# Market Thesis Research Bundle

Question: Given the GENIUS Act regime and bank/payer interest, will regulated stablecoins gain visible traction in exchange settlement, B2B invoicing, or cross-border treasury flows rather than staying mainly a retail-payments story?

What this bundle is: a reasoning and monitoring scaffold. It organizes public evidence into observations, claims, uncertainty branches, thresholds, and a watch plan.

What this bundle is not: primary evidence, live market data, trade advice, or a substitute for official, live, or current web sources.

Core tension: Given the GENIUS Act regime and bank/payer interest, will regulated stablecoins gain visible traction in exchange settlement, B2B invoicing, or cross-border treasury flows rather than staying mainly a retail-payments story?

Current inference to verify: {'status': 'current_inference_to_verify', 'statement': 'Regulated stablecoins are visibly moving beyond a retail-payments framing into institutional settlement, treasury, and cross-border enterprise workflows, with the strongest public evidence in exchange/institutional settlement and treasury/payout use cases. B2B invoicing remains the weakest and least directly evidenced sub-area.', 'notable_limitations': ['Much of the strongest evidence is company-controlled positioning rather than audited usage disclosures.', 'Public evidence is stronger for settlement, treasury, and payouts than for invoice-specific workflows.', 'Retail use cases remain part of issuer strategy, so the story is mixed rather than exclusive.']} Treat this as a hypothesis that must be refreshed against live official sources, not as a signal.

How to use: read `source_priority.json` first, refresh sources in `live_verification_plan.json`, then use `fact_inference_split.json`, `thresholds.json`, and `watch_schedule.json` to decide what changed. Do not infer buy/sell/hold, position sizing, execution, or asset-price direction from this artifact.