EURC

Overview

EURC is a euro stablecoin issued and redeemed by Circle Internet Financial Europe SAS, a licensed electronic money institution authorised to issue EURC as a regulated e-money token under MiCA in the EEA. It runs on seven Circle-approved chains: Avalanche C-Chain, Base, Cronos, Ethereum, Solana, Stellar and World Chain.

EURC is the best-documented non-dollar stablecoin on this map by a wide margin. A named Big Four attestor, an unbroken monthly report series running since June 2022, and a reserve the issuer describes down to the euro. Most of what follows is available because Circle publishes it, which is the opposite of the situation on most of the coins indexed here.

Sources: Circle, EURC product page, Circle developer docs, EURC contract addresses

Backing and reserves

The June 2026 report shows EURC reserves as entirely cash: EUR 389,833,314 held at regulated financial institutions, with a net timing adjustment of EUR (5,095,955), for reserve assets at fair value of EUR 384,737,359 against EURC in circulation of 381,986,779 at 30 June 2026. No treasury bills, no reverse repo, no sovereign debt of any kind. There is no securities line in the table at all, which is a different structure from USDC's and puts a euro holder behind bank credit rather than behind government paper.

Two details in that table repay a second look. The timing adjustment changes sign between the report's two dates, from positive EUR 1,994,343 at 2 June to negative EUR 5,095,955 at 30 June, so it is a working settlement balance rather than a rounding plug. And the reserve exceeds circulation by EUR 2,750,580, about seven tenths of a percent. That margin has to be read against circulation and not against the 438,424,381 total supply on approved chains, because the difference between the two is tokens that exist and are issued to nobody.

That last point corrects a claim in circulation elsewhere. Several secondary write-ups describe EURC as holding short-duration euro sovereign debt and overnight reverse repos. That is USDC's composition, not EURC's. EURC's reserve is cash, and the distinction cuts both ways: no duration or repo counterparty exposure, and no instrument in it that is not a deposit claim.

The report is signed by Deloitte & Touche LLP, monthly, in a series unbroken from June 2022. Two gaps remain in what an external reader can check. The custodian banks are described only as "regulated financial institutions" holding segregated accounts, so the specific institutional exposure is not nameable. And Circle's own surfaces do not name the attestor anywhere in text, describing it only as "a Big Four accounting firm"; the name exists solely as a signature image inside the report PDF, so it is absent from any search of the page or of the document text and can be read only by rendering the page it sits on.

What the opinion covers is narrower than the report it introduces, and the difference is easy to lose. Deloitte examined one assertion by Circle's management: that the fair value of assets held in the EURC reserve is equal to or greater than EURC in circulation at the report dates. That is an inequality. The circulation figure itself is a line in management's own report, computed from criteria management defines, and it reaches the opinion only through that definition. So the document is evidence that the reserve covered the tokens. It is not an independent count of the tokens, and reading it as one is the easiest mistake to make with it.

The contrast with XSGD, attested in Singapore under a different standard, makes the point sharper than any general caution could. There the accountant's examined information sets out the circulation level as a line of its own, alongside the same inequality. Both reports carry reasonable assurance and a positive opinion, and a reader asking how much of the coin exists still gets a direct answer from one and a derived one from the other.

One thing this report does not do is read the chain. Every blockchain reference in it sits inside management's criteria. The accountant's own paragraphs describe the procedures only in the general form the standard requires, that their nature, timing and extent depend on the firm's judgment, and no chain, contract or block appears as something the firm queried. That is no defect in an engagement about a bank reserve. It does mean nothing in this document independently verifies the token side of the balance, which is the half this map measures for itself.

DIA reads EURC supply from contract state on the chains it indexes, which is a different quantity from the circulation figure above and should not be confused with it.

Sources: EURC Examination Report, June 2026, Circle transparency, XSGD SCS Reserve Account Report, 30 June 2026

Peg behaviour

Circle states that "EURC is always redeemable 1:1 for euro". The mechanism behind the peg is redemption at par against a reserve of bank deposits rather than an algorithm or a collateral ratio, which is why the reserve report is the peg disclosure.

What the issuer's pages do not state is who may redeem directly, at what minimum size, on what fee basis and behind which identity gate. The 1:1 statement describes the redemption right that backs the peg. It does not establish that any given holder can exercise it, and DIA has not located terms on the pages read that would settle who can.

Sources: Circle, EURC product page, Circle, transparency page

Regulation

Circle Internet Financial Europe SAS is the licensed electronic money institution that issues and redeems EURC as a MiCA-regulated e-money token in the EEA. The reserve assertion behind the monthly report is made by a different company, Circle Internet Group, Inc., the US parent, signed by its Chief Accounting Officer and dated 29 July 2026.

Both entities are named, which is more than most issuers on this map manage, and they are not the same legal person. The MiCA authorisation sits with the French subsidiary and the reserve assertion sits with the parent. Licence reference numbers are not published on the pages read, so DIA has not linked the regulator's registry entry.

Sources: Circle, EURC product page, EURC Examination Report, reserve as of 30 June 2026, signed 29 July 2026 (PDF)

Risks

EURC's verification gap is narrow, and naming it precisely is more useful than implying there is none.

The reserve is entirely cash at regulated financial institutions, and those institutions are not named. A reserve held as deposits carries the credit standing of whoever holds it, and nothing in the published report lets a reader assess which institutions those are or how the balance is spread across them.

Redemption terms are unstated. The 1:1 claim is about the peg, not about a holder's access to it.

The entity split is a structural point rather than a defect. The MiCA licence and the reserve assertion sit with two different companies in two jurisdictions, so a reader tracing recourse has to trace it through both.

Sources: EURC Examination Report, reserve as of 30 June 2026, signed 29 July 2026 (PDF), Circle, EURC product page

What this map tracks

EURC is the case that shows why aggregator coverage and aggregator accuracy are different things.

Circle defines its own circulation figure as total supply on approved chains less two deductions. The first is "Tokens Allowed But Not Issued", tokens that exist on Solana and are not issued to any holder, which at 30 June 2026 came to 56,437,602 against a 438,424,381 total, so a naive cross-chain sum overstates issued EURC by 12.9%. The second is "Access Denied Tokens", tokens the issuer has restricted from their holder to comply with a law, a regulation or a legal order, and that line stood at zero at both June report dates. A zero there is still a disclosure, because the deduction exists in the definition only because the capability exists in the token. The issuer publishes both. The panel on this page renders a single supply figure read from contract state, so the distinction between the two lives in this text rather than in the panel, and a reader setting our number against Circle's should know which of Circle's two they are holding it against.

DeFiLlama does carry EURC, and its headline total came within about a percent of a DIA research read of the seven approved chains taken on 2026-07-30. That was a one off check by hand rather than the figure this page renders. Its per chain attribution did not hold up the same way. Ethereum was overstated by about 41 million and Solana understated by about 54.6 million, the two errors largely cancelling in the total. It also omits Cronos and World Chain, both Circle-approved and carrying supply, while listing chains Circle's own contract documentation does not. So any chain level claim about EURC taken from an aggregator is unreliable even where the headline looks right.

The supply panel on this page is not that full read, and the difference matters more here than on most coins. DIA reads fewer of the approved chains than Circle documents, and how many fewer has moved between runs: the 2026-08-05 snapshot returned no leg at all for EURC and the 2026-08-07 one returned a single chain. So whatever figure the panel carries is a floor rather than a total, and the comparison above rests on that dated seven chain read rather than on what the panel renders.

One deployment sits outside the issuer's own perimeter entirely. Circle's contract documentation lists seven approved chains, and a live EURC contract sits on an eighth. Blockscout reported 1,758,805.12 EURC and 5,491 holders on Optimism when DIA read it on 2026-08-05. The holder count is what makes this more than a stray deployment, because thousands of addresses hold a token on a chain the issuer's attestation does not cover. By Circle's own definitions that supply is not inside the circulation figure the report gives. A reader reconciling EURC against the issuer's numbers should leave Optimism out of the arithmetic rather than add it in, which is a different instruction from pretending it is not there.

Sources: EURC Examination Report, June 2026, Circle EURC contract addresses, Optimism EURC contract on Blockscout

Common questions