Brian Armstrong, Andrew Feldman, Jake Loosararian: Coinbase CEO's Top 3 Crypto Trends for 2026 + More from Davos!

This All-In interview was recorded at the USA House during the World Economic Forum in Davos. The host introduces himself as Jason Galicanis and says the show was added to the roster at the last minute, leaving time for about half a dozen interviews. The guest is introduced as Brian Armstrong from Coinbase, described as a friend of the podcast making perhaps his fourth or fifth appearance. The segment opens with a sponsor message for the New York Stock Exchange.

The conversation frames the Davos trip as being about regulation rather than networking: the stated focus is getting market structure legislation for crypto passed. The discussion then qualifies that, noting that a lot of networking and commercial meetings also happen there. One claim made is that five of the top 20 global banks now use Coinbase to build crypto infrastructure into their products. Meetings with leaders of different countries about economic freedom and updating financial systems with crypto are also mentioned.

Asked whether the bank partnerships are white-label arrangements and whether the banks are disclosed, the answer is partial. JPMorgan and PNC Bank are named as public integrations, while others are said not to be public yet. The discussion also cites integrations with BlackRock, which is said to want to tokenize every one of its funds, as evidence that financial institutions are "coming on chain."

The interview contrasts two administrations. The host's framing recalls that under the Biden administration, a visit to Washington to talk with regulators was met with refusal to engage. It adds that whatever people think of President Trump, he has engaged with the business community and taken a legal path for crypto seriously.

The response is a sharp verdict on the previous administration, explicitly offered as a personal view:

The Biden administration really tried to unlawfully kill this industry in America, from my point of view.

Trump is credited with campaigning on making the United States "the crypto capital of the world" and with keeping that promise by pushing for clear rules. Three reasons are given for why this matters: consumers being able to earn more on their money; a political base of about 52 million Americans who have used crypto and want clear rules; and global competitiveness. As evidence for the last point, the discussion says China has announced it will pay interest on its central bank digital currency, and that some of the largest stablecoin issuers are still offshore, capital the president wants to repatriate.

The host adds a caveat about the industry's own conduct. He says he was never a fan of people doing things that "weren't buttoned up," but was less a fan of the prior administration refusing to meet. He compares crypto to Airbnb and Uber, which he says also bent rules, and acknowledges that in some crypto cases people broke rules "and they paid the price." The rule set is now described as being refined.

Asked whether Coinbase competes with banks, the answer is that the relationship is "mostly collaborative." Most bank CEOs met at Davos are described as very interested in crypto and starting to integrate it. One unnamed CEO of a top-10 global bank is reported to have said:

crypto is my number one priority. We view that this is existential. We're all in.

The reason given for calling crypto existential is an analogy to the early internet: Amazon competing with Barnes & Noble, or blogs competing with print newspapers. Institutions can treat change as an opportunity or as a threat. The supporting figures are that around 500 million people have used crypto globally, that Bitcoin was "the best performing asset class of the last decade," and that the largest financial institutions are integrating it. On that basis, the discussion calls it "foolish to pretend that this isn't happening."

The account of bank attitudes is mixed. Some banks are described as nervous about their franchise and others as treating crypto as an opportunity. The host suggests banks have not before faced a disruptive technology competitor. The response stresses wanting "everyone to win," while noting it does not speak for the president. It interprets his comments as wanting all American businesses to win, but likely opposing anyone who tries to undermine the newly passed legislation.

Asked directly whether banks are trying to "retrade the deal," the answer is hedged ("I don't want to, like, be careful here"). It specifies that it is bank trade groups, rather than banks in general, that are believed to be trying to undo the Genius Act. The act is said to have passed four months earlier, and undoing it is called a red line for Coinbase and for others in the industry. The stated position remains that banks and crypto companies can both win.

The Genius Act, the stablecoin bill, is described as now law. The host credits David Sacks, whom he calls "my bestie," with leading on requirements that stablecoins be audited and above board. He also refers to longstanding fears of a run on Tether, mentioning past fines, attestations, and doubts about whether it held the resources it claimed.

The reserve requirement is stated precisely:

U.S. regulated stable coins have to have 100% of the assets stored in short-term U.S. treasuries.

The maturity limit is given with some uncertainty: "something like 30 days, 30-day treasuries are the max, I believe." The conclusion drawn is that holders are essentially trusting the U.S. government not to fail within 30 days, which the conversation calls a safe bet.

The discussion contrasts this with fractional reserve banking. Banks lend out deposits rather than holding them all, which is why they face heavy regulatory overhead and can suffer runs. The old joke of lending at 6% and paying 3% is cited to describe that business model, which requires a bank license. With 100% reserves, the argument goes, a stablecoin does not need a bank license and can pass more money to holders because it is safer.

Silicon Valley Bank is offered as a cautionary example. The host says it "mistimed their allocations with treasuries, I guess," and suffered a run. He recounts being in a board meeting, apparently on a Thursday, where the company had all its money at SVB. He received a text saying to get the money out. Two board members resisted because of a 30-year relationship, a compromise of withdrawing half to make payroll was floated, and he says he insisted. The bank failed "literally that night."

The host identifies stablecoin yield as the key business-model issue. The response corrects the terminology: "it's not interest. It's a rewards program," which it says was carefully negotiated in the Genius Act.

The legal distinction is explained as follows: rewards cannot be based solely on the balance held. The customer must do some other activity, such as payments, trading, or subscribing to Coinbase One. When customers do, Coinbase is said to pass along "about 100% of the economics" from holding the stablecoins, which is described as a big driver of growth.

Against concerns that this will destroy the lending market, the argument is that crypto is just another version of the old choice between money market funds and bank deposits. Money markets are said to already hold trillions of dollars, and high-yield checking accounts already exist.

Coinbase's relationship with Circle is described as strong. USDC is called the largest regulated stablecoin because it complies with the Genius Act in the U.S. and with MiCA in Europe. Tether is acknowledged as still bigger and is understood to be cleaning itself up. The host suggests a likely outcome of two Tethers, one U.S.-compliant and one "Wild West" version outside the U.S., and the reply agrees.

The discussion stresses that Coinbase has no exclusive arrangement with Circle. It lists other stablecoins, including PayPal's, and supports Tether "in certain ways," especially for people converting it. Asked whether users can trade into Tether or only out of it, the answer is that it differs by country and is "nuanced," without a precise description.

Pressed on Tether's risk, with the host explicitly taking ownership of calling its approach "loosey-goosey," the response is balanced. It acknowledges regulatory questions but says, "I actually like the Tether guys." Tether is credited with serving people struggling with local currencies at 70 to 100% annual inflation and with strong distribution in emerging markets. The caveat is that Tether is not currently compliant under the Genius Act and, as understood, does not follow the same 100% short-term Treasury reserve rule, so "people have to make their own determination on that."

Asked whether crypto needs objective ratings for consumers, the answer describes minimum listing standards instead. Assets are screened for cybersecurity risk, the risk that a developer could "rug everyone," and legal compliance. Anything that clears the bar is listed and customers decide. Recommending investments is rejected as Coinbase's job, partly because traditional bond ratings can be politicized; the host's aside is "Go see the big short."