CBDC pilots: a comparative note

Central bank digital currency pilots continued through 2024 and 2025 across a range of jurisdictions. Comparing them side-by-side reveals the design choices central banks are making — and where consensus is emerging.

Written March 2026 from public pilot reports and disclosed integration specifications.

The design axes

Every CBDC pilot has to answer:

• Retail or wholesale? Retail CBDC is a direct claim by consumers on the central bank. Wholesale CBDC is for interbank settlement.
• Account-based or token-based? Account-based CBDC ties to identity. Token-based can support anonymity within limits.
• Direct or intermediated? Direct CBDC has the central bank managing the wallet. Intermediated uses licensed distributors.
• Programmable or not? Programmability enables conditional payments but raises policy questions.

What most pilots agree on

• Intermediated distribution. Very few central banks want to run consumer wallets.
• Holding limits for retail CBDC to protect commercial bank funding.
• Interoperability with existing payment rails, not replacement.

Where they diverge

• Privacy model. Some pilots (digital euro) emphasise partial anonymity for small transactions. Others (mBridge) prioritise transparency for AML.
• Cross-border ambition. Some pilots (mBridge, Project Agorá) are explicitly cross-border. Others (digital pound, digital dollar exploration) are domestic-first.
• Ledger technology. DLT (distributed ledger tech) for some; conventional centralised ledgers for others. The technology choice reflects different institutional preferences more than technical requirements.

What integrations should watch

Which corridors the pilots are targeting first, and what the API contracts look like when the pilots move to production. The pilots are the specification.

The most likely path is CBDC as a rail alongside cards, real-time bank transfer, and stablecoins — each optimised for different use cases.