In the wave of tokenizing commodities, players on different chains have chosen two completely different paths.
On Solana, they are busy bringing physical commodities like gold and silver onto the chain, engaging in the business of "digital commodity exchanges." Meanwhile, on the BNB Chain, a leading lending protocol has chosen a similar timeline but has focused on U.S. Treasuries — users can directly buy tokenized Treasuries with USDT, with an annualized return of around 4%.
This contrast is quite interesting. On the surface, both are about RWA (Real-World Assets), but fundamentally, they represent two very different ideas.
One protocol's approach is particularly pragmatic. Backed by over $43 billion in lending volume, its first goal with RWA products is to meet a real user need: finding stable, reliable returns amid crypto market volatility. This aligns well with its overall transformation plan — to become the "ballast" of on-chain assets.
On the other hand, Solana is expanding the variety of asset classes to meet various allocation and speculative needs. Their approach differs, and so do the target user demands.
But the protocol with the more ambitious vision is clearly more aggressive. It is upgrading from a simple lending protocol to a full-stack DeFi ecosystem, even aiming to challenge the industry’s "over-collateralization" rule. Some community members worry about too rapid expansion — and this concern is not unfounded. However, its logic — first establishing stable cash flow through RWA, then using that to support other businesses — is much more solid than just storytelling.
Ultimately, these two paths are not in competition but are complementary. Both point toward the same big trend: the crypto world is increasingly mirroring the value of traditional finance. Bonds, commodities, and other income-generating assets are being brought onto the chain. For users, the future on-chain financial ecosystem will become richer — offering both stable returns and diverse investment options.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
6 Likes
Reward
6
4
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MEV_Whisperer
· 8h ago
4% stable return sounds pretty good, but can it really beat inflation?
View OriginalReply0
Blockwatcher9000
· 8h ago
Stable return of 4%? In this crazy crypto world, it's simply a lifeline.
View OriginalReply0
FudVaccinator
· 8h ago
Government bonds 4% annualized sounds stable, but the returns in the crypto world compared to fiat currency devaluation speed are really not enough.
Solana's move to build a commodity exchange still feels a bit small; everyone is already laying out the ecological infrastructure.
That protocol really figured it out this time—first locking in stable cash flow before expanding, unlike some projects that keep talking about the big picture.
RWA ultimately comes back to one question—where does the real liquidity come from?
Wait, are they really going to challenge over-collateralization? Isn't that shooting themselves in the foot?
But on the other hand, these two approaches ultimately lead to the same place; it still depends on who can retain users.
Stable returns sound appealing, but I'm just worried it might be another new trick to cut leeks again.
View OriginalReply0
RunWithRugs
· 8h ago
Good grief, RWA and government bonds again. Isn't this traditional finance bringing the chain over? A 4% return sounds stable but it's pretty average.
In the wave of tokenizing commodities, players on different chains have chosen two completely different paths.
On Solana, they are busy bringing physical commodities like gold and silver onto the chain, engaging in the business of "digital commodity exchanges." Meanwhile, on the BNB Chain, a leading lending protocol has chosen a similar timeline but has focused on U.S. Treasuries — users can directly buy tokenized Treasuries with USDT, with an annualized return of around 4%.
This contrast is quite interesting. On the surface, both are about RWA (Real-World Assets), but fundamentally, they represent two very different ideas.
One protocol's approach is particularly pragmatic. Backed by over $43 billion in lending volume, its first goal with RWA products is to meet a real user need: finding stable, reliable returns amid crypto market volatility. This aligns well with its overall transformation plan — to become the "ballast" of on-chain assets.
On the other hand, Solana is expanding the variety of asset classes to meet various allocation and speculative needs. Their approach differs, and so do the target user demands.
But the protocol with the more ambitious vision is clearly more aggressive. It is upgrading from a simple lending protocol to a full-stack DeFi ecosystem, even aiming to challenge the industry’s "over-collateralization" rule. Some community members worry about too rapid expansion — and this concern is not unfounded. However, its logic — first establishing stable cash flow through RWA, then using that to support other businesses — is much more solid than just storytelling.
Ultimately, these two paths are not in competition but are complementary. Both point toward the same big trend: the crypto world is increasingly mirroring the value of traditional finance. Bonds, commodities, and other income-generating assets are being brought onto the chain. For users, the future on-chain financial ecosystem will become richer — offering both stable returns and diverse investment options.