From the operation of RWA, it’s clear that many traditional rent-collection methods are ahead of crypto income models. Currently, RWA token funds collect rent through management fees, such as JLTXX’s annual management fee rate of 0.08%. Assuming the fund size reaches $10 billion, the corresponding annual management fee would be around $8 million. As the fund size continues to grow, JLTXX’s fee-based assets and client funds grow in tandem. JLTXX is deployed on ETH, and ETH uses a crypto-based fee logic. ETH only charges based on the Gas consumed by on-chain transactions. Whether it’s a $1 billion subscription or a $1 million subscription, as long as the same smart contract is called, the Gas consumed is roughly the same, and the value returned to the protocol is minimal. Even if the fund size grows a thousandfold, ETH’s revenue still depends on subscription, redemption, and transfer activities. This leads to the situation where RWA protocols have a higher extraction capability from the crypto space compared to the value capture of crypto itself. Additionally, when Ethereum is congested or unable to process transactions normally for an extended period, the fund can pause on-chain instructions and revert to traditional channels. In other words, the RWA ecosystem doesn’t belong to ETH, and ETH doesn’t control the assets themselves.