The comparisons of stablecoins to Narrow Banks typically gloss over the most important details. Namely : yield pass through and the intended customer base. The attractiveness of the Narrow Bank's business model stemmed from it's pass through of the IORB Rate (currently at 4.4%) to previously unqualified institutions (e.g., MMFs who can only have access to the ON RRP Rate which currently sits at 4.25%). It's goal was also to never be a consumer bank, but split the 15bps spread with these institutions. The Fed's rejection of The Narrow Bank was ultimately their issue with the yield pass through and the effect it would have on the potency of monetary policy (e.g., the EFFR would cease to be as useful, funds would flow out of the Banking system, etc.) A Narrow-Bank-Stablecoin-Equivalent, wouldn't just park funds in safe assets, it'd pass through rates to consumers, which is prohibited under the GENIUS act. And it's unlikely that the Fed's stance on this should change as the impact of passing the IORB Rate through to consumers would practically render monetary policy obsolete as there would be no more opportunity cost to holding cash for anyone. Instead of the MMFs gaining ~15bps, it'd be consumers gaining 440bps. Agree with everything else in @nic__carter 's post though, just felt this was a good detail to clarify.