Circle finds itself at a crossroads, grappling with shrinking margins, looming competition from traditional finance, and uncertainty around upcoming regulation. This analysis dissects Circle's precarious position and potential strategic pivots discussed in the podcast.
Crushing Margins & Financial Headwinds
- "You've got your gross margins getting crushed with distribution costs."
- "Net income is down 42%. Adjusted EVA is down 28%. They earned 1.7 billion in revenue in 2024 but had to pay out 900 million to Coinbase as a distribution partner."
- Circle's profitability is under pressure, highlighted by a massive $900M payout to Coinbase, nearly half its 2024 revenue.
- Significant overhead, including $250M+ in compensation and $140M in G&A, further strains financials amidst declining net income (-42%) and Adjusted EBITDA (-28%).
- Anticipated falling interest rates threaten to further erode Circle's primary revenue stream derived from its reserves.
The Banking Onslaught & Regulatory Fog
- "Core US market is being deregulated and banks and financial institutions are about to kind of crash this party, which was this kind of duopoly of Circle and Tether."
- "I spoke to a circle board member and I said is stable coin bill good for you? And they were unclear."
- The potential entry of banks into the stablecoin market, enabled by potential US regulation, poses a direct threat to the existing Circle/Tether dominance.
- There's internal uncertainty within Circle about whether proposed stablecoin legislation will ultimately be advantageous, signaling significant strategic risk.
Pivoting Strategy: Partnerships & Transactions
- "You either look towards becoming effectively a partner for all the banks... you let them effectively white label USDC."
- "You fundamentally shift the way that you try to make money away from a purely interest rate driven business... I think that you effectively try to make a very very small transaction fee."
- A potential strategic shift involves Circle becoming an infrastructure provider, offering white-labeled USDC services to banks entering the stablecoin space.
- Transitioning to a transaction-fee-based model is suggested as a necessary evolution away from reliance on volatile interest income, mirroring payment network models but likely with lower margins.
- Skepticism exists regarding Circle's high operating costs being solely due to compliance, especially after model changes reduced direct user interaction.
Valuation Reality Check
- "If Circle... valuation... 4 to 6 billion... That would imply a multiple of like 13 to 20x... To me, that feels expensive."
- "I think it's better to look at like a bank multiple and then effectively take a discount from there."
- The discussed IPO valuation range of $4-6B (13-20x Adj. EBITDA) is viewed as potentially inflated compared to relevant financial institutions.
- A more appropriate valuation benchmark might be traditional bank multiples, potentially discounted due to Circle's more restricted business model compared to full-service banks.
Key Takeaways:
- Circle faces intense pressure from distribution costs eating into revenue and the looming threat of bank competition fueled by regulation. Its future likely depends on fundamentally shifting its business model.
- Margin Compression is Real: High distribution payouts ($900M to Coinbase) severely impact profitability.
- Banks Are Coming: Impending regulation could unleash bank competition, challenging Circle's market share.
- Pivot or Perish: Circle must transition from interest-rate reliance towards transaction fees or B2B partnerships to survive and justify its valuation.
For further insights, check out the video: Link
This episode dissects Circle's precarious financial position and strategic crossroads as potential banking competition looms and its interest-rate-dependent business model faces significant pressure.
Circle's Financial Headwinds and Market Position
- The discussion opens by painting a challenging picture for Circle, the issuer of the USDC stablecoin (a type of cryptocurrency pegged to a stable asset like the US dollar). The speaker highlights several concerning financial metrics:
- Gross margins are being significantly compressed by distribution costs, exemplified by the $900 million paid out to Coinbase (out of $1.7 billion in 2024 revenue).
- Operating expenses remain high, with over $250 million annually in compensation and another $140 million in General and Administrative (G&A) costs.
- Profitability metrics are declining, with net income down 42% and Adjusted EBITDA (Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization, adjusted for certain non-recurring or non-cash items) down 28%.
- The core US market faces potential disruption as traditional banks and financial institutions enter the stablecoin space, threatening the existing Circle/Tether duopoly.
Potential Strategic Shifts for Circle
- Faced with these pressures, the speaker explores potential strategic pivots for Circle. A conversation with a Circle board member revealed uncertainty about whether upcoming stablecoin legislation would ultimately benefit the company. The analysis suggests two primary paths forward:
- Bank Partnerships: Circle could become a technology partner for banks entering the stablecoin market, allowing them to white-label USDC infrastructure.
- Transaction Fee Model: A fundamental shift away from relying on interest earned from reserves is proposed. The speaker argues, "...you effectively try to make a very very small transaction uh transaction fee. I think that's ultimately where you're going to make money." This anticipates a future where stablecoins are ubiquitous, making transaction volume the key revenue driver, especially as falling interest rates further erode reserve-based income.
Valuation Analysis and Market Comparables
- The discussion scrutinizes Circle's potential IPO valuation, reportedly targeted between $4 billion and $6 billion. This implies an Adjusted EBITDA multiple of roughly 13x to 20x. The speaker finds this potentially high, stating, "To me, that feels expensive..." when compared to relevant companies:
- Payments/Crypto: Coinbase (16x Adjusted EBITDA), PayPal (10x).
- Networks: Visa (27x), Mastercard (28x) – considered less comparable due to their network effects and oligopoly status.
- The speaker suggests that a bank multiple, potentially discounted due to Circle's limitations on capital use compared to traditional banks, might be a more appropriate valuation benchmark.
Scrutinizing Circle's Cost Structure
- The speaker questions the common justification that high compliance costs drive Circle's significant operating expenses. Referencing a previous podcast discussion (with Laura Shin), the analysis points out that Circle has altered its operating model over the past ~18 months:
- Circle moved away from allowing a wide range of entities to directly mint and burn USDC.
- It now primarily relies on a smaller number of distribution partners (like Coinbase).
- This shift, the speaker argues, should theoretically reduce compliance burdens compared to the previous model, casting doubt on compliance being the sole or primary driver of its current high expense levels.
Conclusion: Pivot or Perish?
- Circle stands at a critical juncture, facing eroding profitability and imminent competition. Its reliance on interest income appears unsustainable long-term. Investors and researchers must closely monitor Circle's ability to pivot towards a transaction-based model and justify its valuation amidst these significant market shifts and cost structure questions.
