从稳定币牌照到链上资金端浅析

marsbitPublished on 2026-05-04Last updated on 2026-05-04

原文:招银国际财富管理

事件背景

2026年1月21日,香港财政司司长陈茂波先生在达沃斯论坛会议上发表讲话,强调香港作为国际金融中心,将采取积极稳健的策略发展数字资产,并以“相同活动、相同风险、相同监管”的原则,促进市场的负责任发展和可持续发展。2026年4月10日,香港金融管理局正式公布首批「稳定币发行人牌照」名单,由香港上海汇丰银行有限公司及碇点金融科技有限公司(由渣打银行、Animoca Brands、香港电讯牵头)获得,这标志着香港法币稳定币监管制度进入新阶段,旨在保障用户、规范发行活动。此外,特区政府亦积极推动代币化发展,已发行三批代币化绿色债券,总额约21亿美元;同时,推出监管沙盒,以鼓励应用创新。


01 概述

在资金端,现实世界中的货币可以以代币形式存在。不同金融生态位的机构或个人对货币的理解和应用存在差异。首先,与法定货币1:1锚定的代币,例如由私人机构发行并运行于公链的稳定币,是当前市场讨论最多的代币形式之一。另一方面,由央行发行的数字货币(CBDC)则可以被视为运行于中心化系统内的法币代币。其次,根据货币供应理论,除流通中的现金(M0)外,M1(狭义货币)包含企业和个人持有的活期存款,M2(广义货币)包含定期存款。将存款代币,即可将其作为链上支付工具之一。


02 链上资金端形态分类

如何理解资金端的RWA发展?我们可以参考国际清算银行(BIS)此前在论文中提及的图形(如下图)进行理解,在各项分类中,重点关注Electronic和Universally accessible的交集,我们会发现链上资金端所涵盖的三个方向均有涵盖:1)CBCC,对应央行数字货币;2)bank deposit,对应存款代币;3)Cryptocurrency,包含稳定币。

图一:货币分类示意图

(数据来源:BIS)

1、央行数字货币(CBDC)是国家央行发行的数字法定货币,是对传统纸币硬币的数字化延伸。它以电子形式存在,通常与法定货币价值一比一挂钩,并由央行直接控制和监督。CBDC旨在提高支付效率、促进金融包容性和削减现金使用。其潜在优势包括增强货币政策效果、降低欺诈和洗钱风险以及便利跨境支付。然而,也存在隐私保护、网络安全和金融系统稳定性等挑战。全球多个国家,包括中国、瑞典和巴哈马,正在进行CBDC试点研究,并保持国际合作。央行数字货币的发展代表了货币形式的转变,将对未来的金融体系及经济行为产生深远影响。

2、存款代币本质上仍然是银行负债,是银行将客户的法定货币存款(如活期存款、定期存款)以1:1的比例在分布式账本上进行代币化。它并非加密货币,而是代表了银行对存款人的债务,因此其风险和法律地位与传统存款相同。

值得注意的是,存款代币相较于稳定币的一个关键优势在于其可以产生利息(数字人民币2.0的升级思路就是借鉴了这一点)。稳定币发行方通常从其持有的储备资产中赚取收益,但这部分收益一般不会传递给代币持有者。相比之下,存款代币可以向持有者支付其银行存款所产生的利息,这对于拥有大量余额的机构,例如使用稳定币进行资金划转和作为抵押品的加密货币交易公司,具有显著吸引力。

  • 1)活期存款代币化:客户的活期存款可以被代币化,从而支持7x24小时实时、跨境转账和结算,有效提升了资金流动性。

  • 2)定期存款代币化:定期存款也可以被代币化,通常通过智能合约等技术实现,在满足特定条件(例如到期、达到预设金额)时,才可全额或部分释放,或享受特定收益。但其本质上仍然代表了定期存款的代币。

3、稳定币是一种与法定货币或其他资产挂钩的加密货币,其主要目的是保持价值稳定。根据抵押形式,稳定币可分为几种类型,以下是四种主要的抵押类型:

  • 1)法币抵押稳定币。这种类型的稳定币以法定货币(如美元、欧元等)作为抵押。例如,每发行1个稳定币,发行机构都会在银行账户中保留1美元的储备。

  • 2)加密货币抵押稳定币。这类稳定币通过其他加密货币作为抵押。为了实现价值稳定,通常会使用超额抵押的方式,例如,用户需要提供更多价值的加密货币作为抵押。

  • 3)算法稳定币。算法稳定币不依赖任何外部抵押品,而是通过算法来控制流通数量,以维持其价值稳定。这类稳定币会在价格上涨时增加供应,价格下跌时减少供应。

  • 4)商品抵押稳定币。这类稳定币是以实物商品(如黄金、石油等)为基础的。例如,每个稳定币的价值可以与某种商品的市场价值挂钩。


03 结语

我们不仅可以从技术和监管两个维度分析链上世界的演进,还可以从资金和资产两端把握当前的市场阶段。

首先,在链上资金端(如下图),与稳定币相对应的是各央行发行的中央银行数字货币(CBDC),同时,以香港为例,EnsembleTX将于2026年持续运行,为下一阶段创新奠定坚实基础。代币化存款交易的跨行结算将首先透过港元即时支付结算系统(RTGS)进行,试行环境将逐步升级优化,以支持代币化央行货币进行24/7全天候结算,推动香港更广阔的代币化生态系统的持续发展。

图二:链上资金端分类示意图

(数据来源:JPMorgan & Oliver Wyman, Deposit Tokens: A Foundation for Stable Digital Money)

其次,在链上资产端,随着投资需求对空间和时间维度的日益重视,起购金额更低、交易时段扩展至24/7的资产品种将与链上资金端的特点高度契合。

Related Reads

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit52m ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit52m ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit1h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit1h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit1h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit1h ago

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbit3h ago

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbit3h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片