What’s the truth behind RWA tokenization? ‘More friction, more cost’

ambcrypto发布于2026-03-04更新于2026-03-04

文章摘要

The article examines the debate surrounding the real-world asset (RWA) tokenization trend, questioning whether it truly adds value. Analyst Anndy Lian criticizes the sector for contradicting core crypto principles like decentralization and trust minimization, arguing that it introduces more intermediaries, friction, and costs. He believes only tokenized stocks offer a clear advantage over traditional crypto products. Despite these concerns, major institutions like BlackRock and platforms like Robinhood are actively pursuing tokenization, highlighting its potential to democratize access to financial markets. The RWA market has grown to $26 billion, with increasing user adoption. The recent Iran tensions demonstrated the utility of 24/7 trading platforms like Hyperliquid for price discovery and hedging. While challenges remain, the trend appears resilient and may evolve to address existing risks.

Is tokenization, wrapping a real-world asset (RWA) and offering it via crypto rail, really worth it?

There’s been sharp debate over the efficacy of the overall RWA trend after analyst Anndy Lian poked holes into the sector’s value proposition.

For Lian, the sector lacks key crypto ethos (trust minimization, permissionless, and decentralization).

In contrast, it just adds a new layer of middleman and more overhead costs to run 24/7.

For him, the only segment that makes sense is tokenized stock, which is a better offering than crypto perps (perpetual contracts with no expiry dates).

However, in general, the additional layer with similar traditional disclosure requirements just adds to operational cost, warned Lian.

“Reality: tokenizing RWAs adds intermediaries: Legal wrapper entities, custody providers, compliance oracles, insurance layers, off-chain dispute resolution. More parties, more friction, more cost.”

Do benefits outweigh costs?

While Lian’s argument is plausible, the fact that major players like BlackRock are still betting on it means that the benefits could outweigh the mentioned costs.

In fact, the main argument by supporters is that tokenization democratizes access to financial markets.

And Robinhood is already giving European citizens access to U.S. stock markets via crypto rails. Securitize, Ondo Finance, and other issuers have also ramped up scaling.

As of writing, the global RWA market has hit $26 billion, up 8% in the past 30 days of trading. Over the same period, the total asset holders have crossed half a million to 657K users.

And the growth has been tremendous even as the broader crypto rout deepened, underscoring the demand for these RWA products.

Interestingly, the Iran escalations over the weekend reinforced the need for 24/7 markets, especially for hedging purposes.

According to Bloomberg, Hyperliquid was one of the select available and liquid platforms for traders (including speculators) to express their macro views over the weekend as global tensions heightened.

During the tensions, oil, gold, silver, and other derivatives tracking traditional assets hit record highs on Hyperliquid.

For Flowdesk OTC trader Karim Dandashy, Hyperliquid acted as the ‘price discovery over the weekend.’

Put differently, the RWA trend may be here to stay despite the inherent issues highlighted by Lian. Perhaps, it will evolve to better handle the risks raised rather than be stifled by the perceived cost implications.


Final Summary

  • Analyst discredited the tokenization trend as ‘non-crypto’ that adds more friction and cost rather than offering any ‘real value.’
  • BlackRock and Robinhood are still positioning themselves for the tokenization boom, suggesting that the benefits may outweigh the perceived risks.

你可能也喜欢

做拼多多的黄峥跟区块链有啥联系

本文探讨了拼多多创始人黄峥与其文章《把资本主义倒过来》中提到的核心理念,以及该理念与区块链技术的潜在联系。 文章首先指出,黄峥认为拼多多本质上是一门关于“不确定性”的保险生意。传统模式下,富人通过承担风险(不确定性)获得收益,而穷人则为求“确定性”支付溢价(如购买保险、接受低息),导致财富向上流动。 黄峥提出的“反向保险”旨在逆转这一过程,即让普通人将“确定性”(例如确定的购买意愿)卖给资本。难点在于单个消费者的承诺缺乏约束力。拼多多的拼团模式通过聚集大量用户的即时订单,为工厂创造了确定性的需求,从而消除其库存风险,并将因此节省的成本以降价形式返还给消费者,实现价值的部分“倒流”。 文章的关键转折点在于,黄峥本人提出疑问:区块链是否天生为这种“反向保险”而生?分析指出,区块链技术,特别是智能合约,恰好能解决“个人承诺不值钱”的核心难题。它可以通过代码和押金机制,将消费者的购买承诺变成具有违约成本、可强制执行的数字契约,从而建立起不依赖中间机构的信任体系,让承诺变得可信、可定价、可交易。 最后,文章延伸思考了制造确定性的两种路径:一是拼多多式,依靠聚合规模来平抑不确定性;二是比特币式,依靠不可篡改的算法规则从源头锁定确定性。两者分别以牺牲部分自由与弹性为代价。 总之,黄峥的商业思想与区块链在“构建可信承诺”这一点上产生了深刻的共鸣,拼多多的实践可被视为在中心化框架下对类似理念的一次大规模预演。

链捕手36分钟前

做拼多多的黄峥跟区块链有啥联系

链捕手36分钟前

打下万亿江山的存储大佬,终究成不了首富

《打下万亿江山的存储大佬,终究成不了首富》一文聚焦存储芯片企业家朱一明及其创立的两家公司——兆易创新与长鑫科技。 文章指出,即将登陆科创板的长鑫科技市值或超万亿,但因其无实控人且股权分散,作为“灵魂人物”的朱一明间接持股不足3%,难以凭借公司市值成为顶级富豪。 随后,文章将兆易创新(市值3400亿)视为“长鑫科技前传”,回顾其发展历程。公司2005年创立时资金匮乏,朱一明采取精准“捡漏”策略,在巨头退出的细分市场(如Nor Flash、利基存储)中发展壮大。公司产品从单一存储芯片扩展至微控制器(MCU)、传感器、模拟芯片,形成多元化布局,但存储芯片和MCU仍是主要收入来源。兆易创新凭借在行业周期波动中保持较高的毛利润率(常年在40%以上)和较低的费用控制,展现出“绩优股”特质,但其净利润仍随存储芯片强周期而明显波动。 文章进而分析了存储芯片行业的商业模式。历史表明,在该行业采用重资产的IDM(垂直整合)模式并进行“反周期扩张”是巨头存活的关键,而轻资产的Fabless(无晶圆厂)模式在周期低谷中抗风险能力较弱。兆易创新作为Fabless公司,难以独自涉足资金技术壁垒极高的DRAM等领域。 因此,朱一明于2016年与合肥市政府合作创立了长鑫科技,进军DRAM制造,补齐了产业链关键环节。朱一明在长鑫表现出极大奉献精神,如放弃薪酬、稀释股权、延长锁定期,这增强了国资与银行的信心,使得长鑫得以进行巨额资本投入(截至2025年末机器设备账面值约1693亿,甚至超过比亚迪)。 最终,文章点题:即便长鑫科技市值达到2万亿,结合其持有的兆易创新股权,朱一明的个人身价预估也难以跻身中国顶级富豪行列。其选择通过绑定长鑫、以非完全控制的方式打造存储帝国,奠定了产业地位,但也意味着放弃了成为首富的可能性。

marsbit44分钟前

打下万亿江山的存储大佬,终究成不了首富

marsbit44分钟前

交易

现货
合约
活动图片