A Trillion-Dollar Consumer Credit Market Lacks Key Players

marsbitPubblicato 2026-08-20Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-08-20

Introduzione

The trillion-dollar global consumer credit market remains largely untapped by blockchain technology. While projects like Pharos have rapidly attracted millions in stablecoin deposits for short-term consumer loans in emerging markets, they represent early attempts to bring this massive asset class on-chain. The core challenge isn't technical tokenization, but the "repackaging" of countless small, heterogeneous loans into standardized, investable products that digital asset funds can understand and price. Current approaches primarily change the *distribution* of capital—using stablecoins for settlement and smart contracts for transparency—but do not eliminate underlying credit risk. Several models are emerging: Pharos and Huma Finance/Tala focus on connecting high-yield emerging market loans to global crypto capital. Figure stands out by building full-stack, regulated infrastructure, securing AAA ratings for its securitizations and proving blockchain assets can meet traditional institutional standards. Conversely, Goldfinch's difficulties highlight that on-chain transparency cannot replace offline credit underwriting and collection capabilities. The article identifies a four-layer value chain: 1) loan origination, 2) credit structuring & securitization, 3) on-chain infrastructure, and 4) capital. The current gap is in the second layer—the mature capital markets expertise for structuring, rating, credit enhancement, and institutional distribution. This is the critical link ne...

After the launch of the consumer credit vault from public chain project Pharos this year, pre-deposits reached the $50 million cap within 48 hours. At the official launch, there was already approximately $35 million in committed deposits.

More notably, Pharos is not an isolated case. Over the past few years, several projects have emerged on-chain attempting to bring credit assets like consumer loans, inclusive credit, and mortgage loans onto the blockchain. Their target is not a newly created asset class, but a traditional market that has long existed yet remains underutilized on-chain—the global consumer credit market.

A Trillion-Dollar Cake, No One is Cutting It

Consumer credit is not a niche asset: According to Euromonitor data, the global consumer credit scale exceeded $21 trillion in 2025 and is expected to reach $25.5 trillion by 2030. Compared to this scale, on-chain consumer credit remains a very early-stage market. There are not many teams that have truly developed standardized on-chain consumer loan products and achieved significant scale.

This precisely explains why a consumer loan vault of tens of millions of dollars from Pharos is noteworthy: what it truly unlocks is not a new DeFi lending pool, but a source of assets with massive traditional finance volume yet still low on-chain penetration.

Previously, the easiest RWAs to bring on-chain were standardized assets like U.S. Treasuries and money market funds, due to their low credit risk, transparent valuation, and mature legal structures. Consumer loans are completely different: individual loans are small, borrowers are dispersed, terms vary, and underlying credit risks are more complex.

Therefore, the real difficulty in bringing consumer loans on-chain has never been "how to turn loans into on-chain products," but rather how to repackage thousands of off-chain loans into standardized credit products that on-chain capital is willing to buy.

The Change on-Chain is in Fund Distribution

Compared to traditional consumer loan ABS (Asset-Backed Securities), on-chain products have indeed changed part of the fund flow.

First, the settlement path has changed. Investors can use stablecoins to participate in subscriptions and redemptions; funds no longer rely entirely on traditional cross-border wire transfers, custody, and settlement systems. For globalized capital, this can reduce some account system and cross-border settlement frictions.

Second, the presentation of asset information has changed. On-chain shares, transaction records, and some asset data can be continuously updated via smart contracts and product interfaces. Investors have shorter paths to obtain information and find it easier to perform programmatic verification.

Third, the settlement method for shares has changed. Standards like ERC-7540 for asynchronous vaults are designed specifically for real-world assets and private credit that cannot be settled instantly: investors first submit subscription or redemption requests, and the vault distributes shares or assets after processing is complete. It solves the mismatch between on-chain share settlement cycles and the underlying asset settlement cycles.

These differences address fund distribution and operational efficiency issues, not credit risk issues—the inherent default risk of the underlying loans remains unchanged. But for consumer finance institutions, the value lies exactly here: they don't need to reinvent a lending system; they gain an additional channel to access global digital asset capital.

Several Paths Are Converging

Although the assets and models of the currently emerged projects differ, their general logic is similar: consumer loan interest rates in emerging markets are high (commonly 11%-30%), traditional funding channels are limited; on-chain capital also wants to move away from the increasingly thin yields of Treasury-class RWAs. The two sides align.

Pharos: Connects small consumer loans from Mexico, Thailand, Indonesia, Pakistan, and the Philippines. Using the on-chain vault infrastructure R25 + risk curator Axil, it creates 92-day term on-chain products targeting a 13% annualized return, with an on-chain scale of about $35 million. The product uses USDC as the settlement asset, aiming to provide global on-chain capital with exposure to consumer credit previously mainly underwritten by local financial institutions and private credit funds.
Huma Finance × Tala: On the Solana public chain, it turns cross-border payment financing and emerging market consumer credit into "PayFi." Tala plans to deploy a $50 million USDC stablecoin credit line to serve its global inclusive finance customers.
Figure: The U.S. licensed consumer credit company Figure has originated over $21 billion in home equity loans through its self-built public chain Provenance; Figure's latest securitization transaction also received AAA ratings from S&P and Moody's. Figure positions itself as capital markets infrastructure connecting loan origination, funding, and secondary market trading, rather than simply moving loans on-chain. This is the most important distinction between Figure and the previous projects: it's not just putting assets on-chain, but attempting to connect asset origination, capital markets, securitization, and distribution.
Goldfinch: Was a pioneer protocol for unsecured loans in emerging markets, with cumulative lending exceeding $100 million. However, due to borrower fund misappropriation and repayment issues, cumulative bad debt reached about $18 million, and the community voted to wind down in June this year.

Breaking it down, the underlying assets are in emerging markets or subprime credit populations; the on-chain component handles the capital entry point and share recording. Among these projects, only one is truly doing the professional packaging according to traditional finance rules.

Goldfinch's experience shows that on-chain transparency cannot replace off-chain credit capabilities. What truly determines whether a consumer loan product can operate long-term still includes borrower screening, risk pricing, post-lending monitoring, legal recourse, and default handling.

So, on the surface, these projects are all "moving consumer loans on-chain"; upon closer look, they are actually trying to fill in different parts of the puzzle.

And what is truly scarce is precisely the middle layer.

What's Really Missing?

Breaking down this value chain reveals four layers:

First layer, underlying assets. Consumer finance institutions are responsible for finding borrowers, disbursing loans, and managing post-lending activities.

Second layer, credit and structuring. Someone needs to screen and combine numerous loans based on term, credit grade, region, and risk, then design structures like funds, SPVs, tranches, credit enhancement, and coordinate ratings, legal documentation, and subsequent distribution.

Third layer, on-chain infrastructure. Vaults, on-chain shares, NAV, subscription/redemption mechanisms, custody, and on-chain records bring the already structured assets on-chain.

Fourth layer, capital side. Stablecoin funds, crypto asset management institutions, family offices, and other digital asset investors provide capital for these products.

The third layer is currently the most visible.

But what truly determines whether a consumer loan RWA can grow from tens of millions of dollars to a larger scale is often the second layer.

In traditional finance, this layer belongs to the securitization and underwriting system. When consumer finance institutions issue ABS, they need someone to design the transaction structure, arrange tranching and credit enhancement, coordinate rating agencies, law firms, custodians, and institutional investors. This system has been operating for decades.

In contrast, many on-chain consumer loan projects involve Web3 teams taking on a significant portion of this work themselves: screening assets, designing vaults, performing risk curation, determining yield structures, and then selling the products directly to on-chain capital.

The problem is, while this model can scale quickly, it may not be sufficient to support institutional-scale operations.

R25 and Axil, behind Pharos, essentially undertake part of the asset screening, risk curation, product structure design, and capital raising work found in traditional securitization transactions. However, compared to mature ABS markets, publicly available materials still lack sufficiently comprehensive country-specific, batch-specific asset performance data, as well as independent ratings, standardized credit enhancement mechanisms, and complete default resolution frameworks.

This is not to say on-chain products are inherently unsafe, but rather: on-chain solutions have addressed "how assets flow," but have not fully resolved "why assets are worth buying."

This is precisely the significance of Figure.

It doesn't bypass traditional finance; it brings the crucial language of credit from traditional finance onto the chain. Figure has already received AAA ratings from S&P and Moody's; its latest securitization transaction is described by Figure as the first in the blockchain finance field to receive this dual AAA recognition.

In other words, what Figure proves is not that "blockchain can do loans." What it truly proves is: when on-chain assets possess standardized loan data, securitization structures, ratings, and institutional-grade capital markets infrastructure simultaneously, traditional finance capital can also understand and allocate these assets in familiar ways.

Goldfinch illustrates the same problem from the opposite side: without mature credit screening, continuous management, and recovery systems, no matter how efficient the on-chain capital entry point is, it cannot replace credit capability.

What's the Value of Being Early?

Looking at the problem inversely: if the real gap in this value chain is structuring and distribution capability, then the institutions that fill this gap first are not just getting a single deal.

First, the market is still early enough.

As mentioned earlier, global consumer credit is already a mature asset market exceeding $20 trillion, but truly standardized, institutional-grade products entering the on-chain capital market are still very few. This means the market hasn't yet formed mature product standards, pricing systems, and service chains. Early entrants still have the opportunity to establish their position.

Second, this is about finding new money for existing assets.

What consumer finance institutions truly lack is usually not lending capability, but a continuous, stable, and cost-controllable source of funds. On-chain stablecoin capital pools offer a source of digital asset capital that is harder for traditional bond markets to reach.

If this channel truly works, consumer finance institutions don't need to abandon their existing bank, ABS, and institutional funding; they simply add a new capital pool alongside their original financing structures.

Third, what's missing is precisely mature capital markets capability.

The common shortcomings in current on-chain consumer loans—insufficient asset disclosure and independent audits, unestablished rating and credit enhancement mechanisms, lack of unified market standards for legal entitlement and default resolution—correspond exactly to the most mature aspects of traditional capital markets.

Asset securitization, structured finance, credit analysis, rating coordination, and institutional distribution—these capabilities have been developed over many years in traditional ABS markets. What on-chain consumer loans truly lack is not reinventing these, but adapting these mature capabilities to a new funding channel.

Figure has already proven that on-chain assets are not incompatible with the rating and securitization systems of traditional finance. As stablecoin capital and RWA markets continue to expand, the value of this layer of capability will only become more evident.

Who Will Sit at the Table First?

The real competition in bringing consumer loans on-chain may never be "who launches an RWA vault first."

Pharos has proven that on-chain capital is willing to provide tens of millions of dollars for emerging market consumer credit; Tala and Huma Finance have proven that stablecoins can enter consumer finance systems serving the globally underbanked; Figure further proves that when on-chain assets possess mature capital market structures and rating systems, they can also fit into frameworks familiar to traditional institutions.

These paths all point to the same question: Who can turn dispersed consumer loans into a standardized, priceable, rateable, distributable on-chain credit asset?

Consumer finance institutions hold the assets and risk control; Web3 teams provide on-chain infrastructure; and the structuring, credit analysis, rating, and distribution capabilities accumulated over years by traditional capital markets can precisely fill the most critical missing link between the two.

Compared to highly standardized assets like Treasuries and money market funds, the difficulty with consumer loans isn't just moving assets on-chain, but reorganizing the dispersed underlying loans into standardized products that institutional investors can understand, price, and allocate *before* they go on-chain.

This is also the most noteworthy area of incremental growth for consumer loan RWAs currently: on-chain infrastructure is gradually maturing, but there remains significant room for professional capital markets capabilities that connect the asset side with institutional capital.

*The content of this article is for reference only and does not constitute any investment advice. Markets involve risks; investment requires caution.

Domande pertinenti

QWhat is the main barrier preventing the large-scale tokenization of the consumer credit market according to the article?

AThe main barrier is not the technical act of putting loans on-chain, but the lack of the middle layer—professional capital market capabilities for structuring, standardizing, rating, and distributing these assets. This includes transforming numerous small, heterogeneous loans into standardized credit products that institutional investors can understand, price, and invest in.

QHow does the on-chain tokenization of consumer loans differ from traditional ABS in terms of fund flow?

AOn-chain tokenization changes the fund distribution and operational efficiency in three key ways: 1) Settlement path: Investors can use stablecoins, reducing reliance on traditional cross-border wire transfers and settlement systems. 2) Information presentation: Asset data, share records, and transactions are updated via smart contracts, offering shorter, more programmable access. 3) Settlement mechanism: Standards like ERC-7540 enable asynchronous processing for assets with longer settlement cycles. Importantly, it does not change the underlying credit risk of the loans.

QWhat is the key distinction between the approach of Figure and other projects like Pharos mentioned in the article?

AFigure's key distinction is that it doesn't just put assets on-chain; it builds a full capital markets infrastructure connecting loan origination, funding, securitization, and secondary market trading. Crucially, it integrates traditional finance standards, having secured AAA ratings from S&P and Moody's for its securitization transactions. Other projects primarily focus on providing an on-chain funding channel for pre-existing loans.

QWhat does the failure of Goldfinch indicate about the requirements for successful on-chain consumer credit?

AGoldfinch's failure indicates that on-chain transparency and efficient capital deployment cannot substitute for core, off-chain credit competencies. Success requires robust borrower screening, risk pricing, loan monitoring, legal recourse, and default recovery mechanisms. The platform's ~$18 million in bad debts demonstrated that lacking these fundamental credit capabilities is fatal, regardless of the efficiency of the on-chain funding layer.

QWhy is the current stage of on-chain consumer credit considered an early opportunity for certain players?

AIt's an early opportunity because the market is vast (over $20 trillion) but has very low on-chain penetration with no established product standards, pricing models, or service chains. The critical missing piece—professional structuring and distribution capability—is already mature in traditional capital markets. The player that can effectively bridge this gap by applying these established capabilities (securitization, credit analysis, rating coordination) to the new on-chain funding channel can capture significant value by connecting existing loan assets with new digital asset liquidity.

Letture associate

U.S. Market Trend (August 20): U.S. Treasury Intervention Halts Stock Decline; Moderna's Cancer Vaccine Breakthrough Sparks 180% Surge

U.S. Stocks Rebound on Treasury Intervention; Moderna Soars 180% on Cancer Vaccine Breakthrough Key Points: • U.S. stocks ended a three-day decline, with the rebound driven primarily by the U.S. Treasury Department's move to significantly increase its long-term bond repurchase ceiling. This action briefly pushed the 30-year Treasury yield down by about 10 basis points, easing long-term interest rate pressures. • Despite this, the market faced a countervailing force from the hawkish July FOMC meeting minutes, which revealed broader support for potential rate hikes among officials due to lingering inflation concerns. • Moderna shares skyrocketed nearly 180% after announcing positive Phase 3 trial results for its personalized mRNA cancer vaccine in partnership with Merck, which also rose nearly 13%. This fueled a major rally in the healthcare sector. • Contrary to the broader market, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell over 2%, highlighting persistent pressure on the AI hardware chain. Concerns include AI's potential inflationary impact and questions about application-side cash flows supporting high capital expenditures. • Commodities and cryptocurrencies rallied alongside the equity rebound, supported by a weaker dollar and lower long-term yields. Geopolitical risks continued to underpin oil prices. Outlook: Market focus shifts to whether long-term bond yields stabilize post-intervention, upcoming U.S. economic data (jobless claims, Philly Fed index), and the impact of SK Hynix's massive share buyback plan on the memory chip sector. The tech sector's full recovery remains contingent on the semiconductor index's performance.

marsbit10 min fa

U.S. Market Trend (August 20): U.S. Treasury Intervention Halts Stock Decline; Moderna's Cancer Vaccine Breakthrough Sparks 180% Surge

marsbit10 min fa

The 19 Must-Know Top Chinese and American Entrepreneurs Born After 2000 • The 21st-Century Successors Have Arrived

The 21st century's first generation of entrepreneurs, born in the 2000s, are already taking center stage. This analysis of publicly prominent founders reveals distinct trends between China and the U.S., shaped by their respective ecosystems. In China, young founders are heavily focused on giving AI a physical presence, tackling challenges in robotics and hardware. Examples include Huang Yi (RoboParty, humanoid robots), Qin Shentao (Yuanchen Taichu, embodied AI data infrastructure), and founders working on robotic hands, home cleaning robots, and computing power networks. Their paths often emerge from university labs and robotics competitions, prioritizing prototype demonstration, cost control, and manufacturing delivery. In contrast, their U.S. counterparts frequently leverage software, AI, and capital networks to rapidly reorganize digital services and information flows. Startups like Mercor (AI talent/data, reaching $10B revenue), Etched (AI chips), and various AI-powered SaaS tools for consumers and SMBs demonstrate a focus on user growth, subscription models, and global scalability. However, this velocity has also led to high-profile cases questioning business practices and credibility. The key differentiator for this generation is not merely youth, but the compressed early stage of venture creation. Access to open-source tools, AI models, mature supply chains, and willing venture capital allows them to bypass traditional career ladders. Yet, while technology lowers the barrier to product creation, it does not reduce the challenges of building a sustainable company—managing teams, ensuring reliable delivery, and establishing trust remain hard-earned skills. The article concludes that the true test for these founders will be the "second growth": evolving from product creators into responsible company leaders capable of sustained execution and organizational building. For established businesses, the rise of these fast-moving, technologically adept teams necessitates new strategies for collaboration, competition, and investment.

marsbit15 min fa

The 19 Must-Know Top Chinese and American Entrepreneurs Born After 2000 • The 21st-Century Successors Have Arrived

marsbit15 min fa

Trump's White House Crypto Summit Sets Tone: Cryptocurrency Ushers in 'Regulatory Spring'

Trump Holds Crypto Summit at White House, Signaling "Regulatory Spring". On July 20, President Trump convened a roundtable with U.S. financial regulators and leading cryptocurrency industry executives. Key attendees included heads of the CFTC and SEC, along with CEOs from Coinbase, ICE/NYSE, Nasdaq, Robinhood, Kraken, Ripple, and Chainlink co-founder. The summit focused on U.S. competition for leadership in fintech and AI. Trump highlighted two legislative efforts: the already-signed GENIUS Act, which facilitates compliant dollar-pegged stablecoins, and the pending Clarity Act, aimed at legally defining "crypto securities" vs. "crypto commodities." Industry leaders indicated a Congressional vote on the Clarity Act is scheduled for September 15. Regulators outlined key initiatives. The CFTC confirmed the launch of the first U.S.-regulated Bitcoin perpetual futures contract and is working to compliantly bring the decentralized protocol Hyperliquid to the U.S. The SEC proposed new rules to clarify legal fundraising for crypto startups using digital assets. In a Q&A, Trump expressed openness to expanding the U.S. government's Bitcoin reserves. The event was widely viewed as a major positive signal for the crypto industry, contributing to a sharp overnight price surge for assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum.

marsbit1 h fa

Trump's White House Crypto Summit Sets Tone: Cryptocurrency Ushers in 'Regulatory Spring'

marsbit1 h fa

Interpretation of SEC's New Crypto Regulatory Rules: Fundraising Below $5 Million Exempt from Registration, Is Altcoin Season Making a Comeback?

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has proposed a new regulatory framework titled "Regulation Crypto Assets." This proposal aims to establish tailored exemptions for crypto asset fundraising and a pathway for tokens to transition out of being classified as securities. The core provisions include two exemptions from standard securities registration: 1. **Startup Exemption**: Allows early-stage projects to raise up to $5 million over four years with simplified, narrative-based disclosures, avoiding full registration. 2. **Fundraising Exemption**: Permits raising up to $75 million within any 12-month period. It requires audited financial statements and imposes ongoing reporting obligations, similar to the Regulation A+ framework. A key component is the **Investment Contract Safe Harbor**. This rule allows a token initially sold as an investment contract (a security) to lose that designation once the issuer has completed or permanently ceased the "essential managerial efforts" promised to investors. This theoretically clears regulatory hurdles for tokens where development is finished or abandoned. The proposal defines a narrow scope, applying only to crypto assets that are not securities themselves and are part of an investment contract involving no other assets. This SEC initiative is seen as a response to the stalled progress of the comprehensive *CLARITY Act* in Congress. It represents a shift from relying solely on the historical Howey test, which the SEC admits is ill-suited for dynamic crypto assets. The proposal is currently in a 60-day public comment period, with a final rule likely months away, leaving the U.S. regulatory landscape for crypto in a transitional state.

Odaily星球日报1 h fa

Interpretation of SEC's New Crypto Regulatory Rules: Fundraising Below $5 Million Exempt from Registration, Is Altcoin Season Making a Comeback?

Odaily星球日报1 h fa

Bull Run: Four Key Drivers Behind the Overnight Market-Wide Surge in Crypto

"Crypto markets surged overnight with Bitcoin reclaiming $69,000 and Ethereum jumping nearly 20%. Key drivers include: 1) The U.S. Treasury doubling its long-term bond buyback size, lowering yields and boosting risk appetite. 2) Positive regulatory signals from a White House crypto summit and a new SEC proposal offering funding exemptions. 3) A reversal in Bitcoin ETF outflows, indicating renewed institutional buying. 4) A massive short squeeze, with over 93% of recent liquidations being short positions, amplifying the price moves."

marsbit1 h fa

Bull Run: Four Key Drivers Behind the Overnight Market-Wide Surge in Crypto

marsbit1 h fa

Trading

Spot