BlockBeats has discussed U.S. stock memes many times and predicted early on that this narrative would have a lot of room:

"U.S. stock memes, the Robinhood chain has finally found its grand narrative."

At the same time, we have been thinking about the direction of U.S. stock memes. Just as during the previous AI meme craze, starting from speculating on AI memes like $GOAT and then moving on to speculate on AI frameworks like ElizaOS, U.S. stock memes might just be the first form of speculation for on-chain tokenized U.S. stocks.

Some playstyles have already emerged in the past, such as applying the Pokemon on-chain card drawing mechanic to tokenized U.S. stocks, where opening a U.S. stock pack might yield a tokenized U.S. stock asset with higher value. Or holding certain assets (tokens or NFTs), with the fee income used to buy tokenized U.S. stocks and airdropped to holders.

These playstyles are somewhat lacking and fail to spark imagination regarding the composability of putting U.S. stocks on-chain. The basic logic behind saying this is that using meme coins to boost the trading volume of on-chain U.S. stocks is interesting and has not yet reached its ideal ceiling. However, the ultimate goal of bringing U.S. stocks on-chain is to make stock assets a truly global asset on the blockchain, capable of capturing users worldwide to trade U.S. stocks on-chain around the clock.

A brand new form of stock trading, where each chain effectively becomes a new stock trading platform—that is the ultimate big cake. Looking at this ultimate goal, the current DeFi infrastructure for stocks or RWA assets on various chains is still very incomplete.

The surge of NetNet $NET lets us see some signs of RWAfi gaining momentum on the Robinhood chain.

NetNet: The Rebirth of OHM on Robinhood

Mentioning OlympusDAO, the star project from the DeFi Summer era, might feel unfamiliar to many now. So rather than saying it's a project borrowing from the OlympusDAO v1 architecture, let's explain from scratch what this project actually does.

Let's directly look at this data statistic from the NetNet website:

Market price corresponds to the current price of $NET, around 1030 USD per $NET.

NAV corresponds to the asset backing value per $NET. That is to say, currently, one $NET worth about 1030 USD has an actual value backing of about 60 USD.

The next two data points are, respectively, the premium multiple of each $NET relative to the current asset reserves, currently showing 17.16x, and the total asset reserves in the treasury, approximately 3.35 million USD.

This is the starting point for understanding the entire mechanism of NetNet—why are people willing to pay a premium as high as 17 times to buy $NET?

The reason is simple: people believe NetNet's treasury can earn more money. Essentially, this premium is paying for the future.

NetNet's ways of making money include:

- USDG yield farming. Deploying part of idle cash into the on-chain lending market Morpho to generate yield. Up to 70% of treasury USDG can be deployed, with at least 30% liquidity retained. The income belongs to the treasury.

- $NET transaction fees. Both buying and selling incur a 5% fee. After being live for 30 days, this entire 5% fee goes into the treasury. Before 30 days, part of it serves as project operational expenses.

Of course, it has many other products, but due to certain reasons, they are not currently counted in NAV. We'll understand them later.

So, the value logic of $NET is the opposite of many project tokens. For example, the token of the launchpad Pons on Robinhood falls into the category where it needs to prove itself with its own revenue and market share—people are buying its real-time earning capability. $NET does the opposite—it's betting that the treasury behind this project will grow larger.

Furthermore, NetNet regulates these expectations. If $NET faces panic selling or extreme market conditions, causing the NAV to be particularly low, the protocol will buy back and burn $NET. If $NET rises too outrageously, causing the NAV to be particularly high, the protocol will mint new $NET and sell it to the market, allowing the treasury to have more USDG.

Holders can stake $NET to get $sNET. $sNET is distributed according to rules every 8 hours. This staking reward actually floats based on NAV—the higher the premium of $NET price relative to NAV, the more new $NET is distributed. When the market price is below or equal to NAV, no new tokens are minted to prevent further value dilution.

Due to the existence of this staking mechanism, NetNet's virtuous and vicious cycles can be amplified. If the staking rate is high, circulating $NET is low, and the price can pump quickly. If revenue falls short of expectations and market sentiment is bearish, unstaking can dump the price quickly.

Beyond this core gameplay, its relation to U.S. stock assets lies in its many U.S. stock asset-related playstyles:

- Real World Bonds. Users subscribe to $NET at a discount and linearly receive the subscribed $NET over 2 days, while the project uses this money to buy U.S. stocks. This discount is roughly 11.2% of $NET's market price. The most profitable scenario is if $NET rises and the stock price falls during these 2 days.

- SpaceX Invaders/MSFT Flight Simulator: Essentially probability games playable like arcade games, with bets and rewards being $SPCX/$MSFT (automatically purchased as the corresponding U.S. stocks after starting with USDG). Additionally, there are TURBO and TURBO BLACKJACK, similar in principle—small games with some playability, using tokenized U.S. stocks as bets and rewards.

The reason these parts are not counted in NAV is that the U.S. stock assets are currently independently custodied by the team, not in the permissionless treasury, and there is no automatic, contractual path to use the stock value for $NET buybacks, redemptions, or floor price support. These rules aren't hardcoded or auto-executed; they depend on the team's willingness and actual plans. Therefore, this income has no relation to NAV.

The recent sharp rise of this token is mainly due to a very direct shill by Ansem. Essentially, this project belongs to the category of an "optimized OHM + U.S. stock gambling mini-game platform." You might think this isn't much different from the U.S. stock gambling playstyles mentioned at the beginning of the article. Indeed, the main narratives being pushed now are also largely because the price has gone up, such as "not trading U.S. stocks, but gamified playing of U.S. stocks." What plays a major role is still a left-foot-right-foot flywheel mechanism and celebrity shilling, rather than having too much innovation in U.S. stock DeFi itself.

So let's look at another new project whose price performance is far below NetNet's—Down to Finance. This one aligns more with our requirements for DeFi playstyles with U.S. stock assets.

Down to Finance: Use Any Asset to Build Your Own OlympusDAO

This project's mechanism is truly quite complex. Many discussions categorize it as a "decentralized index fund launchpad," which is intuitive but not entirely complete.

Down to Finance supports packaging various assets into a strategy token, namely DETF (Decentralized ETF). The underlying asset portfolio can include tokenized U.S. stocks, stablecoins, Uniswap V4 LPs, Morpho lending positions, and other types of vaults/assets.

In other words, anyone can launch an index fund on this platform. This index fund is not just about putting tokenized U.S. stocks in it; it can also include some of the strategy-inherent assets mentioned above, like Uniswap V4 LPs, Morpho lending positions, and vaults. To put it simply, your on-chain strategy itself can also be used as an asset to build upon, turning into a recursive loop of "you can operate the tokens operated by the tokens you operate."

Each DETF itself can be viewed as an OlympusDAO. When introducing NetNet earlier, its architecture corresponded as 1 protocol – 1 treasury – 1 token ($NET). In the case of Down to Finance, it becomes 1 protocol (launchpad) – countless DETFs (treasuries) – each treasury with its own reserves and strategies.

This is why I view it as a "decentralized OlympusDAO launchpad."

The default launch mode "Policy" for each DETF is described as:

Minting occurs when the price is significantly above the target price; burning occurs when the price is significantly below the target price. Minting and burning operations pause when the price is near the target price. You can still trade in Uniswap V4 liquidity pools.

This supply adjustment mechanism follows the same principle as NetNet's regulation mentioned earlier.

Each "fund" can be traded, and single-sided liquidity can be provided. The protocol automatically mints DETF shares matching the single-sided deposit into the fund's reserve. Providing single-sided liquidity grants an NFT receipt. Each time the fund undergoes minting, holding this NFT will yield a portion of the newly minted tokens.

Of course, the above is still a rather superficial introduction. Because it's indeed very complex, let's summarize in one sentence: "An asset portfolio launchpad, where each bundled asset (fund) is also an OlympusDAO." The revenue generated by the protocol is used to buy back $DTF.

$NET has Ansem, $DTF has bonkguy. Besides bonkguy's support, the dev of Down to Finance is Olympus's original developer @NCyotee, which is another point people are optimistic about. Of course, risks exist—the contracts are still under audit, and currently only the frontend is live. Also, historically, protocols with hybrid assets are more prone to security issues.

But if it can launch all functionalities without issues, in my view, this project has a higher ceiling. Returning to the beginning, if the chain can also become a new platform for RWA asset trading, supporting infrastructure needs to keep up. People will trade stocks, invest in funds, and also adopt other high-yield investment strategies.

Only by making RWA assets composable on-chain will the advantages of being on-chain truly manifest.