Stablecoin depegging: measurement questions under French GAAP
A stablecoin moves away from its reference price. The company may still control the tokens while its economic exit conditions change. This article focuses on depegging; restrictions caused by freezing are examined separately.
Avoid one automatic response
Established framework. PCG rules distinguish asset categories and closing measurement. One market event does not necessarily produce identical presentation for every holder.
BECTRA illustration — Assessing rights before choosing an accounting classification.
Explain the available information
BECTRA analysis. Separate observed price, quantity, redemption rights and restrictions. Establish whether a quoted price represents a market and exit route relevant to the company’s position.
A single quotation may signal a problem without explaining its cause. Avoid assuming a certain return to par or concluding total loss from one observation.
BECTRA illustration — Transfer restrictions require a separate assessment of rights and measurement.
Fictional example
A token falls on an exchange while its issuer announces continuing redemptions. The announcement requires verification and does not erase the quotation. Accounting analysis should connect both to the company’s actual rights.
Judgment required. Select measurement under the regime applicable to the year. The movement is not automatically a foreign-exchange loss.
Conclusion
Depegging becomes an accounting issue through rights, value and disclosures. Document the incident before translating its effects into the accounts.
Further reading
Sources
Sources reviewed on 19 October 2026. Examples are fictional; BECTRA analysis is distinguished from applicable rules.
Comments