The Migration of Settlement Power: B18 and the Institutional Starting Point of On-Chain Banking

marsbitPubblicato 2026-03-21Pubblicato ultima volta 2026-03-21

Introduzione

The article "The Migration of Settlement Power: B18 and the Institutional Starting Point of On-Chain Banking" discusses how traditional finance relies on settlement—not just transactions—to determine ownership of funds. While transactions are instantaneous, settlement requires time, counterparties, and system confirmation, during which users do not fully control their funds. In contrast, early DeFi (decentralized finance) focused on trading and liquidity while avoiding the fundamental question of who defines settlement in the absence of banks. B18, built on Coinbase’s on-chain infrastructure and operating on Base, aims to address this gap by transforming blockchain into a system that handles time, accounting, clearing order, and finality—functions traditionally managed by banks. B18 is not a typical DeFi protocol but an attempt to decouple banking from institutions and encode it into executable rules. Its capital structure reflects this ambition, with support from Paradigm and Wintermute Ventures at the protocol level, GSR Capital for market liquidity, FuturePay for real-world payment integration, and Base Ecosystem Fund builders who design the rules for fund recording, profit recognition, and liquidation conditions. Together, these layers form a new on-chain financial order where code, not institutions, governs settlement—shifting the power dynamics of finance. B18 represents the starting point of this migration. (Note: This is a submitted article and does not re...

In the traditional financial system, what truly determines whether "money belongs to you" is not the transaction itself, but settlement. Transactions can be completed in an instant, but settlement requires time, counterparties, and system confirmation. During this process, the funds do not entirely belong to the user; they are temporarily held within the system.

Wall Street understands this well.

The banking system exists not because of transactions, but because of settlement and clearing. From SWIFT to clearing houses, from custodial institutions to central counterparties, the core of the financial system has never been liquidity, but the order of settlement. In the on-chain world, early DeFi chose to bypass this issue. They emphasized transactions, returns, and liquidity, but rarely touched upon a more fundamental question:

In the absence of banks, who defines settlement?

This is precisely the domain B18 is attempting to enter.


B18 is built on the on-chain infrastructure system promoted by Coinbase and runs on the Base execution layer.

In this system, blockchain is no longer just a transaction recording tool but begins to carry functions closer to the traditional financial system: time, accounting, clearing sequence, and finality.

B18 does not define itself as a DeFi protocol but attempts to answer a more fundamental question:

When banks are no longer institutions, how do settlement rules exist?

This question determines its capital structure. Unlike most crypto projects built around financing and valuation, B18's capital background presents a layered structure more akin to the financial system itself.

At the protocol and institutional level, B18 receives support from institutions such as Paradigm and Wintermute Ventures. These institutions have long been involved in the evolution of protocols within the Ethereum ecosystem. Their focus is not on short-term gains but on whether the on-chain financial structure can operate sustainably.


At the market level, B18 connects with institutions like GSR Capital. These participants form the foundational conditions of the on-chain market, enabling pricing, liquidity, and clearing to be validated in real environments rather than remaining theoretical.

Simultaneously, B18 introduces capital from the payment and financial infrastructure system (FuturePay). The existence of this layer holds deeper significance—it means on-chain systems are beginning to connect with the real-world settlement network. Stablecoins are no longer just assets but become units of settlement; on-chain protocols are no longer just applications but begin to assume systemic responsibilities.


At the ecosystem level, B18 operates依托 (Note: 依托 means relies on/operates based on, kept as is for context) the Base Ecosystem Fund and its network of developers. But more important than capital is another type of participant: builders.

These engineers and protocol designers from the Ethereum and Base ecosystems do not build products; they build rules.

They decide:

  • How funds are recorded
  • When returns are confirmed
  • Under what conditions清算 (liquidation/clearing) occurs

These questions, determined by banks and institutions in traditional finance, are being recoded on-chain.

Structurally, B18 is not a project but an attempt: to剥离 (strip/separate) the bank from the institution and transform it into an executable system of rules.

Its capital structure is therefore not just a source of funding but a deeper signal:

  • Protocol capital, representing the design of rules
  • Market infrastructure capital, representing price and liquidity
  • Payment system capital, representing settlement and connection to the real world
  • Builder network, representing the continuous evolution of the system

Together, these four elements constitute not a market, but an order.

In the traditional system, banks decide settlement; in the on-chain system, code begins to take over this duty.

As settlement migrates from institutions to protocols, the power structure of finance also changes.

And the position B18 occupies is precisely the starting point of this migration.

Note: This article is a submission and does not represent the views of ChainCatcher, nor does it constitute investment advice.

Letture associate

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

China's A-share market recently faced selling pressure, especially in tech sectors, initially triggered by a global tech sell-off that began in South Korea. However, the article argues this is a case of "mistaken injury" and highlights the market's underlying resilience. This resilience stems from three main pillars: **1) Tech Sector Fundamentals:** Unlike Korea's market dominated by a few memory chip stocks, China's tech sector is diversified across computing, communications, electronics, and semiconductors, supported by dual narratives of global AI supply chains and domestic substitution. Core areas like optical modules and fiber optics continue to show strong earnings growth. **2) "National Team" Support:** State-backed institutions and large corporations have made significant market purchases and announced buybacks, providing liquidity and signaling confidence. This is seen as a stabilizing policy signal, often associated with market bottoms. **3) Broader Market Pillars:** Other major sectors are showing endogenous recovery momentum. Consumer stocks benefit from stabilizing CPI and signs of sector recovery (e.g., liquor price hikes). Cyclical sectors like aluminum have high earnings, potential price increases due to tight supply, and low valuations. The financial sector offers stable dividends and low valuations. The conclusion is that the sell-off was driven by external contagion, not a collapse in fundamentals. With strong policy support and recovering momentum across key sectors, the A-share market possesses the toughness to regain stability.

marsbit29 min fa

Misjudged A-Shares: Resilience, Expectations, and Confidence

marsbit29 min fa

Quantum Computers Haven't Arrived Yet, but Satoshi's 1.1 Million Bitcoin Pose the First Problem

A zero-knowledge proof tool can help modern Bitcoin wallets migrate assets before quantum attacks in milliseconds. However, approximately 1.1 million bitcoins mined by Satoshi Nakamoto before 2012 are fundamentally unprotected by such solutions, as they reside in older P2PK addresses lacking the hierarchical structure required for this cryptographic rescue. This exposes a critical divide: post-2012 HD wallets can potentially "upgrade" signatures using tools like Project Eleven's, while early coins are cryptographically isolated. The community faces a political, not technical, dilemma with four contentious options: 1) Let quantum attackers seize the coins, risking market instability; 2) Hard fork to freeze vulnerable addresses, seen as violating property rights; 3) Implement extreme spending limits to slow any attack; 4) Redistribute "orphaned" coins, breaking immutability. Each solution threatens a core Bitcoin tenet. The market is already pricing in this governance risk, as evidenced by institutional divestment citing uncertainty. The true crisis isn't the arrival of quantum computing, but the community's inability to reconcile its foundational principles with an existential technological shift.

marsbit37 min fa

Quantum Computers Haven't Arrived Yet, but Satoshi's 1.1 Million Bitcoin Pose the First Problem

marsbit37 min fa

Where Will the Next Bull Market's Main Battlefield Be? The Answer Lies in These Two Types of Assets

Matt Hougan, Bitwise's CIO, identifies the fusion of traditional finance and on-chain finance as the core driver for the next crypto bull market. He expects this cycle, propelled by real-world utility and global finance adoption, to be the largest yet, centered on stablecoins, asset tokenization, 24/7 trading, instant settlement, and institutional DeFi growth. The article outlines two primary investment approaches tied to this trend. The first focuses on native crypto applications with strong revenues and sustainable tokenomics, exemplified by Hyperliquid (HYPE). Its Layer-1 chain is gaining significant trading volume from traditional assets like oil and equities. Its model of using 99% of revenues for token buybacks is a key strength. The second approach targets established traditional firms building at scale on crypto rails, like Robinhood. The launch of its Robinhood Chain, enabling global trading of tokenized stocks and DeFi activities, represents a major move towards this fusion. The author also notes other serious contenders like Coinbase, Figure, BlackRock, and JPMorgan. Ultimately, the thesis is that the most profound success will come when blockchain technology seamlessly integrates into finance, becoming invisible to end-users. Investors are advised to position ahead of this convergence.

Foresight News41 min fa

Where Will the Next Bull Market's Main Battlefield Be? The Answer Lies in These Two Types of Assets

Foresight News41 min fa

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

The U.S. Congress is struggling to advance the crypto market structure bill known as the Clarity Act, with bipartisan compromise proving difficult. Key hurdles include unresolved disputes over "yield" products and, more critically, the inclusion of strong ethics provisions for elected officials—a non-negotiable demand for many Democrats. While a compromise on yield was reached in May, securing only limited Democratic support in committee, the separate Senate Agriculture Committee version later passed with no Democratic votes due to the ethics impasse. As Republicans push for a full Senate vote in July, demands for ethics rules have expanded, and other contentious issues like developer protections and concerns from law enforcement and large banks further complicate negotiations. Despite consensus on the need for legislation, the path forward is unclear. Recent discussions between senators and White House officials aim to find acceptable ethics language. Some lawmakers question whether a compromise text can garner enough bipartisan support, with one Democrat stating the current proposal lacks the strong ethics provisions required for their vote. Potential short-term goals for the crypto community include symbolic Senate action before the August recess, a longer-term aim for passage by 2026, or establishing a detailed framework that addresses ethics and other compromises. The process remains arduous, relying on the traditional, vote-by-vote effort to build bipartisan support.

marsbit48 min fa

The Clarity Act's Journey Through Congress: The Thorny Path of Bipartisan Compromise in the U.S.

marsbit48 min fa

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

"The Rivalry Between Kalshi and Polymarket Founders Turns Bitter and Litigious" The intense feud between Tarek Mansour, CEO of Kalshi, and Shayne Coplan, founder of Polymarket, has escalated far beyond typical business competition into personal animosity and regulatory battles. Both lead billion-dollar prediction market platforms, but their approaches differ sharply. Kalshi positions itself as the compliant operator, securing U.S. regulatory approval before launching. In contrast, Polymarket initially operated offshore, allowing U.S. users to access its platform via VPN, which drew regulatory scrutiny. The conflict reached a peak in November 2024 when FBI agents raided Coplan's New York apartment. While Coplan publicly blamed political motives, his team privately suspected Kalshi was involved. According to sources, Kalshi's lawyers had previously reported Polymarket's operations to federal prosecutors, highlighting its accessibility to U.S. users despite a ban. This incident fueled mutual accusations and underhanded tactics, including social media smear campaigns and attempts to sabotage each other's major business deals. Their rivalry also played out in Washington, influencing regulatory debates. Kalshi actively lobbied against Polymarket's practices, framing them as illegal and unethical. Polymarket, after facing a CFTC fine and investigation, later acquired a licensed U.S. firm to launch a domestic app, regaining a foothold. Despite the hostility, both companies have seen massive growth, with combined trading volumes soaring. However, increased regulatory scrutiny, particularly around insider trading on Polymarket's platform, continues to pose challenges. The founders' deep-seated mutual disdain ensures their battle for market dominance remains as much a personal vendetta as a commercial one.

marsbit57 min fa

Are Kalshi and Polymarket Founders at Odds? This Business Rivalry Is More Brutal Than You Think

marsbit57 min fa

Trading

Spot
活动图片