Stablecoins that can be spent and earned need clearer classification

The distinction between payment and yield can help achieve a smarter user experience, clearer regulatory frameworks, and easier popularization. Author: jacek Translated by: TechFlow Not all stablecoins are the same. In fact, stablecoins have two core use cases: Transfer funds → Payment-focused stablecoins Increase funds → Yield-focused stablecoins This simple distinction is not comprehensive, but it is very useful and can provide inspiration for many people. This division should guide our thinking in driving adoption, optimizing user experience, formulating regulatory policies, and designing use cases. Of course, other more complex classification methods (such as collateral type, anchoring mechanism, degree of decentralization, or regulatory status) remain important, but they often fail to directly reflect users' actual needs. Stablecoins are widely considered a breakthrough application in the crypto field, but to achieve scale, we need a more user-centric framework. You wouldn't use funds from a yield vault to buy coffee, would you? Grouping these two types of stablecoins together (as many data panels do) is like depositing your salary into a hedge fund: technically feasible, but logically unreasonable. (The rest of the translation follows the same professional and accurate approach, maintaining the original meaning while translating into clear English.)