Need verifiable oracle data for your project?
DIA provides transparent, customizable price feeds across 50+ chains with fully auditable methodology.
A stablecoin holds its value when the issuer will exchange it for the currency it names, at par, on demand. What backing actually means, and how to check it yourself.
A stablecoin is a token designed to hold a constant value against something else, almost always a national currency. The token trades on a blockchain and the value it tracks sits somewhere off it, usually as cash in a bank account. That gap between where the token lives and where the money lives is the whole subject.
A stablecoin holds its value when the issuer will exchange it for the currency it names, at par, on demand. Almost everything a reader wants to know reduces to whether that is true and how they could tell.
The second half of that sentence is where this page differs from a general definition. Every issuer says its token is backed. What separates them is what they publish, who signed it, and what that signature actually covers, and those differences are visible only in the documents. The sections below walk four real tokens from a full external examination down to no reserve disclosure at all, and each one links to the page carrying its detail.
Three mechanisms are in common use and they fail differently.
The dominant design is a reserve-backed token. Someone deposits currency with an issuer, the issuer mints tokens against it, and holders can redeem tokens for currency later. The peg holds because redemption is available, so the token's credibility is the issuer's willingness and ability to pay. EURC, USDC and PHPC all work this way.
The second design over-collateralises with other crypto assets and manages the peg with liquidation rules rather than a bank account. Nothing needs to be redeemed at a counter, which removes the issuer risk and replaces it with collateral volatility.
The third design held the peg with an algorithm and a paired token, adjusting supply to defend the price. This category is worth naming because it collapsed in 2022 and because the word stablecoin still covers it.
For most of the tokens on this map the first design is what matters, and it means the question is this stable is mostly a question about a bank balance that no blockchain can see.
Sources: Circle transparency, Coins.ph PHPC whitepaper
Backed is the most overworked word in this market. It carries at least four different meanings in practice, and the difference is visible only in the documents.
At the strong end an external accounting firm examines the reserve on a stated schedule and publishes a report a reader can open. Circle's June 2026 report on EURC is signed by Deloitte & Touche LLP, monthly, in a series unbroken from June 2022, and shows the reserve held entirely as cash at regulated financial institutions. Read what the opinion covers, though, because it is narrower than the report it introduces. Deloitte examined one assertion by Circle's management, that the fair value of the assets held in the reserve is equal to or greater than EURC in circulation at the report dates. That is an inequality. The circulation figure it is measured against is a line in management's own report, computed from criteria management defines. So the document is evidence that the reserve covered the tokens. It is not an independent count of the tokens.
One step down, a report exists and the signature does not carry independence. Coins.ph publishes a document for PHPC titled a Proof of Reserve attestation whose opinion section is headed Internal Audit Report. It was performed by the Coins.ph Internal Audit Department under the Institute of Internal Auditors' standards and signed by the company's Chief Audit Executive, with the management assertion signed by the CEO. No external accounting firm appears anywhere in it. That is a real internal control and a different instrument from a third-party attestation.
Lower again, a report exists and covers the wrong half. Transfero states that BRZ's onchain activity is publicly verifiable with independent audits conducted by Parsiq, which is a blockchain data and monitoring company. The claim is not false and the firm is genuinely independent. What a firm of that kind can attest is the onchain leg, which any reader can already verify without it, and no accounting attestation of the reais in the bank is published at all. The audited half is the half that did not need an auditor.
At the bottom there is no reserve disclosure. cNGN's documentation set runs to 27 pages and contains no page on reserves, and the marketing site carries none either. The token is often described as regulated, and regulated is a claim about a company's permissions rather than a claim about money in an account. Nigeria's Securities and Exchange Commission named its issuing company in a circular of 2 July 2026 granting an Approval-in-Principle, and the Commission wrote in that same document that an Approval-in-Principle is not a final licence.
Four tokens, four meanings of one word. A reader who takes backed at face value cannot tell them apart, and the documents separate them immediately.
One more distinction sits inside the strong end rather than below it, and it is the one most likely to catch a careful reader out. An attestation usually assures part of its own contents and not all of them. BiLira's May 2026 report on the lira token TRYB carries a notes section under its own header, No Assurance Provided by the Independent Auditor on These Notes, and the auditor states that the information there has not been subjected to the procedures applied in the examination. The reserve balance is inside the opinion. The description of the accounts holding it is not. So the useful question is not only who signed a report, it is which parts of the report they signed for.
Sources: EURC Examination Report, June 2026, Coins.ph PHPC Proof of Reserve report, as of 2025-03-31, Transfero BRZ, Transfero transparency report, stamped 2024-03-31, cNGN developer documentation, SEC Nigeria circular, 2 July 2026, BiLira reserve report, 21 May 2026
The question splits into two halves with very different answers, and knowing which is which is most of the skill.
The onchain half is open to anyone. How many tokens exist, and on which chains, are facts held in contract state, and reading them needs no permission from an issuer. That is a property of blockchains rather than a service anyone provides. Where this map shows a supply figure it comes from reading those contracts on the chains it indexes, which is not always every chain a coin is deployed to, and where a leg is unread the page names it rather than folding it into the total.
The off-chain half cannot be read from a blockchain at any level of effort. No onchain read confirms a bank balance. That answer comes from a reserve report or it does not come at all, which is why who signed the report and what they examined does so much work.
One trap sits between the halves. The total supply of a token is not the same quantity as the amount issued to holders, and the gap can be large. Circle's June 2026 attestation nets out 56,437,602 EURC that exist on Solana as tokens allowed but not issued, against a total supply of 438,424,381, so a naive cross-chain sum overstates issued EURC by about 13 percent. Any figure presented as how much of a stablecoin exists should say which of the two quantities it is.
A second trap sits under the first. On some tokens a supply read is a point in time rather than a level. BiLira's TRYB cycles a large mint and burn through its Ethereum contract, and two correct reads of that contract one block apart in July 2026 differed by more than four times. Where that happens, a supply figure without the moment it was taken is not a number a reader can use, and a ratio built on it describes an instant rather than the coin.
The strongest thing a reserve report can do for a reader is name a perimeter and an instant, because that is what makes it testable. A report that lists the contracts it counts and the moment it counts them can be checked against chain state at that moment by anyone. Most reports name neither.
Sources: EURC Examination Report, June 2026, Circle transparency, BiLira reserve report, 21 May 2026
Nearly every stablecoin discussion is a dollar discussion, and the dollar tokens are the overwhelming majority of value. The tokens pegged to other currencies are where the mechanics are easiest to see, because the disclosure is generally thinner and the gap between the marketing and the documents is wider.
Generally, not uniformly, and the exception is worth knowing. BiLira's lira token TRYB publishes reserve reports running back to 2020, and the 2026 entries are independent auditor's reports signed in Istanbul by a named external Turkish sworn-in CPA firm, conducted under International Standards on Auditing to obtain reasonable assurance and concluding with an opinion in the affirmative. The 21 May 2026 report gives 162,677,688.00 TRYb issued and outstanding against TL 175,366,533.00 held in custody accounts, and it fixes a Report Date and Time of 11:00 GMT +3 so that figure can be checked at the moment it names. That is stronger evidence than several much larger tokens publish. None of it is discoverable by search, because BiLira's reports carry no text layer, so the auditor's name and the criteria exist only in the rendered document.
It is also not a clean bill of health, which is the more useful half of the example. No custodian bank is named in either 2026 report. The criteria the opinion is anchored to place the reserve at federally insured TL depository institutions, in a country with no federal level, where lira deposit insurance is administered by the Savings Deposit Insurance Fund. Real assurance and imperfect drafting sit in the same document, and only reading it tells you which parts are which.
The Singapore dollar token XSGD shows the other half of the same idea. Its issuer publishes a per chain breakdown alongside an attested total, and its report names both the chains it counts and the second it counts them at, which makes a reconciliation possible rather than only a comparison.
Non-dollar tokens also answer a different question from the dollar ones. A lira, naira or peso stablecoin exists because someone wants that currency onchain, and in some markets the demand runs the other way entirely, toward dollar access rather than a local-currency token. The region pages on this map carry that per market rather than as an average.
Sources: BiLira reserve report, 21 May 2026, BiLira reserve report index, XSGD SCS Reserve Account Report, 30 June 2026
The risks that matter are mostly not the ones the word stable suggests.
Reserve risk is the first. A reserve-backed token is a claim on an issuer, and a reserve held as bank deposits carries the credit standing of the banks holding it. Where those banks are not named, and on several tokens here they are not, that exposure cannot be assessed by a reader at all.
Disclosure risk is the second, and it is the one this map measures. A token whose reserve is real but undocumented and a token whose reserve is not there look identical from outside. Absence of evidence is the condition a reader is usually in, and it is worth naming as such rather than reading it as reassurance.
Redemption risk is third and it is routinely misread. An issuer stating that a token is redeemable at par is describing the right that backs the peg, not confirming that any given holder can exercise it. Terms, minimums, fees and eligibility are frequently unstated, and redemption mechanics are what separate a claim on reserves from a token that merely trades near its peg.
Measurement risk is the last and the least discussed. A supply figure taken without a stated moment, a reserve ratio whose denominator moves between reads, and an attested total compared against a different quantity than the one it attests will each produce a number that looks precise and answers nothing. On this map, where a figure cannot be stated honestly it is withheld and the reason is given in its place.
Sources: cNGN developer documentation, BiLira reserve report, 21 May 2026
A token designed to hold a constant value against something else, almost always a national currency, which holds that value when the issuer will exchange it for the currency it names, at par, on demand.
It depends entirely on the token, and the word backed carries at least four different meanings across the coins on this map. At one end an external accounting firm examines the reserve on a schedule and publishes the report. At the other, an issuer's documentation set runs to 27 pages with no page on reserves in it. The marketing language is similar in both cases and the documents are not.
Half of it. How many tokens exist, and on which chains, are facts held in contract state and open to anyone. Whether currency sits in a bank account against them cannot be read from a blockchain at any level of effort, so that half comes from a reserve report or it does not come at all.
Less than its title suggests, and the difference is worth reading for. An attestation is usually an opinion on one specific assertion by the issuer's management rather than an audit of the company, parts of the document are often explicitly outside the assurance, and the strength of the conclusion varies between a positive opinion and a statement that nothing came to the accountant's attention. The document says which, and the marketing page usually does not.
They are different claims and this map keeps them apart. Regulation describes a company's permissions; backing describes money in an account. A token can be described as regulated on the strength of an approval-in-principle that the regulator's own circular says is not a final licence, while publishing nothing at all about its reserves.
Every coin named on this page has its own entry in the stablecoin explorer, with the contracts DIA verified and the supply read from each of them.