​MXNB is a Mexican peso stablecoin issued by Juno, Bitso's regulated affiliate, designed to move pesos onchain for B2B payouts, FX, and SPEI settlement. As of September 2026 it has roughly 47.7 million MXNB in circulation and settled about $89 million in onchain transfer volume over the trailing 30 days, per rwa.xyz, and for cross-border operators it matters because it collapses the USDC-to-MXN leg into a single onchain hop, replacing OTC desks and shaving the FX spread that typically eats 50 to 150 bps on Mexico payouts.
​

MXNB is a peso-denominated stablecoin issued by Juno, Bitso's Mexico-regulated affiliate, backed 1:1 by Mexican pesos and cash equivalents held at regulated institutions, live on four networks with roughly 800 holders and $2.8 million in market cap as of September 2026 (per rwa.xyz).

MXNB launched on 5 May 2025 and is backed 1:1 in MXN held at Mexican financial institutions, with monthly attestations from a Big Four auditor, per Bitso's product page; operators should request Juno's current attestation report before treasury commitment. Nvio Pagos México, the Bitso entity behind the fiat rails, is an IFPE licensed and supervised by Mexico's CNBV, per Bitso Business, and Juno itself operates as an authorized electronic payment institution under Mexico's Fintech Law, per Coinspeaker's June 2026 coverage. As of September 2026, MXNB has roughly 47.7 million tokens in circulation across Arbitrum (the deepest book at about 41 million), Avalanche, Ethereum, and Polygon, with 811 holders and $89 million in monthly transfer volume, per rwa.xyz. XRPL was added 13 June 2026 through an expanded Ripple partnership that pairs MXNB with RLUSD on XRPL's Permissioned DEX for institutional USD/MXN settlement, per the same Coinspeaker report; that deployment is not yet broken out in rwa.xyz's public network table, so operators building on XRPL should confirm current liquidity directly with Bitso or Ripple rather than relying on third-party trackers. The asset is meant to be the onchain representation of a peso that can be redeemed back into SPEI rails through Bitso's licensed Mexico entity.
​

For US or EU treasury teams paying contractors, suppliers, or marketplace sellers in Mexico, MXNB is not a speculative position. It is a settlement primitive. You hold it for minutes or hours between receiving USDC and pushing pesos out via SPEI, not as a balance-sheet asset.
​

A peso stablecoin exists to remove the OTC desk from the FX leg of a cross-border payout. Correspondent-bank wires and OTC-converted dollar stablecoins both still depend on a bilateral quote; a peso token lets the conversion happen onchain against a visible, referenceable price instead.

The traditional path for a US company paying a Mexican vendor is a correspondent-bank USD wire that lands in a Mexican bank, gets converted to MXN at the receiving bank's posted rate, and clears through SPEI. The pain points are well known: two-to-four day settlement, opaque FX markups, wire fees on both ends, and weekend or holiday gaps.
​

The first generation of stablecoin payouts replaced the wire leg with USDC or USDT, then handed the dollar stablecoin to an OTC desk in Mexico for conversion to MXN. That cut the timing problem but kept the FX spread problem: the OTC desk still quotes the rate, and the receiver still depends on a bilateral relationship.
​

MXNB is the second generation. Instead of converting offchain, the conversion happens onchain through Bitso's market-making and treasury infrastructure, and the resulting peso is itself a transferable token. The operator can hold it, route it, or push it into SPEI when the receiver is ready.
​

MXNB fits into a payout flow as the onchain conversion step between USDC and SPEI. An operator routes USDC to the chain with the deepest MXNB book, swaps to MXNB at a market-quoted rate, then redeems to MXN through Bitso's licensed entity for SPEI payout.

Picture a US fintech paying 200 Mexican contractors twice a month. The pre-MXNB flow looks like this:

With MXNB inserted, the flow becomes:

The headline change is that step 3 happens onchain against a visible book rather than as a private OTC quote. For a treasurer, that translates into a referenceable execution price and a verifiable settlement trail.
​

Routing economics depend on chain selection, the USDC/MXNB spread at execution, and SPEI cutoff timing. Arbitrum carries the deepest MXNB book, around 41 million tokens per rwa.xyz, so operators without Arbitrum-native USDC need a cross-chain hop before they can execute.

On chain selection, Base, Solana, and Arbitrum tend to offer the lowest USDC transfer cost. For routing into MXNB specifically, Arbitrum remains the primary venue, holding roughly 41 million of the 47.7 million MXNB tokens in circulation as of September 2026, per rwa.xyz; Avalanche, Ethereum, and Polygon carry smaller balances, and operators should confirm the deepest book at the time of execution. A USDC-on-Base position needs a cross-chain hop to reach that liquidity. Eco orchestrates that hop using established rails so the operator does not have to hand-roll a bridge or warm a relayer.
​

On the spread, the USDC/MXNB market quote will not be identical to the official MXN/USD reference rate. The spread to the official MXN/USD reference rate is typically in the tens of basis points for institutional-size tickets during liquid hours, widening outside SPEI hours and at larger sizes; quotes should be sized at execution. For tickets in the tens of thousands, the spread is generally tighter than what an OTC desk quotes for the same notional, because the venue is competitive and the operator can split execution.
​

On SPEI, the network operates 24/7 for retail mobile and banking app access per Banxico's published service description; institutional same-day processing windows depend on the participating bank's internal cutoffs rather than the SPEI network itself. The MXNB-to-SPEI hop is fast once submitted, but the overall window for end-to-end same-day settlement is constrained by the participating bank's cutoffs, not by the onchain leg.
​

Compared to USDT-to-MXN via OTC, the MXNB path tends to win on transparency and reconciliation. USDT via OTC can still win on raw cost in specific corridors and sizes, particularly when an operator already has a deep OTC line, but it does not produce an onchain audit trail of the FX execution.
​

MXNB reserves are held 1:1 in Mexican pesos and cash equivalents at regulated institutions, with monthly third-party attestations from a Big Four auditor. Redemption runs through Juno and Nvio Pagos México, entities regulated under Mexico's Fintech Law and CNBV oversight respectively.

MXNB is backed 1:1 by MXN and cash equivalents held at regulated Mexican institutions, with monthly attestations from a Big Four auditor, per Bitso's product page. The asset's redemption path runs through Nvio Pagos México, an IFPE supervised by the CNBV, per Bitso Business, which is a meaningful difference from offshore-issued dollar stablecoins, because the regulatory venue and the redemption venue are the same.
​

For institutional users, the operative questions are: what is the current attestation date, who is the auditor, what are the named custodian banks, and what is the documented redemption SLA? These should be verified directly from Bitso or Juno disclosures at the time of integration rather than taken from a general explainer.
​

We do not render a safety verdict on third-party assets. The factual mechanics: peso-collateralized, regulated issuer, multi-chain availability, integrated with the issuer's licensed off-ramp.
​

MXNB does not help when a Mexican counterparty wants to receive or hold US dollars, or when the goal is any form of tax arbitrage. It also has concentrated liquidity: most of the circulating supply sits in one venue, which matters for large tickets.

MXNB is not useful when the receiver wants USD. If a Mexican supplier invoices in USD and prefers to hold USD, routing through a peso stablecoin only introduces an extra hop. The USDC-direct path or a USD account at a Mexican bank is cleaner.
​

It is also not useful for tax or regulatory arbitrage. The Mexican peso received via MXNB is treated as a peso for SAT purposes; the onchain step does not change the obligation. See the companion article on Mexico's 2026 stablecoin remittance withholding for the B2B implications.
​

Finally, MXNB book depth is concentrated at Bitso, and mostly on Arbitrum: roughly 86 percent of the 47.7 million circulating MXNB sits there as of September 2026, per rwa.xyz. For seven-figure tickets the operator should pre-negotiate execution with Bitso rather than assume the public book can absorb the size without slippage.
​

Adding MXNB to a payout stack means confirming chain liquidity, setting up a Bitso or Juno institutional relationship, defining spread tolerances, scheduling around SPEI cutoffs, and reconciling against both the onchain trace and the SPEI confirmation.

Mexico is one of the two highest-volume B2B stablecoin corridors in LATAM, alongside Brazil, because SPEI is fast and Bitso is licensed. MXNB is the clearest attempt to move the remaining FX leg of that corridor onchain at institutional scale.

Mexico is one of the two highest-volume B2B stablecoin corridors in LATAM, alongside Brazil. The corridor has matured faster than most because SPEI is fast and Bitso is licensed, which means the offchain rails are not the bottleneck. The bottleneck has been the FX leg, and MXNB, with roughly $89 million in trailing 30-day transfer volume as of September 2026 per rwa.xyz, is the most direct attempt to put that leg onchain at institutional scale. Ripple's June 2026 XRPL integration frames MXNB as a template for other LATAM corridors, pairing it with RLUSD to target the estimated $60 billion-plus annual US-Mexico payments flow cited in Coinspeaker's coverage.
​

For a treasurer designing a 2026 LATAM payout stack, the practical question is not whether MXNB belongs in the architecture. It is which chain to route on, what spread to accept, and how to wire the reconciliation. Those are integration questions, not strategy questions.
​

For a fuller view of the Mexico path including the 2026 withholding proposal and the SPEI provider matrix, see support/en/articles/15575503. For the broader LATAM corridor benchmark, see support/en/articles/15575499. For the underlying USDC vs USDT decision that sits above the peso layer, see support/en/articles/15575500.
​