A new BIS-hosted working paper compares bank, fintech and stablecoin payment routes. Its central measurement lesson is to include conversion and withdrawal costs alongside visible fees.
What the primary record establishes
Working Paper 1385, published on 19 October 2026, compares cross-border payment costs using bank transactions, fintech prices, remittance data and crypto-market data. The authors distinguish exchange-rate markups from explicit charges rather than treating the advertised transfer fee as the full cost. BIS Working Paper 1385 — Competing rails for crossborder payments, 19 October 2026 ↗
In their small bank-transaction sample, FX markups range from approximately 2% to 4.7% before wire fees. They also identify conversion, exchange and withdrawal costs in stablecoin routes. These are research findings for the studied data, not universal tariffs or present executable offers. BIS Working Paper 1385 — Competing rails for crossborder payments, 19 October 2026 ↗
What the distinction changes
For an FX customer, the useful comparison is the destination money actually available after all required steps. A route with a low headline fee can deliver less if its conversion is less favourable or if an additional intermediary charges before the recipient can use the funds.
A fair comparison should hold the sending amount, destination currency and observation time constant. It should also identify whether the quote is indicative or executable. Comparing a retail bank quote for a small transfer with an institutional crypto quote for a large one mixes customer types and sizes.
What to check before drawing a conclusion
Record source debit, destination credit, every conversion, explicit charges and the expected availability time. If money remains in a token or intermediary account, do not silently count that as cash already credited to the recipient’s bank.
WFN infers that an all-in comparison is more useful than ranking technologies by their advertised transaction fee. The paper itself separates authors’ views from those of the BIS. It does not establish that one route is cheapest for every corridor, amount or customer.