StableTokens.com is an independent research and information resource focused on the development of U.S. state-backed stable tokens.
Our objective is simple: to provide a clear, evidence-based record of what U.S. states are actually doing, separating verified public programmes from proposals, private-sector activity, broader stablecoin regulation and speculation.
Every state is assessed using the same classification framework and evidence standards.
StableTokens.com uses a four-stage classification framework to track state-backed stable token activity across all 50 U.S. states.
A state's classification is based on verifiable public evidence, including legislation, official government announcements, statutory commissions, public-agency programmes, state-owned institutions and implementation activity.
Stablecoin regulation, licensing frameworks, private stablecoin activity and broader digital-asset policy do not by themselves qualify a state as developing a state-backed stable token.
An officially authorised state-backed stable token has reached issuance or operational deployment through a state government, state agency, state-owned institution or other authorised public entity.
Evidence may include official issuance, operational infrastructure, reserve arrangements, public distribution or confirmed deployment.
Current classification: Wyoming - Frontier Stable Token (FRNT)
A state-backed stable token has progressed beyond investigation and is being actively developed through an official state programme, state agency or state-controlled institution.
Evidence may include confirmed implementation work, pilot programmes, technical development, approved public programmes or formal partnerships established to develop the token.
Current classification: North Dakota - Roughrider Coin
A state is formally examining the possibility of a state-backed stable token, but development or issuance has not yet been authorised.
Evidence may include enacted study legislation, statutory commissions, treasury studies, official working groups, government reports or other documented public review processes.
Current classification: New Hampshire - Stable Token Study Commission
No verified public programme currently meets the StableTokens.com criteria for Launching / Live, In Development or Under Review.
StableTokens.com continues to monitor official activity in these states.
A Monitoring state may still have significant stablecoin legislation, digital-asset initiatives or related public programmes. Where relevant, these may be identified as Related Initiatives without changing the state's core classification.
Texas and Pennsylvania, for example, currently have related digital-currency or stablecoin policy initiatives, but neither currently meets our criteria for classification as a state-backed stable token programme.
For the purposes of the StableTokens.com tracker, a state-backed stable token must have a substantive connection to a U.S. state government, state agency, state-owned institution or officially authorised public programme.
This distinction is fundamental to our research.
The existence of stablecoin legislation in a state does not necessarily mean that the state itself is developing a stable token.
Similarly, regulation of private stablecoin issuers does not constitute a state-backed stable token programme.
Our tracker therefore distinguishes state-backed initiatives from:
These developments may still be relevant to the wider policy environment and may be covered by StableTokens.com, but they are not automatically classified as state-backed stable token programmes.
Some states are pursuing significant digital-currency, stablecoin or tokenisation initiatives that fall outside the strict definition of a state-backed stable token.
Where such activity is materially relevant, StableTokens.com may identify it as a Related Initiative.
A Related Initiative is not a separate tracker classification.
The state's underlying classification remains Monitoring unless verified evidence supports moving it to Under Review, In Development or Launching / Live.
This allows StableTokens.com to document important developments without overstating their relationship to state-backed stable token issuance.
StableTokens.com classifications are based on publicly verifiable evidence.
Wherever possible, we prioritise primary sources, including:
Credible secondary reporting may be used to provide context or identify developments requiring further investigation.
However, a state's classification should not be upgraded solely on the basis of speculation, political commentary, social-media discussion or unverified reporting.
Where evidence is unclear, we favour the more conservative classification until stronger public evidence becomes available.
The U.S. State Tracker is designed to evolve as state programmes develop.
A state may move from Monitoring → Under Review → In Development → Launching / Live as verified evidence demonstrates meaningful progress.
Movement is not necessarily linear.
A programme may stall, legislation may fail, a commission may conclude without recommending implementation, or an initiative may be abandoned.
Where an initiative no longer meets the criteria for its existing classification, StableTokens.com may move the state back to an earlier classification or to Monitoring.
Proposed legislation alone does not automatically result in reclassification.
We assess the substance, status and official significance of each development before changing a state's status.
Accuracy is central to the StableTokens.com project.
State legislation, public programmes and digital-asset policy can change quickly. Tracker entries and research pages are therefore reviewed and updated as new verified information becomes available.
Where new evidence materially changes our understanding of a state's activity, we will update the relevant classification and supporting research.
If an error is identified, we aim to correct it promptly and transparently.
StableTokens.com is an independent information and research resource.
Tracker classifications are based on our published methodology and available public evidence - not on whether a particular development is viewed positively or negatively.
A classification such as Launching / Live or In Development describes the verified stage of an initiative. It should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the programme, technology, policy or participating organisations.
Likewise, a Monitoring classification does not imply that a state is opposed to stablecoins or digital assets. It simply means that we have not identified a qualifying state-backed stable token programme under our methodology.
StableTokens.com currently focuses on U.S. state-backed stable tokens and directly relevant state-level developments.
All 50 U.S. states are monitored.
Our core tracker is deliberately narrower than the wider stablecoin market. Private stablecoins, federal policy, CBDCs, tokenised assets and broader cryptocurrency legislation may be discussed where they provide useful context, but they do not determine a state's tracker classification unless directly relevant to a qualifying state-backed programme.
This narrow scope is intentional.
It allows the tracker to answer one question consistently:
What is each U.S. state actually doing about state-backed stable tokens?
When the evidence is strong, we report it.
When the evidence is incomplete, we say so.
When an initiative is related but does not meet our definition of a state-backed stable token programme, we make that distinction clear.
And when no qualifying programme can be verified, the state remains Monitoring.
That principle underpins every classification on StableTokens.com.
Methodology last reviewed: September 2026
StableTokens.com
Evidence-based. Transparent. Public.
Compare this state with verified state-backed stable token activity across all 50 U.S. states.
← Explore the Interactive U.S. State Tracker
© 2026 StableTokens.com. All Rights Reserved.