Bank stablecoins, tokenized deposits and central bank digital currencies can all move money digitally, but they represent different claims.
The simplest distinction is this: a bank stablecoin is generally a private reserve-backed token, a tokenized deposit is a digital version of money owed by a commercial bank, and a CBDC is a direct liability of a central bank.
That difference affects backing, settlement, regulation and risk.
Bank Stablecoins and Tokenized Deposits Are Different
A bank stablecoin is a transferable token designed to track a fiat currency such as the dollar or euro. Its stability depends on reserves, redemption rules and the issuer. Banks can issue or support these tokens, and Coinpaper has covered growing institutional interest in bank stablecoins.
A tokenized deposit is different. It represents a commercial-bank deposit recorded or transferred using blockchain or distributed-ledger technology. The holder still has a claim on the bank rather than on a separate stablecoin issuer.
The IMF describes tokenized deposits as bank liabilities held and transacted using DLT.
That distinction matters because qualifying bank deposits may fall under banking supervision and deposit-insurance frameworks, while a stablecoin does not automatically receive the same protections.
Where CBDCs Fit
A CBDC is central bank money in digital form. Unlike a tokenized deposit, it is not a liability of a commercial bank.
CBDCs generally fall into two categories:
- Retail CBDCs for households and businesses
- Wholesale CBDCs for banks and financial-market settlement
The ECB describes the digital euro as an electronic form of central bank money for everyday payments.
Wholesale central-bank money could instead support settlement between financial institutions and tokenized markets. The BIS has argued that central-bank money can remain the trust anchor while tokenized commercial-bank money operates around it.
Stablecoin vs Deposit Token vs CBDC
[CHART — PLACE HERE]
Use a comparison table showing issuer, claim, backing, users, main risk and typical use case.
| Feature | Bank Stablecoin | Tokenized Deposit | CBDC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Bank or private issuer | Commercial bank | Central bank |
| Claim | On issuer | On commercial bank | On central bank |
| Value | Tracks fiat | Bank deposit at face value | Sovereign currency |
| Main users | Retail or institutions | Mostly bank customers | Retail or institutions |
| Key risk | Issuer and reserves | Bank credit risk | Central-bank liability |
| Main use | Blockchain payments | Tokenized banking | Digital settlement |
Each model has different strengths. Stablecoins offer broad blockchain portability and 24/7 transfers. Tokenized deposits preserve the existing banking relationship while adding programmability. CBDCs provide digital central-bank money but depend on policy decisions around access, privacy and distribution.
The three models may therefore coexist rather than compete for a single winner.
Coinpaper’s coverage of SWIFT highlights how banks are already exploring interoperability between tokenized money and existing settlement infrastructure.
For investors and businesses, the key question is not simply whether an asset uses blockchain. It is whose liability the token represents. That determines its credit exposure, redemption structure and how closely it functions like traditional money.