Today, I met two friends offline, @saisaisai1995 and @CycleStudies. Although it was in two separate sessions, the core content discussed in both was quite similar: whether RWA has space in the cryptocurrency market and whether it can help the cryptocurrency market, including $ETH, break out of its predicament. I shared my views with everyone.

First of all, there is an essential difference between #RWA and #STO. The most fundamental distinction is that RWA requires a higher level of compliance. This high level of compliance is similar to the position of the SEC in the United States because RWA needs a large amount of assets to enter the market. The main reason a large amount of assets can enter is not because of real estate on-chain or raisins on-chain, but because of compliant assets on-chain.

In simpler terms, it refers to compliant assets issued by compliant platforms. When discussing stablecoins before, I mentioned that the hard backing of stablecoins is actually the foundation of RWA. For example, U.S. Treasury bonds. Even if the debt ceiling is raised, the ceiling on what can be purchased is predictable. However, if RWA based on U.S. Treasury bonds is opened up, compliant stablecoins can be used to invest in U.S. Treasury bonds directly through compliant "on-chain brokers," which effectively expands the yield of DeFi.

Moreover, it combines DeFi and RWA to issue #RWAFi. A simple example is using stablecoins to buy T-Bills (short-term U.S. Treasury bonds), and then a chain-based protocol (third party) provides staking based on the purchase of T-Bills. Although it uses its own issued tokens for subsidies, it actually provides on-chain liquidity for U.S. Treasury bonds, and the staked assets can be used for collateral to achieve a nested structure. This is the play of financial assets.

Another example is that so far, U.S. spot ETFs hold over 1.2 million $BTC, but Bitcoin has been available for purchase for many years. Why wait for the ETF approval to buy? It is because of sufficient compliance; compliance can support large assets, and compliance will ensure that BTC custody is protected by law. If theft occurs, the custodian is required to compensate 100%, reducing the black forest rule in the crypto space.

So, although we see various RWA projects, only those that can obtain permission are the ones that can ultimately succeed. Projects that receive approval can carry large funds and provide safe services.

In addition to U.S. Treasury bonds, high-quality corporate bonds are also the best targets for RWA. For example, the bonds issued by $MSTR are not available to ordinary investors, but BlackRock can purchase them. If BlackRock buys them at a 4% yield and then sells them on-chain at a 5% yield (2.5% MSTR yield + 2.5% expected token issuance yield, just an example, please don't take it literally), it can achieve rights confirmation, and I believe there will be buyers.

Today, I also gave an example: if LV or Hermès were to sell their bonds on-chain through BlackRock or someone else, while providing a VIP treatment confirmation to investors who purchase over $1 million, it would essentially confirm RWA rights. Of course, this requires strict KYC and AML, but interestingly, RWAFi can bypass this. RWAFi institutions can complete KYC and AML in their name and then seek retail investors for financing purchases, turning RWAFi into a very interesting business activity.

Additionally, some friends mentioned that RWA is low liquidity, which is actually incorrect. The liquidity of RWA depends on what the underlying assets are. If it is truly U.S. Treasury bonds on-chain, what liquidity is lacking? One of the most liquid assets in the world is U.S. Treasury bonds. However, if you insist on putting coconuts on-chain or Cambodian real estate on-chain, there is indeed not enough liquidity, and the reason for the lack of liquidity is insufficient compliance.

PS: Please do not ask me what RWA assets can be purchased. Either look for compliance or ensure there are sufficient industrial returns and cash flow income; otherwise, buying anything has nothing to do with true RWA.

PS2: Many on-chain computing power is also a form of RWA. Although there may be some shortcomings in compliance, if there are real returns to conduct airdrops or buybacks for rights, it may not be impossible. Treating RWA as part of yield confirmation, this form of RWAFi should be marketable.

This tweet is sponsored by @ApeXProtocolCN | Dex With ApeX

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。