Opinion: Most Tokenized Assets Are Still Traditional Finance Wrapped On-Chain

marsbitPublicado em 2026-05-25Última atualização em 2026-05-25

Resumo

**Summary:** A market analysis reveals that the vast majority of tokenized assets remain mere "wrappers" for traditional finance on-chain. Of 593 surveyed assets, 77.6% are "Wrapped" assets where the token exists on-chain but key lifecycle functions (issuance, redemption, custody, access) remain off-chain. Only 11.1% are "Hybrid" assets, where some operational logic (transfers, settlement, yield accrual) is migrating on-chain, representing the true beginning of transformation. A mere 2.7% are "Native" assets built with a fully on-chain operational model. This explains why stablecoins feel structurally advanced compared to other RWA—they are true on-chain financial primitives, not just digitized traditional processes. The key future distinction won't be between tokenized and non-tokenized assets, but between those that are merely distributed on-chain and those that begin to *operate* on-chain.

Author: Yaroslav Writtle

Compiled by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Deep Tide Guide: The RWA sector has been discussed for so long, yet 77.6% of tokenized assets are still just "on-chain wrapping paper" — the token is on-chain, but issuance, redemption, and custody are entirely off-chain. What's truly worth attention are the 11.1% of "hybrid" assets, which are moving part of their lifecycle on-chain. This explains why stablecoins feel far ahead of other RWAs: they are genuine on-chain financial primitives, not just digital shells for traditional processes.

Market Size Growing Faster Than Market Maturity

An effective way to understand this market is not to look at whether it's tokenized or not.

Instead, look at:

  • Wrapped
  • Hybrid
  • Native

A 2026 market survey covering 593 tokenized assets showed that 460 assets, or 77.6%, were still classified as wrapped. Only 66 assets, or 11.1%, were hybrid, and a mere 16 assets, or 2.7%, had reached a native state.

This is the true shape of the market.

Wrapped Remains the Default Form

Most tokenized assets improve distribution, not infrastructure.

The token exists on-chain.

Most of its lifecycle does not.

Issuance, redemption, custody, transfer permissions, pricing, and investor access still heavily rely on off-chain systems.

So surface growth may be real, but on-chain autonomy remains low.

Hybrid Is Where Real Transformation Begins

Hybrid is the part of the market worth watching.

This is where certain parts of the lifecycle begin migrating on-chain:

  • Transfer logic
  • Settlement processes
  • Yield accrual
  • Partial compliance or access controls

Not fully native.

But no longer just wrapping paper.

This middle category is still small, which is why the market feels like it's moving faster than it actually is.

Native Is Rare for a Reason

Native assets are rare because the bar is high.

To reach that level, it's not just about the token being on-chain.

The operating model must also be on-chain.

This includes:

  • Issuance and redemption
  • Transfer execution
  • Custody assumptions
  • Composability with other systems

Very few assets truly meet this standard today.

Stablecoins Still Feel Ahead of Other Assets

This also helps explain why stablecoins still feel structurally ahead of most RWAs.

They are closer to being true on-chain financial primitives.

Many other tokenized assets still resemble digital wrapping paper for traditional processes, rather than assets that genuinely operate within an on-chain financial system.

What Matters Next

The market doesn't need more proof that assets can be tokenized.

A more useful question now is: which parts of the lifecycle have truly migrated along with it?

This is where the next round of differentiation will occur.

Not between tokenized and non-tokenized.

But between assets that are still distributed on-chain, and assets that are beginning to operate on-chain.

Perguntas relacionadas

QAccording to the article, what percentage of tokenized assets are considered 'wrapped' and what does this category mean?

A77.6% of tokenized assets are considered 'wrapped'. This means the token exists on-chain, but key lifecycle functions like issuance, redemption, custody, transfer permissions, pricing, and investor access remain heavily dependent on off-chain systems.

QWhat is the 'hybrid' category of tokenized assets, and why does the article suggest it's the important one to watch?

AThe 'hybrid' category refers to assets where some parts of their lifecycle, like transfer logic, settlement, yield accrual, or compliance controls, are beginning to move on-chain. The article suggests this is the important category because it represents the real start of infrastructure transformation, moving beyond just being a digital wrapper for traditional processes.

QWhy are truly 'native' on-chain assets still so rare according to the analysis?

ATruly 'native' on-chain assets are rare because the bar is very high. It requires not just the token to be on-chain, but the entire operational model—including issuance, redemption, transfer execution, custody assumptions, and composability with other systems—to be fundamentally built on-chain.

QHow does the article explain the perceived structural lead of stablecoins over most other Real World Assets (RWAs)?

AThe article explains that stablecoins feel structurally ahead because they are closer to being genuine on-chain financial primitives. In contrast, many other tokenized RWAs still resemble digital wrappers for traditional financial processes, not assets operating within an on-chain financial system.

QWhat does the article propose as the key question for the next phase of development in tokenized assets?

AThe article proposes that the key question is no longer whether assets can be put on-chain, but which parts of their lifecycle are genuinely migrating on-chain. The next phase of differentiation will occur between assets that are merely distributed on-chain and those that are beginning to operate on-chain.

Leituras Relacionadas

τ Scaling: Huawei's New Growth Engine Designed for the Post-Moore Era

**Tau Scaling: Huawei's New Growth Engine for the Post-Moore Era** For 60 years, progress in semiconductors was driven by Moore's Law – making transistors smaller, denser, and cheaper. This path has now stalled due to plummeting returns below 7nm, astronomical lithography costs, and rising per-transistor expenses. After six years and testing 381 production chips, Huawei’s semiconductor team proposes a fundamental shift: **stop competing on size, start competing on time**. This is the core of their "τ (Tau) Scaling" theory. It treats *time* as the key optimization metric, compressing characteristic delays (τ) across all levels – from transistor switching (picoseconds) to data center tasks (seconds), spanning 12 orders of magnitude. **What is τ Scaling?** It holistically minimizes delay/time constants (τ) across four layers: transistors (switching speed), circuits (signal delay), chips (compute/memory access), and systems (end-to-end communication). The goal is to align optimization from process and circuit design to architecture and systems using this unified metric. **Mobile Application: LogicFolding** Without advancing the process node, this technique vertically stacks chips using ultra-precision hybrid bonding, distributing critical paths across layers ("stacking floors"). Results include a 55% transistor density increase, 41% better energy efficiency, over 40% higher SRAM frequency, and a roadmap targeting 4GHz by 2029. **AI Data Center Application: Full-Link Latency Compression** With 80% of AI cluster energy and 70% cost spent on data movement, the focus is slashing communication time. Key innovations include: 1. **Unified Bus:** Cuts multi-layer protocols, reducing remote access latency from microseconds to ~100 nanoseconds – 500x faster. 2. **Hi-ONE Optical Interconnect:** Replaces copper with fiber, enabling 8Tb/s per module and scaling distances from 1m to 100m for 10,000-chip clusters. 3. **3D Folding:** Solves the "interface bottleneck" of 2.5D packaging by vertically integrating memory, power, and optical I/O alongside compute, predicting over 100x integration density gain by 2035. **Re-fusion of Logic and Memory** The AI era, where data movement is more critical than computation, demands tight 3D integration of logic and memory, shifting industry influence towards memory and advanced packaging. **Remaining Challenges** include adapting EDA tools for 3D design, optimizing wafer-to-wafer process variation and vertical interconnect losses, and establishing new energy efficiency and benchmarking standards. **Conclusion:** The era of scaling physical dimensions is over. The era of scaling time has begun. By leveraging 3D stacking, system architecture, and interconnect optimization—rather than solely chasing advanced lithography—performance and efficiency can continue to advance. This is poised to be the semiconductor industry's core roadmap for the next decade.

marsbitHá 11m

τ Scaling: Huawei's New Growth Engine Designed for the Post-Moore Era

marsbitHá 11m

NodeStrategy: The First Ordinals DAT Project, Bringing the Strategy Treasury Narrative to NFTs

**Summary: The Fundamental Flaws of NodeStrategy, the 'First Ordinals DAT'** NodeStrategy presents itself as the first Ordinals Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) on Bitcoin. Its model mirrors MicroStrategy's treasury narrative but for NFTs, specifically targeting the NodeMonkes collection (not officially affiliated). The project's core mechanism is a four-step flywheel: a 10% fee on all trades (90% to treasury, 10% to radFi/Bound marketplace) is used to buy NodeMonkes. These NFTs are then listed for sale on Satflow, with 100% of the sale proceeds used to buy back and burn the project's token, NODESTRAT, aiming to create a perpetual value cycle. However, the design contains critical, self-defeating flaws: 1. **Platform Lock-In:** As a Bitcoin Rune, NODESTRAT lacks smart contract functionality and cannot natively enforce the 10% fee. The fee can only be collected on the radFi/Bound marketplace itself. This makes the entire flywheel dependent on a single platform. If liquidity moves elsewhere, fee revenue drops to zero, halting the mechanism. 2. **Self-Suffocating Economics:** The 10% fee acts both as the flywheel's fuel and a major drag on demand. A buy/sell roundtrip incurs a 20% cost, creating a massive hurdle for traders. This strangles the very trading volume needed to generate fees. 3. **Ineffective Value Support:** The flywheel is starved. Low daily volume (~$9K) generates minimal fees for NFT purchases. The NFT "ladder" sales are slow and unpredictable (only 39 total sold), meaning buybacks are infrequent. While 30.77% of the supply has been burned, this supply reduction cannot lift price without corresponding demand, which is suppressed by the high transaction tax. 4. **Meaningless NAV:** The Net Asset Value (NAV), currently at a 0.46x discount to market cap, is merely a marketing figure. There is no redemption mechanism for token holders to claim the underlying NodeMonkes assets. Price is set by market liquidity flows, not by this theoretical backing. In essence, NodeStrategy's design forces its revenue source (trading fees) to simultaneously cripple the demand and liquidity required for its own success, trapping the project in a stagnant state.

marsbitHá 17m

NodeStrategy: The First Ordinals DAT Project, Bringing the Strategy Treasury Narrative to NFTs

marsbitHá 17m

Agentic Design Patterns: A Book That Made Me Re-Understand "What Is an Agent, Really?"

"Agentic Design Patterns" is a 2025 book by Antonio Gullí, a Google engineering director, which offers a systematic framework for AI Agent development through 21 design patterns. A core contribution is the "Four Levels of Agency": Level 0 (bare LLMs) are not true agents. Level 1 agents actively decide when and how to use tools. Level 2 agents engage in strategic planning, context engineering (curating and filtering information), and self-reflection. Level 3 involves multi-agent collaboration with defined communication topologies. The book introduces **Context Engineering** as a superset of prompt engineering, managing four layers of information for the agent: system prompts, external data, implicit context (user history, environment), and feedback loops for automated optimization. A key pattern is **Reflection (Producer-Critic)**, where two distinct agents with different prompts collaborate iteratively—one produces output, the other critiques it—until quality is satisfactory or a max iteration limit is reached. For **Memory**, a three-layer model is proposed: Session (ephemeral conversation context), State (temporary task data), and Memory (persistent, long-term storage). Regarding **Multi-Agent Systems**, the book advises against unnecessary complexity, recommending simple topologies like Supervisor or Peer-to-Peer based on task needs. It emphasizes perfecting a single Level 2 agent before moving to multi-agent setups. The author concludes with three actionable takeaways: 1) Add a Critic agent to existing workflows, 2) Practice Context Engineering beyond simple prompts, and 3) Avoid premature multi-agent complexity; first master a robust single agent. The book provides a practical map, codifying common challenges like reflection, memory, and coordination into reusable patterns, saving developers from reinventing foundational solutions.

链捕手Há 1h

Agentic Design Patterns: A Book That Made Me Re-Understand "What Is an Agent, Really?"

链捕手Há 1h

Will ETH See Fund Inflows Again? Sharplink and BitMine Make It onto the Russell Index List

Two Ethereum (ETH)-related public companies, Sharplink (SBET) and BitMine (BMNR), will be added to the U.S. Russell Indexes on June 29, 2026. SBET is confirmed for the Russell 2000 and Russell 3000, while BMNR is on the preliminary list for the Russell 3000 and has a high chance of entering the Russell 1000. This inclusion acts as an "automatic shopping list" for massive passive investment funds like ETFs and pension plans, compelling them to buy these stocks to match the index composition. Consequently, millions of mainstream investors who do not directly trade crypto will automatically gain exposure to these Ethereum-linked equities through their index funds. This move channels significant passive capital—trillions of dollars track these indexes—into SBET and BMNR, integrating Ethereum-related investment opportunities into traditional financial portfolios. While the funds buy the companies' stocks, not ETH directly, this is expected to provide short-term price support for the stocks and increase their liquidity and institutional ownership. Over the long term, it could also indirectly incentivize the companies to acquire more ETH.

marsbitHá 1h

Will ETH See Fund Inflows Again? Sharplink and BitMine Make It onto the Russell Index List

marsbitHá 1h

An AI Read SpaceX's Prospectus and Wrote This Investment Memo in 12 Minutes

An AI agent autonomously analyzed SpaceX's 226MB S-1 filing, purchased real-time market data on-chain for $1.87, and generated a comprehensive investment memo in 12 minutes. The memo concludes a "Hold" recommendation. Bull Thesis: SpaceX holds a near-monopoly in commercial launch (80% of global orbital mass since 2023), operates the profitable Starlink business (10.3M subscribers, $7.2B adj. EBITDA), and is vertically integrated from rockets to AI via the xAI acquisition. Starlink alone is a standout, high-margin business. Bear Thesis: The AI division is a massive cash burn ($6.4B operating loss on $3.2B revenue in 2025). True debt obligations approach ~$42B, not the headline $29B, due to bridge loans and X-related debt. Significant contingent liabilities exist, including a potential $10B fee from a Cursor option agreement. The company faces concentrated counterparty risk (e.g., a $45B Anthropic contract), slowing revenue growth, and complex governance as a controlled company with four share classes. Valuation anchors Starlink's standalone value at ~$84B (applying Iridium's 7.4x sales multiple), suggesting the current ~$500B+ IPO target prices in immense future execution risk for Starship and AI. Key risks include Starship delays, accelerating AI losses, and underwriter conflicts (the IPO's lead banks are also lenders on the $20B bridge loan it aims to refinance). Investment triggers: upgrade to "Overweight" if priced ≤$350B and Starship meets milestones; downgrade to "Pass" if priced >$510B or key risks materialize.

marsbitHá 1h

An AI Read SpaceX's Prospectus and Wrote This Investment Memo in 12 Minutes

marsbitHá 1h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片

Categorias popularesright-arrow

Etiquetas Popularesright-arrow