Fireblocks Rejects Report of $2.5 Billion Visa Acquisition Talks

Fireblocks rejects reported Visa takeover talks

Fireblocks has denied a report that Visa is nearing a deal to acquire the crypto custody and stablecoin infrastructure company for about $2.5 billion. The denial leaves a reported sale process, circulating for several weeks, without confirmation from either company. For now, the reported price and the suggestion that discussions had reached a late stage remain claims attributed to unnamed sources, rather than details established by the companies themselves.

Axios Pro, citing unnamed sources, reported on Oct. 22 that Visa was in late-stage discussions. Fireblocks told The Block: “We are aware of the rumors about a possible acquisition of Fireblocks by Visa. This is news to us, and not true at present time.” The statement is direct, though its wording addresses the possibility of an acquisition “at present time”; it doesn't provide details about how the rumor began or whether the companies have discussed other forms of partnership.

The Axios report is available here; Fireblocks’ statement was reported by The Block. Until either side confirms a transaction, the reported figure should be read as an attributed estimate, not an agreed price. That distinction matters: acquisition rumors can shape expectations about a company’s value even when no deal has been reached.

Get Unchained’s crypto news in your inbox with the free Unchained Daily newsletter.

Coinbase was reportedly considered

Visa wasn’t the only potential buyer named. Anonymous sources told CoinDesk that Coinbase had also been considered as a bidder. CoinDesk reported that Coinbase denied involvement after the story appeared. The separate reports point to market interest in Fireblocks, but they don't establish that either company made an offer or entered formal negotiations.

Coinbase and stablecoin infrastructure provider BVNK ended discussions over a roughly $2 billion acquisition in November 2025, according to a previous report. Mastercard later bought BVNK, completing the deal in August after agreeing in March to pay up to $1.8 billion, including $300 million in contingent payments. That sequence gives the Fireblocks rumor a useful point of comparison: card networks and crypto companies have pursued infrastructure through acquisitions, but the path from reported interest to a completed deal is far from automatic.

Here's the thing: a company being named as a possible buyer can reflect speculation about strategic fit as much as confirmed intent. Coinbase’s reported consideration and denial should therefore be kept distinct from the completed Mastercard-BVNK transaction. The latter shows a deal that closed; the Fireblocks accounts describe an unconfirmed process.

Stablecoins draw card network interest

Visa’s stablecoin activity has grown. In August, it began working with Zerohash to let Visa Direct support stablecoin funding and payouts. The company later said stablecoin settlement had reached an annualized pace above $20 billion, more than 15 times the level a year earlier. Those figures describe activity on an annualized basis, rather than a report that the same amount settled during a completed year.

The reported interest in Fireblocks fits a broader push by card networks to build stablecoin capabilities. Mastercard’s BVNK purchase gives it a dedicated infrastructure provider, while Visa has expanded settlement and payout services. These efforts touch different parts of the payments chain: custody and transaction infrastructure can support the movement of digital assets, while network services connect those capabilities to payment flows.

That said, a larger settlement pace doesn’t by itself show how profitable the activity is, how broadly customers use it, or whether it will change established payment habits. The available figures suggest that stablecoin settlement is becoming a more visible part of Visa’s business. They don’t answer what role an acquisition would play in that strategy, especially while Visa hasn’t confirmed talks.

Reported price below Fireblocks’ last valuation

Founded in 2018, Fireblocks serves institutions that hold digital assets and uses multi-party computation (MPC) to secure keys. In September 2025, it launched a stablecoin payments network with more than 40 participants, including Circle, Bridge, Zerohash and Yellow Card. The company’s business therefore spans custody and payments infrastructure, two areas that can matter to institutions building services around digital assets.

MPC is a way to manage sensitive cryptographic key operations across multiple parties or components, rather than relying on one complete key in one place. In broad terms, that kind of design is intended to reduce the consequences of a single point of compromise. For institutional customers, custody tools and payment networks can address separate operational needs, though the source material doesn't detail Fireblocks’ specific customer arrangements or how its systems are deployed.

A $2.5 billion sale would put Fireblocks below a third of its last publicly reported valuation. The company raised $550 million in a Series E round in January 2022, at an $8 billion valuation. That gap makes any eventual deal price a notable measure of how the market values crypto infrastructure today. It also needs context: a private fundraising valuation and an acquisition price can reflect different terms, expectations and circumstances, so the figures alone don't explain why they differ.

The numbers here are underwhelming for a company last valued at $8 billion, if the reported price proves accurate. But that price hasn't been confirmed, and the denial leaves the central question unresolved: whether there’s a transaction to price at all. This is more significant than it looks because the rumor links a prominent payments network’s stablecoin ambitions with the value investors assign to the infrastructure behind them.

What the rumor means for the sector

If you're working in this space, the reported interest is a reminder that custody, settlement and payment distribution can be strategic assets for firms with established networks. An acquisition could give a buyer direct access to infrastructure and expertise; a partnership can also connect services without a sale. The available reporting doesn't show which, if either, path Visa is pursuing.

And yet. The denials matter as much as the reported interest when assessing what’s actually known. Visa hasn’t confirmed a deal, Fireblocks has rejected the report as untrue at present, and Coinbase has denied involvement. Until the companies provide more information, the clearest evidence is the broader activity already described: Visa’s stablecoin services, Mastercard’s completed BVNK purchase and Fireblocks’ own network launch.

The next useful signal would be confirmation from the companies, or a concrete transaction announcement. Until then, the reported $2.5 billion figure is a talking point, not a settled verdict on Fireblocks’ value. A rumor can expose where strategic interest may lie; it can’t establish the terms, timing or outcome of a deal.

Related Listen: Can Blockchains Solve the Fraud Problem Cards Can’t?

The post Fireblocks Calls $2.5 Billion Visa Takeover Rumor ‘Not True’ appeared first on Unchained.