Two weeks after Open USD’s launch wiped off a large chunk of Circle’s market value, a major bank has translated the threat into hard numbers. Mizuho Securities downgraded Circle Internet Group (CRCL) to Underperform from Neutral on July 14 and slashed its price target to $50 from $85, implying roughly 21% downside from the prior close, arguing that the consortium stablecoin unveiled on June 30 could undercut the very foundation of Circle’s revenue model. Shares fell about 3.7% to $60.68 after Tuesday’s open.
The call matters less for the rating than for the mechanism behind it, which reframes how the Open USD threat actually works.
The Thesis: It’s About Distribution, Not Market Share
The intuitive fear about Open USD is that its 140-plus corporate backers will simply out-compete USDC and take its users. Mizuho’s argument is more subtle, and more uncomfortable, for Circle.
Mizuho Analyst Dan Dolev wrote that Open USD’s “pass-through model to distributors,” combined with its scale and likely GENIUS Act compliance, “could fundamentally alter CRCL’s business model, which relies on retaining a large portion of the treasury yield to drive revenues.” The two structures are near-opposites. Circle runs what Mizuho calls a float-capture model: it collects 100% of the income earned on the Treasuries backing USDC and retains a blended share of roughly 38%, paying the rest out to distribution partners. Open USD inverts that entirely, keeping only a small management fee and routing nearly all reserve income to its partners, on the premise that merely issuing a stablecoin is not, by itself, a business worth much.
The implication is the key insight: Circle does not have to lose a single user to Open USD to lose money to it. If a rival is willing to give distributors nearly all the reserve income, it resets the market price of distribution across the industry. Circle’s partners can then demand a bigger cut simply by pointing at the alternative. That is margin compression by competitive gravity, not by customer defection.
The August Problem: Coinbase
That abstraction has a very concrete first test. Dolev flagged Circle’s revenue-sharing agreement with Coinbase, by far its largest distributor, which already receives roughly half of USDC’s reserve income, which is expected to renew in August. Coinbase’s support for Open USD, he argued, “could boost its leverage” in that renegotiation.
It is an awkward position for Circle: its single most important partner is simultaneously a backer of the consortium built to make issuers like Circle pay more. This is precisely the dynamic that drove Circle’s stock down 16.38% on Open USD’s launch day, its sharpest single-session drop since its IPO. Mizuho has now attached a forecast to it, raising its estimate for Circle’s 2027 distribution and transaction costs to 73% of revenue from 64%, and cutting its 2027 adjusted EBITDA projection to $699 million from $1.093 billion, about 25% below the $941 million Wall Street consensus.
Even Higher Rates Can’t Save It, Mizuho Says
Perhaps the most striking element of the note is what it dismisses. Circle earns the bulk of its revenue from interest on the short-term Treasuries backing USDC, which means higher-for-longer rates are normally a tailwind. Mizuho now expects rates in 2027 to stay higher than it previously assumed, and cut its numbers anyway.
That is the crux of the bear case: the bank believes the pricing compression from Open USD outweighs the benefit of a friendlier rate environment. In a market where Fed Chair Kevin Warsh has flipped projections toward hikes and inflation sits near a three-year high, an issuer whose economics are levered to rates would ordinarily be a beneficiary. Mizuho is arguing the structural problem is bigger than the macro gift.
A Bank Charter, Then A Downgrade
The downgrade landed with pointed timing. It came a session after Circle shares rallied roughly 14% in premarket trading on news that it had received final regulatory approval to establish First National Digital Currency Bank, a genuine milestone that gives the company a federally chartered footing.
Mizuho’s response was essentially: nice, but irrelevant to the problem. The bank argued the market’s enthusiasm may have been overly optimistic, because the charter does not address Circle’s core challenges, among them the continued decline in USDC’s market capitalization. In other words, regulatory legitimacy is not the constraint on Circle’s earnings; the distribution economics are.
The Other Side Of The Argument
Mizuho’s thesis is a forecast, not a fact, and there are credible counterpoints. Open USD has not actually launched yet, it is slated to go live later in 2026, so its ability to convert 140 logos into real volume remains unproven. That skepticism is well-founded: Arca’s Jeff Dorman has noted a partner list says little about adoption, Dragonfly’s Rob Hadick warned that “consortiums are hard and they break easily,” and several Korean firms named as Open USD partners have publicly said they never formally signed on, raising questions about how deep the coalition truly runs. Clear Street’s Owen Lau called Circle’s launch-day sell-off “an overreaction.”
Nor is the Street uniform. Baird has remained constructive on Circle over the longer term even while trimming its target, and Mizuho’s own analyst carries a 51.3% success rate over the past year per TipRanks data. Circle also retains real assets: regulatory-first positioning, the new national trust bank, deep institutional relationships, and USDC’s status as the compliant dollar of choice in Western markets. And the broader tape has not helped — crypto-linked equities have been under pressure generally as investors de-risk ahead of inflation data and the Fed’s July meeting.
Why It Matters
The downgrade marks a shift in how the market is pricing the stablecoin business itself. For years, the assumption was that whoever issued the dollar captured the float; and Circle’s IPO thesis rested on that. Open USD’s proposition is that issuance is a commodity and distribution is where the power sits, an argument that, as The Crypto Times has explored, pressures USDC more directly than Tether’s USDT given the overlap with Circle’s payments-heavy turf.
If Mizuho is right, the damage arrives not through a dramatic market-share war but quietly, in contract renewals, beginning with Coinbase in August. That negotiation has just become the most consequential event on Circle’s calendar, and the clearest read on whether Open USD is reshaping stablecoin economics before it has even shipped a token.
Also Read: Circle, Coinbase Join 40+ Firms Backing Linux Foundation’s x402
