AAVE price

When will the RWA narrative truly shift from "mapping track" to "transaction logic"? After experiencing the successive entry of Wall Street giants such as BlackRock and Franklin Templeton, the answer to this question seems to have remained unresolved until the emergence of a key variable - the potential entry of Nasdaq, which will undoubtedly step on the most powerful accelerator for this profound narrative iteration. In this context, RWA has reached a delicate inflection point, the past gameplay that stayed at the level of "asset mapping" has shown fatigue, and the new paradigm of "on-chain native use" and "composable transactions" is becoming the focus of competition. With this question, we had an in-depth conversation with Jack, the head of the FufutureDAO Foundation, who believes that the winner and loser of RWA lies not in the order of issuance, but in the transaction itself. And the good show will really start after Nasdaq enters in person. 1. The conflict between "old assets" and "new world" 1. Since the beginning of this year, from the major TradFi giants to the latest SEC statements, RWA has become the focus of attention of the whole industry. Are there any industry misreadings or conceptual confusions? Jack: I think the biggest misreading right now is to equate the action of "putting assets on the chain" itself with the ultimate value of RWAs. Many people believe that as long as a stock or bond is turned into a token, the RWA revolution is complete, which is essentially using Web 2's "mapping thinking" to treat the blockchain as just a decentralized database. This thinking ignores the fundamental question: how to release the liquidity of an asset after it is put on the chain? How to establish an efficient market-making mechanism? How to achieve portfolio trading across assets? If these underlying transaction logic problems are not solved, then the so-called "on-chain RWA" is just a liquidity-depleted certificate that exists in a wallet, which is not fundamentally different from its status in a traditional brokerage account. Therefore, we are not only seeing the current RWA tokenization attempts for stablecoins and US stocks, but also anticipating that in the future, mainstream financial assets such as commodities, real estate, and even carbon credits will need a new set of on-chain transaction paradigms to carry, which is where the trillion scale really lies. 2. Many people see compliance as the biggest roadblock for RWAs, and do you seem to think there are deeper bottlenecks? Jack: Compliance is the barrier to entry, but it's not the only determinant of success. Even if all compliance hurdles are resolved, the RWA track still faces a more core bottleneck: the fundamental conflict between the inefficient and opaque properties of traditional financial assets and the efficient and transparent properties native to the blockchain world. For example, the liquidation and delivery of a US stock requires T+1, while on-chain transactions are atomic, 7 x 24 hours. These are deep-seated structural contradictions that require new infrastructure design. Therefore, I have always emphasized that the success of RWAs does not lie in the "on-chain" itself, but in whether we can use the characteristics of blockchain to create "killer applications" for these old assets that cannot be achieved in the traditional financial system, which is the source of all value. 3. This point is interesting, doesn't it explain why we haven't seen a "killer" application like Aave or Uniswap in this wave of RWA? Jack: Yes, the fundamental reason is that there is a huge gap between "asset on-chain" and "asset tradability". The success of Aave and Uniswap is due to their new and efficient "transaction language" and "lending language" tailored to crypto-native assets, which are inherently 7 x 24 hours a day, with no historical baggage. But now we try to use this language designed for crypto-native assets to describe a stock with opening and closing times, complex clearing processes, and a price anchored under the chain, and the result is naturally "acclimatization". In other words, the current mainstream DeFi infrastructure, especially AMMs, is designed for crypto-native assets with ambiguous price discovery mechanisms and high volatility, but RWAs, such as Tesla's stock, have an absolutely authoritative public market price on the Nasdaq. You can't use an AMM to "discover" its price, you can only "track" it. Therefore, the real proposition is not to simply throw RWA assets into the existing DeFi Lego, but to design a new and native transaction logic and infrastructure for RWA assets. 2. How to meet the "Nasdaq moment" of RWA 1. What kind of "disruptive impact" may the recent Nasdaq personally exit and issue tokenized shares have on the existing RWA landscape? Jack: I don't think this will be a shock, but more like a "singularity event" that completely clarifies the current chaos in the RWA market. First of all, all previous debates about whether RWA issuers are "compliant or not" will naturally end when Nasdaq issues the first native on-chain shares, because it is the top liquidity pool and source of trust in the global financial system, and the standards it defines are the final standards. More importantly, it may completely reconstruct the value chain under the RWA narrative, and protocols like Ondo Finance that focus on issuance and underwriting may have their living space severely squeezed - because once the "source" of the asset can be directly put on the chain, the value of any intermediate link will be weakened. This is precisely a historic opportunity for downstream agreements. Decentralized protocols and compliant exchanges that are close to downstream traffic entrances and build trading capabilities around on-chain composability, such as on-chain protocols such as OSL/HashKey or Fufuture, may become the real dividends. We can understand this change as the "container moment" of RWA, looking back at the history of global trade, where before the advent of standard containers, global freight was made up of countless packages of varying sizes and inefficiency (like the various ALT assets that are now flooding the chain). It is the establishment of the global unified standard of containers that has given birth to a modern global supply chain and automated ports. Once Nasdaq makes U.S. stocks RWA, it provides the standard of "value containers", and the market will quickly eliminate those "junk packages" with ugly packaging and different standards, releasing huge and standardized new allocation needs and trading opportunities. Our agreement is positioned to provide automated ports and global trading networks for these "value containers", and is the core hub under the new order. 2. Many people mention that the existing DeFi infrastructure is not acclimatized to RWA assets, can you analyze it more deeply from the underlying logic, such as Uniswap's AMM model, where are its core flaws? Jack: First of all, it is important to be clear that the AMM mechanism was a revolutionary innovation in the early days of DeFi, elegantly solving the cold-start liquidity problem of countless long-tail assets in a permissionless way, and its historical position is unquestionable. But its design philosophy dictates that it is just not suitable for the RWA asset class, which is a fundamental problem that the tool does not match the task. For RWAs, the core flaw of AMMs lies in their "price discovery mechanism", which passively "calculates" the price through the relative quantities of two assets in a closed liquidity pool, which is feasible for crypto-native assets without a real anchor off-chain - in many scenarios, the price in the pool is a true reflection of the market price. However, RWAs, such as tokenized Tesla stock, at least in the short to medium term, have an absolutely authoritative open market price on the Nasdaq that is updated every second, which is the "cause", and the price of on-chain transactions must be the "effect". Therefore, I think any attempt to change the cure through simple modifications, such as adjusting the curve and increasing the fee level, is a symptom rather than a root cause, and what RWA needs is a new transaction structure: it must be able to efficiently and cost-effectively obtain prices from external authoritative sources (oracles) and use this price as an "anchor", and then around this anchor point, by getting closer to the combination of order book and RFQ (quote-driven) models. In a word, its core should no longer be "discovering" prices, but "responding" to prices. 3. Since the value of the issuer will be weakened, beyond the concept of asset on-chain itself, where is the first "killer application" of RWA most likely to appear? Jack: The first killer application must be to use RWA as native collateral for global, 7 x 24-hour derivatives trading, which solves the core pain points of asset fragmentation and limited transaction time in traditional finance. Imagine an Asian investor who can use his tokenized Apple shares as margin on a weekend night to open a long order on a Bitcoin perpetual contract, a scenario that is completely unattainable in traditional finance, requiring complex liquidation across time zones, markets, and varieties, but on the chain, all of this can be done instantly through smart contracts. This is true value creation. In fact, this is also the core idea of Fufuture's current product - it supports users to use various financial assets as a unified margin to trade BTC, ETH, and even any mainstream financial assets in the world in the future. 3. Defining the new syntax of RWA: the dawn of downstream trading applications 1. After talking about so many challenges, can you talk about the key challenges in the technology and market of using equity RWA assets on the chain based on Fufuture's thinking and practice? Jack: The biggest challenge is risk control and liquidation mechanisms. For example, stock assets have a closed market in traditional markets, and the risk of crypto derivatives is 7 x 24 hours a day, so we must design a new and hybrid risk control engine that can not only handle the risk of price "gaps" during non-trading hours, but also ensure the timely and efficient on-chain liquidation. In fact, Fufuture's product design concept is "asset agnostic", that is, the underlying risk control and liquidation logic of our infrastructure is not limited to US stocks, but can be seamlessly expanded to a wider range of RWA asset classes such as tokenized gold, crude oil, treasury bonds, and even carbon credits in the future, laying the way for this grander future. 2. For the upcoming RWA "Nasdaq moment", how can the resources and experiences of the traditional world be integrated into the on-chain business logic? Is it just channel cooperation, or is there a deeper business synergy? Jack: It's not just channel cooperation, it's deeper business synergy. For example, we are exploring cooperation with some Web 2 technology giants, not only to obtain traffic, but also to jointly explore efficient identity verification (KYC) and fund deposit and withdrawal solutions within the compliance framework. When a large number of traditional users and funds want to enter this new world, whoever can provide the safest and smoothest bridge will be able to take the initiative. 3. Standing at the end of 2025, please boldly predict what the RWA market will look like in 18 months. Which concepts will be falsified today, and what new breakthroughs will be born that we have not yet paid attention to? Jack: I think there will be a couple of notable changes by then: First, the frenzy of "everything can be issued by RWA" will be falsified, asset issuance will be highly concentrated in a few giants with top credit, and it will be difficult for small and beautiful issuance agreements to survive. Second, the biggest breakthrough will be in "cross-asset composability". We will see the birth of the first truly "on-chain all-round trading account", where users can use tokenized real estate equity as collateral to trade commodity futures, and all risks and positions are netted within the same protocol, which is the ultimate charm of DeFi. Third, the narrative center of RWA will completely shift from the "asset side" to the "application side", and the market's focus will no longer be on who puts what on the chain, but who can use these assets to create the most amazing financial gameplay. epilogue A tacit consensus is that the entire industry is actually waiting, waiting for the "creator" of the global financial system such as the Nasdaq and the New York Stock Exchange to drop that decisive pawn. Because their entry will completely end the discussion of "what" and open a new chapter of "what can be done", which also forces us to face up to the reality that RWA is not only an innovation in the technology stack, but also a deep reconstruction of financial structure and behavioral logic. It is in this expectation that the "infrastructure narrative" of RWA is irreversibly replacing the "mapping narrative". And the sentence we are already familiar with, "going to the chain is only the first step, trading is the language", has finally changed from a slogan to a test question that needs to be answered seriously.