Will Solana Create Its Own Stablecoin? Helius CEO Sees It as a “No-Brainer”

A new discussion has emerged in the Solana ecosystem after Helius Labs CEO Mert Mumtaz suggested that Solana could benefit from its own stablecoin. He argued that a Solana-focused digital dollar could recycle its reserve yield back into the ecosystem by either buying or burning SOL.

In a post shared on September 10, Mumtaz called the idea a “no-brainer,” initially hinting at protocol-level integration but later clarifying that digital asset treasury companies (DATs) may be better suited for the role. His reasoning centers on one critical issue: Solana currently hosts large volumes of stablecoins, but the yield generated from their reserves supports rival platforms instead of Solana itself.

Why a Native Stablecoin Matters

Mumtaz described stablecoins as commodities and warned that Solana is losing valuable economic potential by relying on external issuers. He noted that some stablecoins on Solana generate yield that flows back to Coinbase and Circle, who reinvest in Ethereum-focused initiatives like Base, a Layer-2 network.

While the legal classification of stablecoins under the US GENIUS Act places them outside traditional securities and commodities laws, the economic impact remains significant. Stablecoin issuers keep reserve yield—often from U.S. Treasury bills—and use it to expand their business operations.

For Mumtaz and other Solana proponents, the key question is: why should Solana’s activity generate billions in profits for competitors when those same funds could strengthen SOL’s ecosystem?

Community Responses and Early Experiments

The discussion quickly gained momentum within the Solana developer community. One project, KAST, publicly committed to designing a stablecoin called USDK that would direct 101–103% of its reserve income toward buying SOL. According to CEO statements, the surplus above 100% would be used as marketing expenditure, while the core of the revenue stream would support Solana’s ecosystem through token buybacks.

KAST plans to work with the m^0 foundation, which is developing programmable and application-specific digital dollars. By tying reserve yield directly to SOL purchases, KAST’s proposal represents one of the first tangible efforts to align stablecoin economics with Solana’s long-term growth.

How the Model Could Work

The mechanism is relatively simple:

1. A Solana-based stablecoin holds reserves, typically in U.S. Treasuries.

2. The income generated from those reserves is captured by the issuer.

3. Instead of keeping the yield as profit, the issuer (or a treasury structure like a DAT) uses it to buy SOL on the open market.

4. Those tokens are either burned, reducing supply, or redirected into ecosystem programs.

This model ensures that every dollar of stablecoin activity on Solana contributes directly to SOL’s value and sustainability, rather than funding competing networks.

The Stablecoin Wars Reach Solana

Mumtaz’s comments sparked broader comparisons to other ecosystems. On Ethereum, USDC plays a dominant role, with Coinbase and Circle splitting revenue from reserves. Coinbase’s Base network has quickly grown into a hub for stablecoin activity, creating a clear competitive dynamic.

For Solana advocates, this is a wake-up call. Allowing billions in stablecoin transactions to generate profits that are reinvested into rival ecosystems is increasingly viewed as strategically unsustainable.

Multicoin Capital co-founder Tushar Jain echoed Mumtaz’s view, highlighting that other projects like Hyperliquid already direct stablecoin yields back into their native tokens. He argued that Solana should adopt similar practices to avoid losing economic value to competitors.

Legal and Regulatory Landscape

The GENIUS Act, passed in July, clarified the regulatory framework for payment stablecoins in the United States. The law confirmed that stablecoins are not classified as securities or commodities, placing them largely under banking oversight. Importantly, the Act prohibits issuers from distributing yield directly to holders, ensuring reserve income remains with issuers or their affiliates.

This structure gives issuers the flexibility to use reserve profits creatively. For Solana, that opens the door for DATs or foundation-backed entities to design stablecoins that reinvest revenue into the ecosystem, without conflicting with regulatory requirements.

What’s Next for Solana?

At this stage, the idea remains a proposal. There is no governance vote or Solana Improvement Proposal (SIP) to formalize a native stablecoin. Mumtaz himself emphasized that the path forward is more likely through competition among DATs and issuers rather than changes at the protocol level.

Still, momentum is building. With projects like KAST already pledging to direct yield toward SOL, Solana could see the emergence of multiple stablecoin options aligned with its ecosystem. Whether this becomes a dominant trend or remains a niche experiment will depend on adoption, liquidity, and user trust.

Final Thoughts

The debate around a Solana-based stablecoin reflects a broader shift in crypto: ecosystems are increasingly aware that who controls stablecoin yields controls long-term economic power. By redirecting reserve income to support SOL, Solana could reduce dependency on competitors and strengthen its financial foundation.

While it’s still early, the discussion highlights Solana’s culture of rapid experimentation and market-driven innovation. If successful, a Solana-focused stablecoin could reshape the network’s economic landscape and provide a new model for aligning stablecoin activity with native token value.