Ondo Perps：把华尔街 Prime Brokerage 搬到链上？

Author: 137Labs

1. The Starting Point of the Issue: Why Have Stock Perpetuals Always Underperformed?

Looking back at the development path of DeFi over the past few years, a clear divergence emerges: the derivatives market for crypto-native assets (BTC, ETH) has become quite mature, while derivatives related to real-world assets (RWA) remain stuck in the “experimental stage.”

Stock perpetual contracts are a typical example.

From the demand side, the market is quite clear: global users want to participate in U.S. stock trading with lower barriers and higher efficiency, while also using leverage, hedging, and other tools for risk management. But from the supply side, whether it’s early synthetic asset protocols (like Synthetix) or later on-chain order book or AMM models, none have truly solved the core issues.

These attempts often provide price exposure initially but struggle to sustain continuous trading, eventually falling into cycles of liquidity depletion, slippage expansion, and user attrition.

Meanwhile, tokenized stocks are rapidly developing along another path. According to mainstream media reports, these assets already have advantages like 24/7 trading and instant settlement, but their market size remains limited, and they are mostly seen as “holding tools” rather than part of a complete financial system.

Therefore, the core issue isn’t whether “someone wants to trade stocks,” but rather:

Why can’t these assets form a self-sustaining, continuously expanding market structure?

In other words, what is truly missing isn’t the product itself, but the underlying mechanisms that support the operation of these products.

2. The Current Situation: Structural Flaws in DeFi and Tokenized Stocks

Further dissecting the existing system reveals problems concentrated at two levels: collateral structure and liquidity structure.

First, in DeFi derivatives systems, collateral is highly homogeneous. Most mainstream protocols rely almost entirely on stablecoins as collateral, meaning all trading activities must be mediated through stablecoins. Users holding other assets—whether ETH or tokenized stocks—must first convert them into stablecoins to participate in derivatives trading.

This design was reasonable in early stages due to stablecoins’ price stability and settlement convenience, but as asset varieties increase, it has become a structural constraint. Assets cannot directly relate to each other, leading the entire system to exhibit an “islanded” characteristic.

Second, although tokenized stocks have made progress in asset mapping, their financial functionality remains extremely limited. They can be held, transferred, and in some cases used for simple lending, but lack more complex uses—such as serving as efficient collateral for derivatives, or playing a role in multi-asset portfolios.

Deeper still is liquidity. Most tokenized stock projects attempt to “rebuild a market” on-chain through AMMs or synthetic order books to provide trading depth. However, this approach is inherently limited by the scale of on-chain capital and cannot compete with traditional exchanges’ liquidity, leading to price deviations, slippage, and high trading costs.

Thus, the core flaw of the current system can be summarized as:

Assets are tokenized, but they cannot form effective financial relationships, and the market lacks sufficient liquidity support.

3. What Has Ondo Perps Done: Triple Structural Innovation

In this context, Ondo Perps is not merely offering a new trading platform but aims to reconstruct collateral logic, asset relationships, and liquidity sources simultaneously.

First, it introduces a key change: allowing tokenized stocks to be used directly as collateral. This seemingly simple parameter adjustment actually alters the entire system’s fund flow. Users no longer need to convert assets into stablecoins; they can directly leverage existing holdings for margin or hedging.

This mechanism not only improves efficiency but also changes the asset’s attributes. Stocks are no longer just “income assets” but become a “credit foundation” capable of supporting other risk exposures. In financial terms, this means assets begin to have “collateral properties.”

Second, Ondo introduces the concept of cross-asset margin. Traditional DeFi protocols typically use isolated margin models, where each position’s risk is calculated independently. Ondo, however, treats the entire asset portfolio as a whole. This design is closer to traditional portfolio margining, allowing different assets to hedge and support each other.

This structural change means risk is no longer calculated on a single asset basis but on the combined portfolio. The result is a significant increase in capital efficiency, but it also introduces more complex risk transmission pathways.

Third, and most critically, is the change in liquidity modeling. Ondo does not attempt to build liquidity from zero on-chain but connects the on-chain market with traditional exchanges through issuance and redemption mechanisms for tokenized stocks. This allows price discovery and liquidity depth to be directly inherited from Nasdaq and NYSE, rather than relying solely on limited on-chain funds.

If this mechanism can operate stably, on-chain trading will no longer be limited by TVL but can tap into a market worth trillions of dollars.

4. The Essence: What Is It Actually Doing?

From a higher perspective, the significance of Ondo Perps isn’t just about “improving trading experience,” but about redefining the fundamental structure of the financial system.

Traditional DeFi is more like a “collection of trading tools,” where users switch between protocols to borrow, trade, stake, etc. But these operations are independent and lack unified risk management and asset perspectives.

Ondo’s approach is closer to the traditional prime broker system. In this system, users aren’t just operating individual products but managing a complete balance sheet. All assets and liabilities are incorporated into a unified risk framework, with dynamic adjustments via portfolio margining.

Therefore, Ondo can be understood as a combination of three functions:

A multi-asset collateral system

A portfolio risk management engine

A clearing layer connecting on-chain and traditional markets

From this angle, it’s more like a “financial account system” rather than a single trading platform.

5. Why Is This Important: Three Levels of Impact

If this model can be realized, its influence will extend beyond any single protocol and could change the entire trajectory of DeFi development.

First, capital efficiency will be improved. Assets can participate in multiple financial activities without conversion, reducing intermediate steps and transaction costs, while increasing capital turnover. This difference becomes even more pronounced in high-frequency trading and hedging scenarios.

Second, the boundaries between assets will dissolve. Previously, crypto, stocks, bonds, and other assets belonged to separate systems. In the Ondo model, they can coexist within the same account and interact. This fusion will make asset allocation more flexible and could spawn new strategies and products.

Third, user structure will change. As the system’s complexity increases, ordinary users may find it difficult to fully utilize these features, while institutional investors and professional traders will become the main participants. This indicates a gradual shift toward “institutionalization” of DeFi, with market behaviors increasingly resembling traditional finance.

6. Risks and Uncertainties: The More Complex the Structure, the More Hidden the Risks

Despite the promising outlook, this model introduces new risk dimensions.

The most critical uncertainty remains liquidity. If on-chain markets cannot reliably access liquidity from traditional exchanges, all mechanisms based on this will be affected, with price deviations and liquidation risks rapidly amplifying.

Second, the complexity of liquidation mechanisms increases. In a multi-asset, cross-market environment, risk transmission pathways become more intricate. Price swings in one asset can affect others through collateral relationships, potentially triggering chain reactions. Such systemic risks have yet to be fully tested in DeFi.

Finally, regulatory issues are a concern. Tokenized stocks involve securities attributes, and their compliance varies across jurisdictions. Changes in regulatory environments could directly impact the issuance and trading of these assets.

Conclusion: Paradigm Shift or Complex Packaging?

Overall, Ondo Perps isn’t just about launching a new derivative product; it’s about attempting to build a new financial architecture where assets can support and price each other within a unified system.

The success of this attempt depends on two key factors: whether liquidity can truly connect to real markets, and whether risk systems can remain stable amid complex conditions.

Thus, a relatively clear judgment can be made:

If the liquidity model succeeds and risk controls withstand market volatility, Ondo could become an important part of on-chain financial infrastructure; otherwise, it may ultimately remain a more complex but fundamentally similar derivatives platform.

From a broader perspective, this attempt perhaps raises a more fundamental question:

When different types of assets can serve as collateral and participate in a unified market, does the traditional boundary between “currency” and “asset” still exist?

This may be the real issue Ondo is touching upon.