What Cross-Border CFOs Need to Know About Stablecoin Bridging

The office of the CFO and crypto assets might sound like strange bedfellows.

After all, CFOs and other finance leaders are the staid stewards of corporate balance sheets; while digital assets are typically understood to reside in the move-fast-and-break-things vertical of finance, a Wild West ecosystem with a checkered past.

The volatility of cryptocurrencies, the regulatory fog, and the perception of blockchain as “tech for the tech crowd” have traditionally meant finance leaders could afford to look away.

But stablecoins, dollar-pegged blockchain-based payment and value transfer instruments that promise faster settlement and global reach compared to fiat methods, are changing the back-office calculus. Once the domain of retail traders seeking refuge from bitcoin volatility, stablecoins are now embedded in cross-border settlements, decentralized finance, and remittance corridors.

Stablecoins offer instant settlement across time zones, low fees compared with correspondent banking, and programmable features that allow treasury desks to automate flows.

Yet as adoption grows, so too does ecosystem complexity. Stablecoins are not bound to a single network. The same stablecoin, USDC for example, can exist simultaneously on Ethereum, Solana, Polygon, Avalanche, Arbitrum, and other blockchains. Each chain has its own ecosystem of exchanges, lenders and liquidity pools.

That multiplicity is both a strength, due to greater optionality, and a headache, because the stablecoin on one chain is not inherently the same as on another.

One company’s supply chain finance partner may operate on one chain for traceability, while a payments provider might favor another for its low fees. Treasury desks holding a token on one chain may find they need to bridge it to another to settle invoices, manage liquidity pools, or participate in tokenized investment products.

To move value across, CFOs need “bridges.” But before even that, they need to understand what stablecoin “bridges” are.

Read also: The Stablecoin Market Is $220 Billion. Are Businesses Actually Using Them?

Stablecoins Might Need Bridging

For cross-border CFOs, liquidity is not just about holding cash. It’s about having it available in the right currency, in the right market, at the right time.

A bridge, in blockchain terms, is infrastructure that locks a token on one chain and issues an equivalent representation on another. It is operationally equivalent to a cross-border payment rail, except the borders are not nations but blockchains.

On paper, the concept sounds simple. In practice, it is a minefield. Forget the complexities of FX hedging, for cross-border CFOs, the stablecoin landscape can be one full of even more unexpected twists, turns and pitfalls.

If CFOs misunderstand a bridge for a swap by confusing a liquidity pool with a native transfer mechanism, treasury operations risk paying hidden spreads. If they underestimate liquidity fragmentation, and CFOs may face delays in settling payables or mismatches in cross-chain positions.

And, crucially, if finance teams overestimate the security of a bridge, their funds can be stranded or stolen. Bridge hacks represent nearly 40% of the entire value of crypto lost due to hacks across the entire digital asset sector’s history. Counterparty risk is a prominent concern.

The problem is compounded by speed of innovation. New blockchains proliferate, each promising faster settlement or lower fees, and issuers turn their attention to the new competitive playing field. Liquidity disperses across the n+1 blockchains, forcing corporates into constant recalibration.

Still, for cross-border CFOs, treasury efficiency rests on three pillars: liquidity, predictability and risk management. Stablecoin bridging cuts directly across all three.

Read more: Stablecoins Face Liquidity Shakeout That Could Upend Payment Strategies

Why This Matters for CFOs

A dollar trapped on the “wrong” chain is not useful capital. Corporates accepting stablecoin payments from clients in Asia might receive one stablecoin, only to discover their suppliers in Latin America demand a different one on a different chain. Without effective bridging, that dollar is illiquid.

For CFOs, the analogy to FX hedging is familiar. In the early days of FX markets, treasurers had to navigate fragmented liquidity and idiosyncratic settlement risks. Over time, infrastructure improved, standards emerged, and risk management tools matured. Stablecoin bridging may likely find itself on a similar trajectory, moving from ad hoc solutions to institutionally robust rails.

Beyond bridging, swap solutions are also proliferating across the cross-border crypto landscape. For example, if a company holds one U.S. dollar-pegged stablecoin but a counterparty prefers settlement in a different token, the business could perform a token swap. The process doesn’t move assets across blockchains, it simply exchanges one token for another using a liquidity pool or trading venue (often a decentralized exchange).

For cross-border CFOs, token swaps are a tool for adapting payment instruments to counterparty preferences, while bridging is about adapting infrastructure to different blockchain ecosystems.

Click here to register for the upcoming PYMNTS 2025 B2B event, “B2B.AI: The Architecture of Intelligent Money Movement,” taking place Oct. 6-31.