Speaker stated Circle's policy to freeze USDC only on a judge's order is structurally broken for emergencies, delegating control to the government and lacking internal responsiveness. This policy delay increases risk for USDC holders during hacks, as funds cannot be frozen quickly, unlike stablecoins with proactive freeze mechanisms. Avoid USDC because its freeze policy may lead to greater losses in theft events, reducing its reliability and safety as a stablecoin in volatile situations. Circle could revise its policy, or legal systems might improve emergency response times, mitigating the downside.
Speaker mentioned Tether has an internal team and high thresholds for freezing funds, implying a more controlled and responsive approach compared to Circle. Tether's ability to freeze funds based on internal assessment may make it safer during security incidents, attracting users seeking stability in emergencies. Watch USDT as it could benefit from perceived better security management and increased adoption relative to USDC in the stablecoin market. Tether's policies might lack transparency or face regulatory scrutiny, potentially offsetting advantages.