Tokenized Deposits, Money-Market Funds, Stablecoins, and M1/M2

Overview

This series explains why blockchain transfer speed does not decide whether tokenized deposits, tokenized money-market funds, or payment stablecoins belong in M1 or non-M1 M2. It compares liability, dominant use, cash conversion, reserve overlap, reporting, and geography, then traces stablecoin settlement, international dollar use, and conditional digital dollarisation. M1 and M2 remain useful, but global circulation and fragmented data make measurement and policy effects harder to interpret.

Learning outcomes

M1 and M2 classify economic claims by liquidity and use, not by the ledger that records them.
Blockchain transfer speed alone does not determine M1 status; payment function and immediate cash access matter more.
Payment stablecoin treatment remains conditional on dominant use, redemption, reserve overlap, reporting, and geography.
Stablecoins support crypto settlement and selected cross-border use, but evidence does not show household-scale replacement of ordinary payments.

Keywords

StablecoinsM1M2DepositsMoney-market fundsLiquidityReservesRedemptionDollarisationCapital controls

Chapters

M1/M2 Counting for Tokenized Deposits, Money-Market Funds, and Stablecoins

Why function, cash access, data, and geography matter

13 min · Why function, cash access, data, and geography matter

13 min

M1/M2 Classification: Four Tests for Tokenized Assets

Separate payment readiness from transfer speed and data quality

12 min · Separate payment readiness from transfer speed and data quality

12 min

Tokenized Deposits, Money-Market Funds, and Stablecoins Compared

Different liabilities, cash paths, and statistical treatment

11 min · Different liabilities, cash paths, and statistical treatment

11 min

Why Instant Token Transfers Do Not Guarantee M1

Follow the claim, use, cash path, and evidence

10 min · Follow the claim, use, cash path, and evidence

10 min

How Stablecoins Hold Their Peg—and How the Promise Can Fail

Why redemption, markets, reserves, and access all matter

12 min · Why redemption, markets, reserves, and access all matter

12 min

Stablecoins and the International Dollar: Who Uses Them?

Separate private saving, payments, and official currency roles

14 min · Separate private saving, payments, and official currency roles

14 min

Digital Dollarisation: When Payment Choice Becomes Policy Constraint

How stablecoins can weaken monetary traction in fragile economies

15 min · How stablecoins can weaken monetary traction in fragile economies

15 min

Are M1 and M2 Broken by Tokenization?

What changes in measurement, policy, and digital money

14 min · What changes in measurement, policy, and digital money

14 min

Preview every chapter · Unlock full text, audio, and video from chapter 4

Plans

Ch.1-3 FreeCh.4-8 Premium

FAQ

Does putting an asset on a blockchain make it part of M1?

No. Blockchain representation does not by itself make an asset part of M1; payment use and immediate cash access are the key tests.

How do tokenized deposits, money-market funds, and payment stablecoins differ?

They are different claims: a tokenized deposit is a bank liability, a tokenized money-market fund is a fund share requiring redemption, and a payment stablecoin is a private dollar-linked claim whose placement depends on use and measurement.

Why can stablecoin growth be hard to add to U.S. money measures?

Stablecoin growth is hard to add cleanly because reserves may already appear in M1 or M2, reporting is incomplete, and tokens can circulate globally.

Are stablecoins already replacing ordinary payments internationally?

No. Current evidence shows important crypto settlement and selected cross-border use, but not household-scale replacement of ordinary payment systems; broader digital dollarisation remains conditional.