2026-01-20 08:36:15

I've heard a very interesting point: when "going on-chain" itself becomes the end goal, it actually marks the beginning of the problem.

The RWA (Real-World Asset) track has indeed been hot over the past two years, but there's a curse — too many projects have fallen into the same trap: desperately emphasizing compliance identity and on-chain status. As a result? They become a series of "compliant displays," looking impressive and high-end, but when it comes to actual trading, liquidity is shockingly thin.

This is the core issue. RWA should never be just about going on-chain. That's just the foundation. The key is the subsequent trading markets, price discovery, and real liquidity — these are the vital signs that keep RWA alive.

RWA-0.77%

View Original

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.

15 Likes

Reward
15
10
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

ImaginaryWhale

· 01-23 05:15

Basically, RWA is a liquidity game. On-chain assets without real trading volume are just worthless paper. Honestly, compliance is just a ticket; whether you can survive depends on trading depth. In the past two years, I've seen too many "high-end" RWA projects. As soon as they go live, no one touches them—that's ridiculous. Liquidity is the lifeline; everyone in the know understands that.

View OriginalReply0

StillBuyingTheDip

· 01-23 02:53

Basically, RWA is now just "wealth on paper," with nothing to show for it once on the chain. Liquidity is dead, and no matter how beautiful the compliance certificates are, they're useless. Wait a minute, isn't this just a variant of the ICO projects from 2018? Changing the shell to keep scammin'

View OriginalReply0

GasFeeCrybaby

· 01-23 02:22

To be honest, RWA right now is like a group of people fighting to put things on the chain, then thinking they've fulfilled their mission. I really can't hold it together. Without liquidity, it's dead. No matter how compliant, it's useless.

View OriginalReply0

Blockchainiac

· 01-20 09:05

Exactly right, going on-chain is really just the beginning, not the end. Right now, many RWA projects are just trying to get a compliance tag and call it a day. What about liquidity? No one is actually trading. The real problem is that these projects forgot one thing: blockchain was originally meant to improve efficiency, but it has turned into a digital museum.

View OriginalReply0

BottomMisser

· 01-20 09:05

Haha, it's the same old trick again. Just get on the chain and it's done? Wake up, everyone. --- Liquidity is the key; without it, everything else is pointless. --- Exactly right. Right now, RWA is just a game of stacking compliance labels. --- Isn't this just a rebranded concept hype? Looks impressive but no one really wants it. --- The core still needs to have real trading volume; otherwise, it's just an empty shell. --- Every day they hype compliance enthusiastically, but during trading, there's not even a shadow of a person, haha. --- The path of RWA is quite difficult; liquidity issues really need to be solved. --- Basically, project teams only think about how to get on the chain to obtain legal status, and never consider how to generate revenue. --- Price discovery mechanism is the key; right now, all these are just empty talk.

View OriginalReply0

RugPullAlertBot

· 01-20 09:04

Ha, you're so right. Going on-chain is just the beginning, not the end. A bunch of projects will boast "We are compliant" "We are on-chain," and then what? No trading, just decorations. --- Liquidity is king. RWA without real trading is just an empty shell. No matter how loud the compliance claims are, they are useless. --- That's the problem. Everyone wants to take shortcuts and skip the trading market part. As a result, they end up with a bunch of fancy but unused stuff. --- Wake up, everyone. RWA requires real cash transactions, not on-chain certificates. Market liquidity is the only thing that proves everything. --- Honestly, there are too many RWA projects fooling themselves now. Thinking that just being on-chain means success, but little do they know, that's just the beginning of hell.

View OriginalReply0

unrekt.eth

· 01-20 09:04

Well said. The logic of just going on the chain and being done should have been broken long ago. I see these so-called "compliance showcase" items in the group every day, with liquidity dead as hell. What's the use? It's just a bunch of pretty numbers. True RWA should come to life, not just lie on the chain as decorations.

View OriginalReply0

RektRecorder

· 01-20 08:48

To be honest, on-chain has itself become a facade, with many projects using "compliance" as a cover-up. Liquidity is the real key; RWA that no one is willing to buy is just museum collectibles.

View OriginalReply0

ContractBugHunter

· 01-20 08:46

That's right, going on the chain is just the beginning, not the end. Currently, too many RWA projects are doing it backwards, focusing only on compliance for promotion, but there are hardly any buyers and sellers. Liquidity is the key.

View OriginalReply0

FOMOmonster

· 01-20 08:42

Not wrong at all. On-chain itself is just a facade; the real game is in liquidity. --- Another bunch of PPT projects. No matter how beautifully compliant they are written, what's the use if no one buys in? --- Liquidity is the key; without it, everything else is useless. --- The RWA track is now just a shell game. It looks glamorous on the surface, but behind the scenes, the trading depth is weak. --- I just want to know how deep the trading depth really is for those RWA projects that hype themselves the most. --- Haha, the compliant showcase is just too perfect; it's indeed a bunch of fake excitement. --- So now, investing in RWA projects is just gambling on whether liquidity can pick up; how likely is that? --- This is the core issue. Everyone is only thinking about going on-chain, but no one is really building the market.

View OriginalReply0