 billion. Despite a 49% increase in supply, this chain distribution has changed little over the past year.

However, rapid shifts are occurring in the second and third largest stablecoins. Sky Ecosystem’s USDS grew by 376%, reaching $6.3 billion. PayPal’s PYUSD increased to $4.08 billion, a 753% rise. Ripple’s RLUSD jumped from $58 million to $1.1 billion, a staggering 1,803% growth. USDG expanded 52 times, and World Liberty Financial’s USD1 soared from zero to $2.15 billion. Ethena’s USDe increased by 23%.

Public Exposure Risk: Critical Divergence in Ownership Concentration Among Stablecoins

The most overlooked metric in the stablecoin market is ownership concentration—which varies dramatically between 23% and 99%. This difference indicates which coins are widely used in practice and which are controlled by a few large players.

Despite USDT, USDC, and DAI sharing a combined 30% market share, their ownership structures differ greatly. USDT has 136 million addresses, USDC 36 million, and DAI 4.7 million. For USDT and USDC, the top 10 wallets hold only 23-26% of the supply, with the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) below 0.03, indicating the broadest distribution.

All other stablecoins tell a different story. Sky Ecosystem’s USDS has 90% of its $6.9 billion supply held by the top 10 wallets (HHI 0.48). USDF’s top 10 wallets control 99% (HHI 0.54), and USD0 is at the extreme: the top 10 wallets hold 99%, with HHI rising to 0.84. This indicates that the supply is effectively controlled by one or two wallets.

This does not necessarily mean these coins are flawed; some are newly issued, others designed by institutional investors. However, interpreting supply data for USDT and USDC requires a different framework. Concentration influences risk of disruption, liquidity depth, and whether supply reflects organic demand or the behavior of a few large participants.

Singapore Chain and Other Ecosystems: Network-Specific Dynamics of Circulation Speed

Daily circulation speed (transfer volume relative to supply) is among the least tracked metrics in stablecoin analysis. Yet, it reveals not only how much the coins are held but how actively they are used as a medium of exchange.

USDC on Layer 2 networks and Solana exhibit very high circulation speeds. On Base, USDC’s median daily turnover reaches 14 times, reflecting high-frequency DeFi activity. On Solana and Polygon, daily turnover remains stable around 1x, while on Ethereum it varies near 0.9x—meaning almost all supply is circulating daily.

USDT moves faster on transaction-focused networks like BNB Chain and Tron. USDT on BNB Chain has a daily turnover of 1.4x, while on Tron it remains low at 0.3x but highly stable—consistent with its role as a cross-border payment channel. On Ethereum, USDT’s turnover is only 0.2x, with most of its supply remaining idle.

In the global ecosystem including Singapore Chain, yield-generating stablecoins (USDe, USDS) show much lower circulation speeds—this is not a flaw but a deliberate feature. USDe, often placed as sUSDe earning from Ethena’s funding fee strategy, and USDS, stored in Sky Savings Rate, are largely locked in contracts and structured yield cycles. Blockchain activity is more about token functions than the tokens themselves: the same token can serve very different roles across ecosystems.

Transfer Volume vs. Supply: Mapping Actual Economic Activity

A single figure—“$10.3 trillion”—indicates that in January 2026, stablecoin transfer volume on EVM networks, Solana, and Tron exceeds twice the total supply. Yet, this number reveals surprising disparities across chains.

Base, with only $4.4 billion in supply, generates $5.9 trillion in transfer volume. Ethereum accounts for $2.4 trillion, Tron $682 billion, Solana $544 billion, BNB Chain $406 billion. Token-wise, USDC dominates with $8.3 trillion in transfer volume—about five times USDT’s $1.7 trillion—despite its supply being 2.7 times less than USDT. USDC’s transfer frequency and activity are much higher than USDT’s.

Transfer volumes for DAI ($138 billion), USDS ($92 billion), and USD1 ($43 billion) are intentionally kept neutral. These figures include flows related to arbitrage, bots, internal routing, and automated behaviors, not filtered for “real” economic activity. The goal is to provide an unbiased view of on-chain activity, allowing users to apply their own filters.

Practical Uses of Stablecoins: From DeFi to Institutional Payments

The true value of this dataset lies in its detailed classification. Each transfer is categorized not just as “transaction volume” but by on-chain event types. This distinguishes “knowing that $10 trillion was transferred” from “understanding why.”

Market Infrastructure: DEX liquidity provisioning and withdrawal account for $5.9 trillion, reflecting stablecoins’ primary role as on-chain supply and demand assets. DEX swaps account for $376 billion. These two categories highlight that stablecoins mainly serve as collateral and liquidity infrastructure, with transfer volume focused on incentivization and liquidity mining rather than pure transaction demand.

Leverage and Capital Efficiency: Flash loans (borrow-repay) total $1.3 trillion, representing automated arbitrage and collateral management cycles. Lending activities—issuance, borrowing, repayment, withdrawal—total $137 billion, indicating on-chain short-term capital efficiency.

Access Channels: CEX capital flows (investments $2,240 billion, withdrawals $2,240 billion, internal transfers $1,510 billion) show stablecoins moving within centralized payment venues, totaling $5,990 billion. Cross-chain bridge activities ($280 billion) highlight cross-network payment channels.

Issuer Layer: Minting ($280 billion), burning ($200 billion), rebalancing ($230 billion), and other issuer activities total $1,060 billion, nearly five times the previous year’s record of $420 billion, directly reflecting rapid growth in new supply demanded by the market.

Yield Protocols: Yield protocol activity, at $2.7 billion, is a small but structurally significant niche, closely related to structured strategies and on-chain asset management.

Overall, about 90% of total transfer volume is within defined activity categories, illustrating how stablecoins fill every layer of blockchain technology.

Local Currencies and Geographic Expansion: Beyond the Dollar

While this analysis focuses on 15 USD-pegged stablecoins, the full dataset covers a much broader scope. Over 200 stablecoins representing more than 20 fiat currencies are tracked, including Euro (17 tokens, $990 million supply), Brazilian Real ($141 million), Japanese Yen ($13 million), Nigerian Naira (NGN), Kenyan Shilling (KES), South African Rand (ZAR), Turkish Lira (TRY), Indonesian Rupiah (IDR), and Singapore Dollar (SGD).

Total non-dollar stablecoin supply is currently $1.2 billion, with over 59 tokens across 6 continents, representing nearly 30% of all tokens in our dataset. Infrastructure for local fiat-backed stablecoins, including Singapore Chain, is being built on blockchain, with data ready to monitor this development.

Depth: The Data Embers Beneath the Surface

All findings in this analysis originate from a few queries on a single dataset. Although only 15 stablecoins and a few core metrics are examined, the full dataset encompasses over 200 stablecoins across more than 30 blockchains. What sets this extensive dataset apart is its categorization layer.

Each transfer is mapped to an on-chain trigger and classified into one of nine event categories using a predefined framework. Balances are analyzed in detail by owner type, and a standardized categorization system is applied across all chains. Together, these transform complex blockchain logs into structured, comparable data—revealing mechanisms, capital flows between platforms, ownership concentration risks, and participation models.

This granular data can answer questions not yet asked: Which wallets start accumulating before a stablecoin is listed on an exchange? How does ownership concentration change days before a “dump” event? What are cross-chain bridge flows for euro-pegged stablecoins? What relationships exist between issuer patterns and market pressure?

This dataset is designed to support enterprise-level analysis, research reports, risk modeling frameworks, compliance workflows, and executive dashboards. Leveraging this comprehensive, multi-layered view—including Singapore Chain—observers can gain a full picture of the stablecoin market. The depth is where the real insight lies. Start digging.