Key takeaways
-
The stablecoins close to a $ 300-billion market cap, but the adoption remains limited due to risks around removal, collateral and trust.
-
The removal of stablecoins such as Nubits (2018), Terrausd (2022) and USDC (2023) have expressed weaknesses in both models of algorithm and fiat.
-
The collapse of the terrausd wiped a nearly $ 50 billion worth and exposed the systematic destruction of algorithm designs.
-
In 2025, YU lost Yala who lost the peg following an exploitation, emphasizing issues of thin liquidity and cross-chain security.
Stablecoins only crossed a major milestone, with a total market capitalization that is now over $ 300 billion. Until October 6, 2025, CoinMarketCap Report Excessive $ 312 billion.
Despite the rapid growth, the stablecoins have not yet achieved the mainstream adoption. A major reason is the repeated instances of these Tokens are missing their peg in the possessions that will return them – if fiat currencies like the US dollar, Goods such as gold or even other cryptocurrencies.
This article discusses the real examples of removal of stablecoin, why this happened, the dangers involved and what the givers could do to prevent it.
Historical General -Side of Stablecoin Defggings
Stablecoin Defggings are repeatedly exposed flaws in how these possessions are designed. Early examples, such as the fall of 2018 by nubits, have shown how fragile models can be. Even Tether’s USDT (USDT) Short fell below $ 1 in 2018 and again in 2022, driven by panic in the market and Lack of liquidity – Events that have filed concerns about its reserves.
One of the biggest falls arrived in May 2022, when Terrausd – an algorithmic stablecoin -No not opened after a wave of redemption that set a bank -like bank. His brother, token, Luna, went to Hyperinflation, wiping nearly $ 50 billion in market value and shipping shockwaves through the broader crypto industry.
Fiat-back stablecoins are also depegged. USDT Moment drops to $ 0.80 in 2018 amidst solvency fears, and USDC (USDC) its peg lost in 2023 after the Silicon Valley Bank collapsed – showing how even the FIAT reserves face traditional banking risks. Dai (Dai) and frax (Frax) – Both USDC -back -back – also dipped at the same time, deepening concerns about reserve interlinkages throughout the market.
Together, these episodes feature liquidity shortcomings, relevant confidence, and systematic risks that continue to challenge Stablecoins-even if the market is close to $ 300-billion marks.
Do you know? Most degs occur when the pools are running thin. Large drainage sellers are available for liquidity, making recovery more difficult. Terra’s curve pool imbalance in 2022 and Yala’s little ether (Eth) The pool in 2025 showed how limited depth could increase market shocks.
Case Study: The fall of terrausd
May 2022 Falling Terrausd (UST) is a major blow to the crypto market, which has been able to react a chain reaction throughout the industry and expose the risks of algorithmic stablecoins. Unlike traditional FIAT -supported versions, UST has tried to maintain $ 1 peg through an arbitration mechanism with its brother token, Luna.
The Terrausd adoption was filed by the anchor protocol, which offered an unstable, subsidized yield of nearly 20% to UST depositors. As the doubts about this model grew and the crypto markets weakened, confidence collapsed, triggering a bank-like bank. Large, sophisticated investors came out first, Speed up UST’s Deg. The first clear signs appeared on May 7, 2022, when the two large wallets moved away more than 375 million UST from the anchor.
It has been a massive swap wave from UST to Luna. In just three days, Luna’s supply jumped from about 1 billion to about 6 trillion, while its price crashed from about $ 80 to almost zero, UST’s peg completely broke. Crashing is exposed to major flaws in decentralized finances (DEFI), from unrealistic yield models to how smaller investors, often without timely information, ended up getting the biggest hit.
Do you know? Stablecoin degs tend to spill when the panic is spreading online. With the collapse of UST, social media discussions and forum discussions are likely to have set up a quick backwardness. The speed of which losing confidence has shown how fast the crypto fear is spreading, faster than traditional finances.
Case Study: Yu’s Yu Stablecoin
In September 2025, Bitcoin supported by Bitcoin by Yala, Yu, Suffered a removal of the event following an attempt to attack. According to the Blockchain company lookonchain, an attack exploited Yala Protocol’s Minting 120 million YU tokens on the Polygon network. Attack then bridged and sells 7.71 million YU tokens for 7.7 million USDC across Ethereum and Solana Networks.
On September 14, 2025, the USDC was converted to 1,501 ETH and distributed funds to multiple wallets. According to the lookonchain, the attack will still be held with 22.29 million yu token in Ethereum and Solana, with an additional 90 million yu left in the polygon network, which has not been bridged.
The Yala team said that all bitcoin (Btc) Collateral is safe, but Yu still fails to recover its peg. They did not enable the converts and bridges and began an investigation of security partners.
The event is highlighting a critical weakness. Despite a $ 119-million market cap, Yu has super thin liquidity in Onchain, which makes it susceptible to such attacks. On September 18, 2025, Yu had Lived again Its peg to Dexscreener.
Why did Stablecoins fail to handle their $ 1 peg
Stablecoins aims to maintain a stable price, but past events show that they can lose their $ 1 peg during stress. Failures have emerged from design weaknesses, market sentiments, and external pressure showing flaws even in stable systems. The main reasons for deepegging include:
-
Lack of liquidity: When pools have low funds, large sellers of orders cause significant price collapse. Yala’s little ether pool and Terra’s curve swap shows how limited the sleeplessness of liquidity is.
-
Loss of trust and running: Panic can spark bank-powered scenarios. When the falters of confidence, the removal of the masses can push prices down, and social emotions or noisy market reactions can accelerate the spiral.
-
Algorithmic flaws: The mechanisms that use mint-burn, such as Terra’s UST, fail when redemption in excessive control. Exploits or market shocks can ensure these fragile designs.
-
External pressures: Broader crises, such as bank collapse, hacks or economic collapse, can decompose pegs throughout the market, increased volatility and systematic risks.
Do you know? To prevent future depgs, projects experiment with proof-of-reserves, overcollateralization and real-time audit. These innovations are marked by a transition from fantasy algorithmic to transparent, mechanisms of confidence formation, even though investors know $ 1 stability are never guaranteed to crypto.
Dangerous investors cannot be ignored
Stablecoins are designed to offer reliability, but when they lose their peg, they can create serious risks for investors and wider crypto markets. Here are some of the major risks that investors should know:
-
Financial Losses: Degs can lead to irreversible erosion. In the case of Stablecoins, the annual run run is higher than that of conventional banks, which increases the risk of financial losses for investors.
-
SECURITY FLAWS: Attacks, such as one of the Yala who have mininted unauthorized tokens, can spread possessions throughout the blockchains, which often leave investors with little chance to recover.
-
Regulation and Reputation Concerns: The Stablecoin market approaches $ 300 billion, led by major players such as the USDT, USDC and USDE. The growing regulatory review has increased concerns about the stability of the financial providers. That also highlights how limited mainstream is still adopted.
-
Systematic effects: A single stablecoin failure can trigger extensive market interference. For example, Terra’s collapse has destroyed billions of billions and proven relevant defi systems, showing how interrelated risks can be strengthened throughout the crypto ecosystems.
Lessons learned from Stablecoin collapsed
Repeated stablecoin failures have shown both the potential and the destruction of dollar digital assets. Each fall exposed how liquidity gaps, weak collateral and overreliance in algorithms can quickly eliminate trust.
To address these risks, those who provide can focus on stronger collateral-using over-collateralized models and high quality, liquid properties. Transparency is equally important. Proof-of-reserves, independent audits and clear disclosure to reserves and redemption policies help restore confidence. Backstop funds can also absorb sudden sellers and stabilize peg.
On the technical side, thorough contract audits, multi-signature controls and limited exposure to cross-chain reduce security risks. Solid Governance and Regulatory alignment-under frameworks such as crypto-assets (MICA) or US Stablecoin bills-along with insurance range, add additional protection and strengthen investor confidence.
This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every transfer of investment and trading involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when deciding.
