It may sound harsh but it's a hard truth: most RWA projects on the market are fundamentally just label-placing businesses.



In the past two years, the concept of RWA has been overhyped. Government bonds, real estate, bills, accounts receivable... a bunch of projects are all promoting "on-chainization," "tokenization," and "real-world assets on chain."

But the key question is—

Have these assets truly changed the operational logic of DeFi? Honestly, in most cases, the answer is no.

Their roles are only threefold: serving as a source of yield, providing an endorsement narrative, or acting as a "seems pretty stable" decoration. That's all.

But what if some projects take a different approach? For example, not just "showcasing RWA," but actually "using RWA." That would be a fundamental difference.

**Structural Changes on the Asset Side**

When stablecoins are backed by RWA like U.S. Treasuries, the value of this step isn't in the trading volume but in the fundamental change in accounting structure.

How do traditional DeFi stablecoins work? Very simply:

Highly volatile assets → Over-collateralization → Passive liquidation → System self-protection

This is a self-sufficient ecological logic.

But after introducing RWA, the asset side of stablecoins begins to show entirely new faces:

Low volatility, predictable cash flows

Institutionalized pricing anchors

Linked to macro interest rates

What does this mean?

It means the stability of stablecoins is no longer hostage to market sentiment. They start to genuinely connect with real-world interest rates, fiscal credit, and maturity structures.

This is the first time that stablecoins, at the asset level, touch the core of TradFi risk management.

**Collision of Real Finance and On-Chain Finance**

Imagine: stablecoins no longer rely on over-collateralization as a safety net but depend on predictable cash flows and government-backed credit. Then collateral ratios can be optimized, systemic risks can be better controlled, and user experience can be closer to traditional financial products.

This is not just conceptual innovation. It’s a substantial leap for DeFi stablecoin models from "crypto-world self-consistency" to "real-world integration."

So don’t be dazzled by the plethora of RWA projects. What truly matters are those that don’t just talk but are genuinely changing the infrastructure of stablecoins.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 8
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
degenonymousvip
· 2025-12-21 01:00
Wake up, most RWA projects are just rebranded Ponzi schemes Most projects haven't really changed anything; they're just using real assets as a facade to spin stories The truly meaningful ones are those that can improve infrastructure, not just slap on a label
View OriginalReply0
BoredStakervip
· 2025-12-19 04:19
Well said, finally someone has pierced through this layer of window paper. Most RWA projects are just dream-making with PPT; few are truly implemented. This is currently the most虚 (hollow) part of the crypto圈 (circle). However, stablecoins do have real potential; whoever can do it well will win. Leeks everywhere are still chasing the hot spots.
View OriginalReply0
LiquiditySurfervip
· 2025-12-18 21:49
That's right, most RWA projects are just superficial rebranding. Genuine logic-changing projects are rare. Instead of just looking at concepts, it's better to see if they are truly useful. Over-collateralization is old news; cash flow anchoring is the real way to go. Everyone can boast, but the key is whether they can connect with TradFi. RWA is everywhere, but only a few are actually usable. Stablecoins must rely on government credit backing; that's what progress really looks like. The current problem is that everyone is just telling stories, and very few are actually getting things done.
View OriginalReply0
RamenStackervip
· 2025-12-18 21:48
You're right, most RWA projects are indeed capitalizing on narrative benefits. The real difference lies in whether they actually use it or not, rather than just shouting about it. There are very few reliable projects.
View OriginalReply0
TokenomicsTherapistvip
· 2025-12-18 21:48
Another sober article about RWA, it's really hitting home—it's that pile of air projects we all know. Wait, do projects truly using RWA actually exist? It feels like they're all just storytelling. Ultimately, stablecoins are probably the real breakthrough, everything else is just floating clouds. That said, issuing currency backed by government bonds sounds much more reliable than over-collateralization. So which projects should we focus on now? How many are actually working in this area?
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-40edb63bvip
· 2025-12-18 21:42
Labeling business is not wrong, but why are there so few projects actually using RWA? Most RWA are just superficial, without any real change. That's the key—asset structures need to undergo genuine transformation.
View OriginalReply0
MerkleMaidvip
· 2025-12-18 21:42
It sounds quite heartfelt, but why do I feel that most projects still stick to labels after hearing this?
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-7b078580vip
· 2025-12-18 21:39
However, the data shows that most RWA projects haven't really changed anything. Historical patterns tell me to wait a bit longer.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin

Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)