For most of modern economic history, commerce adapted itself to the limitations of financial infrastructure.

Businesses operated within banking hours.

Cross-border transactions moved through layers of intermediaries.

Treasury teams planned around settlement windows.

International payments often required multiple institutions, multiple jurisdictions, and multiple days before funds became available.

Those constraints were accepted because the underlying infrastructure was built for a world where commerce itself moved more slowly.

That assumption is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain.

A retailer sourcing products across multiple markets does not operate on a local banking schedule.

A software company with employees, contractors, suppliers, and customers across different countries does not stop operating when one financial system closes and another has not yet opened.

Digital commerce, global supply chains, and increasingly software systems themselves operate continuously.

The financial infrastructure underneath them often does not.

That tension sat at the center of a recent EVOLVE discussion with fintech executive and advisor Safwan Zaheer and Marlison Silva, founder of Transfero Group and one of the builders behind BRZ, one of the most widely adopted Brazilian real-backed stablecoins.

One of the more interesting aspects of the discussion was how little time was spent talking about technology.

The conversation repeatedly returned to operational friction.

Marlison described a situation familiar to many executives operating internationally. While establishing an investment structure in the Bahamas, he was unable to move capital through four separate banking relationships despite having the funds, the documentation, and long-standing relationships with the institutions involved. A smaller specialist provider completed the transaction within twenty-four hours.

The example highlights a broader reality.

Over the past twenty years, companies have reorganized themselves around increasingly global operating models. Supply chains span continents. Talent is recruited internationally. Software businesses can serve customers in dozens of markets before establishing a physical presence in any of them.

The movement of information adapted quickly to this environment.

The movement of money adapted more slowly.

Most financial systems still reflect assumptions from a period when economic activity was more geographically concentrated and significantly less connected.

Global merchandise trade now exceeds $24 trillion annually, while digitally delivered services continue to grow at double-digit rates across major economies. Commerce increasingly operates across borders by default.

Financial infrastructure remains largely organized around national systems, local regulations, and institutional boundaries.

For many years, stablecoins occupied an unusual position within financial markets.

They were widely used within parts of the crypto ecosystem, yet largely ignored by traditional institutions.

That became harder to justify as the numbers grew.

During the discussion, Safwan highlighted a figure that has attracted increasing attention across the industry. Stablecoins processed approximately $35 trillion in transaction volume last year, exceeding the combined payment volume of Visa and Mastercard.

The comparison deserves nuance.

Transaction volume does not automatically translate into economic value.

Yet scale matters.

At a certain point, boards, regulators, banks, and payment providers can no longer dismiss an infrastructure layer processing tens of trillions of dollars annually.

The conversation shifts from whether something exists to how it might affect existing systems.

That shift is already visible.

Safwan pointed to JPMorgan's blockchain-based settlement infrastructure, which processes billions of dollars daily across its global network.

Recent regulatory developments in the United States have also accelerated institutional engagement. Leadership teams are increasingly being asked to evaluate stablecoins, tokenized deposits, and alternative settlement mechanisms as part of broader infrastructure discussions.

One reason infrastructure discussions often receive less attention than product, growth, or marketing is that friction tends to be distributed across an organisation.

No single payment delay changes a business.

No individual settlement process becomes a board-level discussion.

No isolated treasury operation appears particularly significant.

The economics change when those frictions accumulate across thousands of transactions, suppliers, markets, and counterparties.

Throughout the discussion, Marlison returned repeatedly to practical use cases rather than technological possibilities.

Importers paying suppliers overseas.

Companies moving capital between jurisdictions.

Consumers sending funds internationally.

Businesses operating in markets where traditional banking infrastructure remains expensive, fragmented, or difficult to access.

Cross-border payments generate more than $240 trillion in annual transaction volume globally. Small improvements in efficiency become meaningful when applied at that scale.

This partly explains why adoption often emerges first where friction is highest.

Companies operating across multiple currencies, regulatory environments, and banking systems experience infrastructure constraints more directly than businesses operating within a single market.

Most executives can tell you the cost of a supplier.

Fewer can tell you the cost of coordination.

Yet coordination sits behind almost every activity inside a modern organisation.

A payment needs approval.

A vendor needs to be reconciled.

A treasury position needs to be updated.

A transfer needs to be confirmed.

A settlement needs to clear.

Individually these activities appear routine. Collectively they consume managerial attention, operational capacity, and working capital.

Part of the reason is historical.

Financial infrastructure evolved during a period when delays were expected. Information travelled slowly. Transactions crossed fewer borders. Businesses operated within narrower geographic boundaries.

Organisations built processes around those realities.

Safwan repeatedly returned to treasury management, settlements, vendor payments, and cross-border transactions.

Viewed together, these activities reveal how much modern commerce depends on coordination across institutions, jurisdictions, suppliers, customers, and partners.

The financial system performs that function remarkably well.

It also performs it at a cost.

Settlement delays require liquidity buffers.

Reconciliation creates administrative work.

Multiple intermediaries create additional layers of verification and control.

Each individual step exists for a reason.

The cumulative effect is that organisations devote considerable resources to managing the movement of value itself.

Consumers rarely discuss payment rails.

Retailers rarely market settlement architecture.

Boards rarely dedicate strategy sessions to reconciliation processes.

Most infrastructure becomes important only when it fails or when a superior alternative changes the economics of an existing process.

Several examples from the discussion reflected this dynamic.

For years, stablecoins were viewed primarily through the lens of digital assets.

Meanwhile, treasury teams experimented with settlement.

Financial institutions tested tokenized money movement.

Cross-border payment providers searched for lower-cost alternatives.

Companies operating internationally explored more efficient ways to move value between jurisdictions.

Infrastructure transitions often follow this pattern.

Containerization transformed global trade.

Cloud computing transformed enterprise software.

Neither became significant because of a single announcement.

Adoption accelerated as the economics became increasingly difficult to ignore.

The discussion suggested that financial infrastructure may be entering a similar phase.

The discussion never depended on a prediction.

Whether stablecoins represent a small percentage or a meaningful percentage of future payment flows is ultimately a secondary question.

What matters is understanding where economic incentives are pointing.

Cross-border commerce continues to expand.

Digital businesses continue to operate across jurisdictions.

Treasury teams remain under pressure to improve efficiency.

Financial institutions continue searching for faster and cheaper settlement mechanisms.

Regulators are increasingly defining frameworks rather than debating existence.

Taken collectively, these developments suggest a financial system entering a period of adjustment.

For leadership teams, the more useful exercise may be to examine where financial friction still exists inside the organisation.

Where does capital remain idle longer than necessary?

Where do settlement delays influence operational decisions?

Where do reconciliation processes consume disproportionate resources?

Where do geographic boundaries continue to shape workflows in businesses that increasingly operate across markets?

Those questions existed before stablecoins.

The discussion simply provided a different lens through which to examine them.

The most valuable outcome of the session may not be a view on digital assets or payment rails.

It may be a broader recognition that commerce and financial infrastructure have evolved at different speeds.

The gap between the two created many of the systems, processes, and assumptions organisations operate with today.

The question is whether those assumptions remain as durable as they once appeared.

EVOLVE brings together VC’s, PE’s, Family offices, board-level leaders, ambitious founders, and senior operators across commerce markets through ongoing structured conversations.

These discussions take place through expert sessions, small gatherings, roundtables, and private dinners across markets.

The objective is to understand how experienced operators navigate the realities of commerce as those realities evolve.

For leaders who want to participate in these conversations, EVOLVE offers private membership or corporate partnerships for organisations seeking closer proximity to the people shaping commerce across markets.

The room stays small by design.

The conversations stay practical for the same reason.

Curated. Personable. Global.
That is EVOLVE

If you’d like to learn more how to partner with, please email us at
[email protected] or [email protected]