We invest in founders and companies who are passionately building towards a blockchain-based economy. Telegram Group: https://nitter.cf/t.co/0hi9uYoz9p
Joined April 2021
- Tweets4.8K
- Following366
- Followers184K
- Likes1.3K
On October 27, @Morpho announced plans for its Midnight Adapter, which would let vaults allocate to fixed-rate, fixed-term markets.
Loans repay on a schedule, while investors may want their cash back sooner. Managers have to decide how much investors can withdraw and who will provide the money.
In the second quarter of 2026, @blackstone 's BCRED received roughly $4.5 billion in share repurchase requests, with $2.3 billion left unfulfilled. Quarterly repurchases are generally capped at 5% of outstanding shares, subject to board approval. Requests above the approved amount are filled pro rata.
To give investors cash before the loans mature, a product needs liquid reserves or buyers for its loan positions. A buyer pays now and waits for the borrower to repay. The return they require affects how much of the loan's interest depositors get to keep. @BirchHill_io is developing tokenized securities backed by U.S. loan pools, with plans to place them with longer-term investors.
Consider a product that values a loan using its entry yield, with interest accruing over time. A buyer prices the remaining cash flows at the return they require today.
Take a claim expected to pay $102 in three months. Using simple annualized discounting, its book value at an 8% yield is $100. Assume repayment expectations and benchmark rates stay the same, but a buyer wants a 12% annualized return for tying up cash over those three months. They would pay $99.03. The 0.97% discount to book value is nearly half the claim's $2 in remaining interest.
If a vault lets investors redeem for $100 in cash while reserves last, those who withdraw early can avoid that discount. Cash redemption at book value gives depositors an option to sell early at that price. The further the market bid falls below book value, the more valuable that option becomes.
As the vault pays redemptions from cash, loans that have yet to mature make up a larger share of what remains. Once cash runs short, investors who withdraw later have to wait for repayments or find a buyer. When the market bid is below book value, cash withdrawals at book value let early withdrawers pass part of the exit discount to those who stay.
BCRED allocates repurchases pro rata, while withdrawal order determines access to cash in the hypothetical vault above.
In-kind redemption lets investors withdraw the underlying credit positions. Morpho's planned Midnight Adapter includes this option. After leaving the vault, investors can hold to maturity or look for a buyer. Getting cash early depends on executable bids for the amount they want to sell. Investors who want cash handle the sale themselves, reducing the vault's need to fund cash redemptions.
Money set aside for withdrawals can still earn a return. In April, @maplefinance said it would keep some assets in stablecoins and U.S. Treasury bills as a liquidity buffer. On October 29, its transparency page listed about $202 million under the โUS Treasuriesโ category. If those assets earn less than the loans, the allocation affects how much interest depositors receive.
Suppose the loans earn 8% a year and the cash-like assets held for withdrawals earn 4%. Allocating 10% of the portfolio to the latter brings its annualized yield before fees down from 8% to 7.6%. The extra 40 basis points from investing it all in loans come from greater loan exposure, with no change in the loan terms.
The problem is comparing products on APY alone. With the same loan terms, a product that holds lower-yielding liquid assets reports a lower APY. One that leaves investors to sell their own positions can show a higher APY. If deposits follow that ranking, managers have an incentive to hold fewer liquid assets. In that comparison, the higher APY reflects less preparation for cash withdrawals.
With the same underlying loans, managers that fund early exits more cheaply, or attract capital willing to wait for repayment, have more income available to distribute.
OKX Ventures retweeted
Another major milestone for the OKXICE joint venture.
ICE and @tradexyz are advancing a new regulated, 24/7 market model for U.S. retail traders, with access through OKXICE.
One shared vision: financial markets that are more open, efficient, and accessible.
@Ondo launched 15 tokenized equities/ETFs and 11 @Uniswap v4 pools on Robinhood Chain.
This marks a structural shift in RWAs: from passive asset wrapping to active liquidity management and clearing infrastructure.
A quick breakdown:
THE FRICTION: WEEKEND LIQUIDITY VACUUMS
TradFi runs 5 days x 8 hours; crypto trades 24/7.
Robinhood supports 24/7 secondary transfers, but primary minting and redemption shut down over the weekend. Exogenous shocks can create supply-demand imbalances and depegging risks, with no direct TradFi arbitrage available to restore parity.
THE MECHANICS: UNI V4 AND CROSS-CHAIN ARB
Ondo deployed 11 paired pools (e.g., NVDAon <-> NVDArh), creating an arbitrage corridor:
โข Dynamic Fee Hooks: Fees scale with price deviations, protecting LPs while preserving profit margins for arbitrageurs.
โข Arb Path: Buy discounted RH tokens -> swap via Uni v4 -> bridge cross-chain -> redeem at parity through Ondo's 24/7 facility.
STRATEGIC PLAY: COLLATERAL AND ON-CHAIN PB
Beyond simple price exposure, this targets institutional rails, as Ian De Bode explained in a recent community interview:
โข DeFi Collateral: Tokenized, cash-flow-generating equities and Treasuries can replace volatile crypto-native collateral, reducing cascading liquidation risk.
โข On-Chain Prime Brokerage: Giving securities stablecoin-like velocity to enable cross-margin accounts, leverage, and automated smart portfolios.
ARCHITECTURE AND TRACTION
โข RFQ Model: Orders route directly to traditional broker liquidity, eliminating the capital drag of pre-funded, passive DEX pools.
โข Bankruptcy Segregation: Assets are held under security-interest structures with third-party verification.
โข Traction: ~$1.3B in TVL for tokenized equities/ETFs (platform TVL: >$4B).
FOLLOW-UPS
โข Tail-Risk Liquidity: Still untested during severe, sustained weekend market crashes.
โข Bridge Friction: Latency and gas fees can erode arb margins and delay price convergence.
โข Settlement Bounds: Secondary trading runs 24/7, but physical clearing remains bound to TradFi hours. The framework is offshore-only and excludes U.S. investors.
Ondo isn't erasing TradFi market hours. It's engineering an on-chain liquidity router around them.
The real moat for tokenized securities isn't asset wrapping. It's becoming the core clearing and collateral layer for decentralized finance.
Weekly Crypto Brief is live ๐
Market insights. Key trends. Strong signals.
All in one place โ everything that shaped last week in crypto.
Dive into the poster๐
According to CoinGeckoโs Q3 2026 Crypto Industry Report, total crypto market capitalization rose 39.6% quarter over quarter, increasing by $840.1 billion to approximately $3 trillion. This ended three consecutive quarters of decline and marked the largest quarterly gain since Q4 2024. However, total market capitalization remained down roughly 4% year to date.
Among major assets, ETH gained 71% during the quarter to $2,684, significantly outperforming BTC and other leading crypto assets. Spot ETH ETFs recorded $3.1 billion in net inflows over the quarter. Meanwhile, Hyperliquid (HYPE) reached an all-time high of $98 on September 23, supported by favorable U.S. regulatory developments, gaining 40.5% over four days.
Trading activity, however, did not recover in tandem. Average daily market-wide trading volume declined 8.6% quarter over quarter to $73.3 billion, while spot trading volume across the top 10 CEXs fell 14.2% to $1.65 trillion. At the same time, CEX perpetual futures open interest rose 40.6% quarter over quarter, surpassing $100 billion again by quarter-end.
Source: coingecko.com/research/publiโฆ
View:
This rebound appears more like a valuation re-rating driven by improved expectations for macro liquidity, ETF inflows, and a recovery in risk appetite than a broad-based recovery led by spot demand. While total market capitalization rebounded rapidly, spot volumes continued to weaken, suggesting that capital has not yet been sufficiently distributed across the market and that a gap remains between price performance and broader market participation.
ETHโs relative strength is particularly noteworthy. Continued net inflows into spot ETH ETFs suggest that institutional investors are gradually moving beyond single-asset BTC allocations toward infrastructure assets with broader application-layer utility, asset issuance potential, and on-chain economic value capture. Whether ETH can sustain this strength will depend on the persistence of ETF inflows, a recovery in on-chain activity, and whether sectors such as DeFi, stablecoins, and RWA can translate asset-price gains into genuine usage demand.
Meanwhile, the combination of declining spot volumes and sharply rising perpetual futures open interest indicates that the marketโs upside has been driven more by leverage and derivatives positioning. This increases short-term price sensitivity while also amplifying volatility and liquidation risks. Going forward, key indicators to watch include a recovery in spot volumes, the continuation of stablecoin supply growth and ETF net inflows, and whether capital can broaden beyond leading assets into projects with tangible cash flows, user growth, or infrastructure-driven value capture.
The OCC recently finalized its rules implementing the GENIUS Act. Stablecoin issuers are still prohibited from paying interest directly to holders, but the OCC removed its proposed presumption that certain third-party rewards arrangements violate the yield ban. Existing rewards programs, including those involving white-label partners, get no blanket safe harbor and will be reviewed case by case.
Banks have pushed back hard, concerned that rewards offered through stablecoin platforms could pull deposits out of the banking system.
According to a model published by the White House Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) earlier this year, a blanket ban on stablecoin yield would leave roughly $8.5B in potential annual earnings with issuers and intermediaries, from users who continue holding stablecoins. Even when holders receive no interest, the underlying reserves are still generating income. The OCC's latest decision leaves more room for issuers and distribution partners to structure how that economics is shared.
Stablecoin reserve revenue depends on how long dollars stay in circulation, while payments growth is driven by how quickly those dollars move.
Allium's latest October report shows that stablecoin payments reached $482B in the first nine months of 2026, up 45% YoY, with transaction counts growing 71%. Meanwhile, total stablecoin supply stood at roughly $305B at the end of September, up just 0.4% YTD.
Payment activity can scale much faster than outstanding balances. The same dollar can settle transaction after transaction, but those additional transfers don't generate more reserve interest for the issuer. For businesses that rely heavily on reserve income, higher payment volume doesn't necessarily translate into higher revenue.
A lot of today's stablecoin economics still revolves around earning interest on outstanding balances. Payments, on the other hand, are all about moving money efficiently. Those incentives don't always align.
That makes the economics of white-label stablecoins particularly interesting.
A payment company can now work with a specialized issuer to launch its own branded dollar and earn a share of the economics through distribution and commercial partnerships. But if recipients have little reason to hold that token and quickly convert it back into USDC or fiat, the branded stablecoin may struggle to build a meaningful, lasting float, even with substantial payment volume.
To earn more from reserves, platforms naturally want users to keep larger balances. Yet for cross-border payments, merchant settlement, and institutional transactions, what users really want is cheap conversion, broad acceptance, and as little idle capital as possible.
Every additional branded stablecoin can also introduce new conversion routes and liquidity fragmentation. Those costs become harder to justify as interest rates fall and reserve income shrinks.
The OCC's decision could encourage more payment companies to enter stablecoin distribution and white-label issuance. It may also accelerate a split between two business models: those built around attracting and retaining dollar balances, and those generating revenue from payments, FX, settlement, and treasury services.
For the latter, the real value of stablecoins is allowing the same dollar to move faster and settle more transactions. If the revenue model still depends on getting customers to park their money, the faster payments grow, the more obvious that tension could become.
Read the OCC's final rule: occ.gov/news-issuances/news-โฆ
Architect submitted its comments on compute derivatives to the CFTC on October 16, followed by the Hyperliquid Policy Center (HPC) on October 20. Both support bringing regulated compute derivatives to U.S. markets, though they take different approaches to benchmark standards and the rollout of perpetuals.
Around the same time, AI infrastructure credit came under renewed pressure. CoreWeave's 9.625% notes due 2032, issued in June, saw their yield climb above 15% in the secondary market. As of October 21, they were still yielding around 14.7%.
How much of the risk in AI infrastructure financing can GPU futures actually hedge?
@CoreWeave ended Q2 with roughly $104B in revenue backlog and $640M in quarterly net interest expense. Long-term take-or-pay contracts provide revenue visibility, while lenders also have to underwrite execution risk, refinancing conditions, and what the underlying GPUs will be worth when those contracts expire.
Consider a five-year financing arrangement backed by three years of contracted compute revenue. Once those contracts roll off, the economics depend on what the GPUs can earn under new rental agreements and what the hardware would fetch on the secondary market. Rental futures could help hedge the repricing of that capacity, provided the settlement benchmark tracks the rates the operator can actually realize.
That brings us to a problem with the underlying market.
Much of the GPU rental market still operates through private, long-term bilateral agreements. Architect notes that even the Compute Desk H100 index it plans to use relies primarily on published quotes, with executed transactions accounting for a smaller share of the benchmark.
Research from HEC Montrรฉal found that weekly price changes in Silicon Data's and Ornn's H100 rental indices had a correlation of just 0.17 through July 2026. These indices track the same GPU generation, yet their price movements show limited alignment. The study doesn't establish which benchmark better reflects commercial rental rates, but the choice of settlement index clearly matters for basis risk.
Pricing also varies across hardware generations. Architect cites Compute Desk data showing the B300 rental index rising from $4.55 in November 2025 to a reported $7.39 per GPU-hour, a roughly 62% increase. As newer GPUs change the economics of serving compute, rental rates and residual values across generations can move quite differently.
The two CFTC submissions approach this market from different angles.
@HyperliquidPC argues that listed futures can help an immature spot market develop common pricing standards, drawing a parallel with Henry Hub natural gas futures. It supports competing qualified benchmarks and a regulatory path for both dated futures and perpetuals.
@Architect_Fi puts more emphasis on benchmark integrity and favors establishing a track record in dated futures before expanding to perpetuals. One of its proposed safeguards is particularly interesting: exclude spot transactions priced off a futures contract or the same reference index from that index's settlement inputs.
Here's why that matters.
As GPU futures gain traction, more commercial compute agreements could move toward index + spread pricing. A provider and its customer could agree on a rental rate tied to a published H100 index, plus a negotiated premium or discount. That would make contracts easier to price and give lenders a common reference for projecting rental income.
But suppose those index-linked agreements are then reported as fresh transactions and fed back into the same benchmark.
The benchmark would effectively start incorporating prices derived from itself. Futures trading could also influence commercial contract pricing, which in turn could feed back into futures settlement.
Over time, the index might appear to be supported by a growing volume of transactions, even as the amount of independently discovered price information grows much more slowly.
The more widely a benchmark is adopted, the more important it becomes to preserve independent price formation beneath it.
This is particularly relevant for compute perpetuals. GPU-hours are non-storable: unused capacity today cannot be carried into tomorrow. That makes it difficult to establish the same kind of spot-and-carry arbitrage available in assets such as BTC. Without an expiry date, perpetuals depend heavily on funding and a reliable reference index to keep prices aligned. If that index drifts away from executable rental rates, funding can keep the contract anchored to a distorted reference.
As GPU futures become more widely used in rental agreements and equipment financing, the same benchmark could influence derivatives settlement, contracted cash flows, and the valuation of GPU-backed credit.
A pricing distortion that starts in a relatively thin rental market could then feed into a much larger pool of financial exposure, with the benchmark serving as the link between them.
Weekly Crypto Brief is live ๐
Market insights. Key trends. Strong signals.
All in one place โ everything that shaped last week in crypto.
Dive into the poster๐
According to CryptoRank data, weekly RWA Perps trading volume on DEXs has risen from $22.8 billion to $39.8 billion, up 74.7% compared with the last week of August.
Since early September, Variationalโs market share has increased from 10.6% to 32%. Its trading volume over the past week reached $12.73 billion, surpassing TradeXYZ.
Source: nitter.cf/CryptoRank_io/status/2โฆ
Commentary:
The surge in RWA Perps trading volume suggests that on-chain demand for exposure to traditional assets is evolving beyond hold-oriented tokenization toward trading-oriented financial infrastructure. Compared with directly holding tokenized stocks, indices, or commodities, perpetual contracts offer two-way trading, leverage, and hedging capabilities with lower capital requirements, making them better suited to the practical needs of sophisticated traders.
The key to this trend is not simply bringing more assets on-chain, but establishing a sustainable cycle of price discovery and risk transfer. Reliable, low-latency oracles, sufficiently deep market-making liquidity, effective liquidation mechanisms under extreme market conditions, and risk management systems tailored to the trading hours and liquidity characteristics of underlying markets are all essential.
Variationalโs rapid market share growth from 10.6% to 32% is another reminder that competition in perpetuals is not determined solely by the range of assets listed. Trading experience, quote quality, capital efficiency, market-making incentives, and liquidity distribution are the core factors that determine whether users and trading volume can be retained.
At the same time, rising trading volume should not be taken as direct evidence that the RWA market has reached maturity. In the next phase, more meaningful indicators will include the quality of open interest growth, bid-ask spreads and market depth, active trader retention, liquidation performance during extreme volatility, and the proportion of total trading volume driven by genuine hedging demand.
If these foundational infrastructure components can withstand the test of different market cycles, RWA Perps could become one of the key gateways connecting traditional financial assets with on-chain liquidity.
๐ฅ RWA Perps Volume Has Surged 75% Since August
Weekly RWA perps volume on DEXs climbed from $22.8B to $39.8B, marking a 74.7% increase from the final week of August.
@variational_io market share tripled from 10.6% to 32% since early September, overtaking TradeXYZ with $12.73B in trading volume over the past week.
Papertrade recorded roughly $596B in notional volume on its first day, with open interest peaking above $10B, against a House bankroll of just a few million dollars. The platform has no order book of its own. Instead, it uses Hyperliquid's BBO midpoint to price synthetic trades, without executing matching positions on Hyperliquid.
If a handful of deep markets already handle price discovery, does every new derivatives venue need its own order book?
On CLOBs like Hyperliquid, orders are matched against real counterparties. Market makers quote prices, manage inventory, and hedge their exposure, with those costs reflected in spreads, market impact, and fees. Funding helps keep perp prices aligned with the broader market.
Pool-backed synthetic perps, like GMX, use external prices while the protocol's liquidity pool takes the other side of traders' P&L. A new venue can launch without building its own order book or hedging every trade externally.
The capital efficiency comes from pooling and netting risk. Suppose a protocol has $100M in longs and $95M in shorts on the same asset, with similar price sensitivity. That's $195M in gross OI but only about $5M in net directional exposure. The pool can support substantial notional activity without finding a separate counterparty or hedge for each trade.
But net exposure isn't the same as capital required. One-sided positioning increases the pool's directional risk, while liquidation levels, profit realization, and price gaps can create cash demands even in a balanced book. Synthetic OI can grow quickly, but the amount a protocol can safely support still depends on its balance sheet.
On CLOBs, market makers build inventory and hedging costs into their quotes. GMX uses dynamic price impact and funding to make trades that worsen an imbalance more expensive, while encouraging positions on the other side. Borrowing fees and OI caps help manage capital usage and exposure.
Papertrade pushes the model further by bootstrapping its House from trader losses, without upfront LP capital. PAPER gives losing traders a share of future protocol revenue. The trade-off is that profitable traders may have to wait for payouts when the House runs short. The protocol can keep creating synthetic exposure without necessarily having the cash to settle every winning trade immediately.
PAPER also introduces a different incentive problem. PAPER is minted from realized losses on individual positions, while the House's net gain depends on the P&L across all traders. Farmers can run offsetting long and short positions to mint PAPER at relatively low net cost. Volume and token supply can grow rapidly without generating much additional revenue for the House.
External pricing brings another risk. On October 11, a trader reportedly moved ETH quotes on Hyperliquid while holding large synthetic positions on Papertrade. The associated wallet recorded roughly $1.28M more in withdrawals than deposits, and Papertrade subsequently tightened its OI limits.
Moving Hyperliquid's actual order book costs money, but the resulting price change can generate much larger P&L on synthetic positions elsewhere. If the potential payout exceeds the cost and risk of moving the reference market, manipulation becomes economically attractive.
A venue can reuse another market's price discovery without inheriting its depth, risk controls, or ability to pay. The reference market determines how costly it is to move prices; the synthetic venue's position limits and capital reserves determine how much damage that move can cause.
This opens up opportunities beyond BTC and ETH. New venues can offer different leverage, margin structures, and trading experiences without building separate order books. Synthetic exposure to FX, commodities, and equity indices is another opportunity, though trading hours, halts, and price gaps add complexity. Even CLOB and RFQ models still need reliable reference prices for margin, liquidations, and settlement.
As price discovery becomes easier to reuse, launching synthetic markets requires less upfront capital. But passive pools remain constrained by one-sided exposure and available reserves. A promising direction is to combine internal netting, dynamic risk pricing, and external hedging, so trading capacity can grow with the risk a protocol can actually absorb, rather than simply with the amount of LP capital it attracts.
๐๐ญ๐๐๐ฅ๐๐๐จ๐ข๐ง ๐๐๐ซ๐ค๐๐ญ๐ฌ: ๐๐ญ๐ซ๐ฎ๐๐ญ๐ฎ๐ซ๐๐ฅ ๐๐ง๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐๐จ๐ข๐ง๐ญ๐ฌ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐๐ฅ๐ฎ๐ ๐๐๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐จ๐๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง
๐๐ข๐ ๐ก๐ฅ๐ข๐ ๐ก๐ญ๐ฌ
The total stablecoin market capitalization currently stands at $302.1B, representing a marginal increase of 1.3% over the past 180 days and indicating a period of stagnant supply growth. However, this macro-level consolidation masks a significant underlying shift: 30-day DEX trading volume surged 27.2% to $152.2B. This suggests a growing divergence between transaction activity and overall supply growth. USD-pegged stablecoins continue to dominate the market, accounting for 99.3% of the total.
1. ๐๐ข๐ฏ๐๐ซ๐ ๐๐ง๐๐ ๐๐๐ญ๐ฐ๐๐๐ง ๐๐๐ซ๐ค๐๐ญ ๐๐๐ฉ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐ง-๐๐ก๐๐ข๐ง ๐๐๐ญ๐ข๐ฏ๐ข๐ญ๐ฒ
#USDC significantly surpasses USDT in DEX trading volume ($80.0B vs. $36.7B). While USDT retains the top position in market capitalization ($184.1B), its utility remains concentrated in CEX liquidity provision and OTC settlements in emerging markets. Its business model primarily captures reserve yield through centralized asset management. Conversely, USDC's compliance infrastructure and programmability have strengthened its position as a preferred settlement layer for DeFi, institutional clearing, and the emerging agentic commerce economy.
2. ๐๐๐ญ๐ฐ๐จ๐ซ๐ค ๐๐๐ฌ๐ก๐ฎ๐๐๐ฅ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ง๐ญ๐๐ ๐ซ๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง
On-chain payment flows are increasingly shifting toward high-throughput, low-cost networks. Solana's share of DEX trading volume (22.9%) is rapidly approaching Ethereum's (25.3%). Furthermore, Robinhood Chain has secured an 11.9% market share, placing it among the top five networks. This highlights how traditional brokerage firms and fintech companies can leverage their existing user bases to drive adoption of on-chain financial services.
3. ๐๐ซ๐จ๐ญ๐จ๐๐จ๐ฅ ๐๐จ๐ง๐ฌ๐จ๐ฅ๐ข๐๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐ข๐ฌ๐ญ๐ซ๐ข๐๐ฎ๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐๐ซ๐๐๐ค๐จ๐ฎ๐ญ๐ฌ
At the issuance layer, Circle and Tether collectively account for nearly 80% of on-chain volume. However, Paxos has captured a 13.6% share through its USDG and PYUSD portfolio, suggesting that the combination of regulatory compliance and open distribution networks could challenge the existing duopoly. On the DEX front, Uniswap maintains a dominant 46.7% market share, while V4 represents the next stage in the protocol's evolution of liquidity management beyond V3.
4. ๐๐ฌ๐ฌ๐๐ญ ๐๐จ๐ญ๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐๐จ๐ฐ๐๐ซ๐ ๐๐ข๐๐ฅ๐ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐จ๐ฆ๐ฉ๐ฅ๐ข๐๐ง๐๐
The market capitalizations of established assets (USDT and USDC) have declined slightly over the past 180 days, while newer assets backed by institutional players have recorded robust growth:
#USDG (Global Dollar Network): Operating within regulatory frameworks including Singapore's MAS requirements and the EU's MiCA regime, USDG adopts a distribution-and-yield-sharing model that passes underlying Treasury bill yields to ecosystem partners. This approach has helped drive its market capitalization to approximately $3B, representing an increase of roughly 340% in one year.
#RLUSD (Ripple): With its market capitalization rising 66.2% over the past 180 days to $2.4B, RLUSD highlights growing demand from traditional financial institutions for compliant cross-border settlement instruments.
๐๐ซ๐๐ง๐๐ฌ ๐ข๐ง ๐๐๐ฅ๐ฎ๐ ๐๐๐ฉ๐ญ๐ฎ๐ซ๐
With projections suggesting that the U.S. stablecoin market could reach $3 trillion within this decade, value capture is increasingly shifting away from basic issuance toward the infrastructure surrounding the ecosystem.
Source: finance.yahoo.com/news/us-trโฆ
1๏ธโฃ ๐
๐ข๐๐ญ ๐๐๐ฆ๐ฉ๐ฌ ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐ซ๐ข๐ญ๐ข๐๐๐ฅ ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฆ๐๐ง๐ญ ๐๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐ญ๐ซ๐ฎ๐๐ญ๐ฎ๐ซ๐
The total cost of cross-border stablecoin remittances remains high, at approximately 200 basis points (bps), compared with less than 50 bps for traditional fintech providers such as Wise. Stripe's acquisition of Bridge signals a broader industry shift: compliant payment networks offering seamless fiat on/off-ramps with minimal slippage could establish strong competitive moats as critical gateways between traditional finance and on-chain markets.
2๏ธโฃ ๐๐ข๐๐ฅ๐ ๐๐๐ฆ๐จ๐๐ซ๐๐ญ๐ข๐ณ๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐๐ง๐ ๐๐๐๐
The legacy model, in which issuers retain 100% of the yield generated by their reserves, is facing disruption. This shift could weaken the competitive position of zero-yield stablecoins. High-traffic Web2 platforms and e-commerce giants are likely to increasingly rely on Stablecoin-as-a-Service (BaaS) providers to issue branded tokens, enabling them to retain underlying Treasury bill yields or distribute them to end users.
3๏ธโฃ ๐๐จ๐ฆ๐ฉ๐ฅ๐ข๐๐ง๐๐ ๐๐ข๐๐๐ฅ๐๐ฐ๐๐ซ๐ ๐๐ฎ๐ฉ๐๐ซ๐๐ฒ๐๐ฅ๐
The anticipated implementation of the U.S. GENIUS Act in 2027 is expected to reinforce requirements for 1:1 backing with high-quality reserve assets, such as Treasury bills. As stablecoin issuers increasingly function as on-chain distribution channels for sovereign debt, alpha opportunities may emerge in adjacent compliance infrastructure, including decentralized Proof of Reserves (PoR), on-chain KYC/AML primitives, and compliant API routing networks connecting traditional financial institutions and banking consortia with public blockchains.
During Token2049 Singapore last week, the OKX Ventures team actively contributed to @okx Dev Day by evaluating project pitches and sharing our thesis on building AI software and how X Layer can support founders in this space.
We met talented developers building across RWA and AI agents. Many brought thoughtful ideas to the stage, and their energy was great to see firsthand.
Thanks to everyone who took part. Keep building! @XLayerOfficial
๐ค Made with AI
Weekly Crypto Brief is live ๐
Market insights. Key trends. Strong signals.
All in one place โ everything that shaped last week in crypto.
Dive into the poster๐
OKX Ventures retweeted
Grateful to welcome Circle, Ripple, QRT and SC Ventures as investors in OKX.
We didnโt raise capital because we needed it. We chose to bring in strategic partners who share our long-term vision for stablecoins, payments, institutional markets, and the next generation of financial infrastructure.
13 years in, weโre still early.
More to build. ๐
NEW: Crypto exchange OKX has raised new funding at a $25 billion valuation from Qube Research & Technologies, Circle, Ripple, and Standard Chartered's SC Ventures, Bloomberg reported.
OKX did not disclose the amount raised, which extends an approximate $200 million March funding round at the same valuation.
Tokenized equities are transitioning from a Web3 retail arbitrage experiment into a global, 24/7 same-rights clearing networkโjointly driven by TradFi clearing powerhouses (DTCC, NSCC, Nasdaq) and compliant issuers.
๐ ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ธ๐ฒ๐๐ (๐ค๐ฏ/๐ค๐ฐ ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ฎ๐ฒ)
ยท $3.0Bโ$3.6B market cap (>4x YTD growth), representing ~8% of total on-chain RWA; Q3 on-chain transfer volume exceeded $100B, including $40B in 90-day DEX trading volume. Capital velocity is significantly outpacing traditional equity markets.
ยท 2.37Mโ4.7M wallet addresses holding tokenized equities, accounting for ~82% of all RWA holders.
ยท $250Mโ$290M TVL (a 12โ18x increase), driven by growing adoption as loan collateral and perpetuals margin.
For example, xStocks has reached $900M in AUM, >$40B in cumulative volume, 490K+ holders, and 1,100+ assets in just ~15 months (holders rose from ~400K in September 2023 to 490K+). It is now live across 10+ networks (Ethereum, X Layer, Solana, etc.) and integrated with 100+ CEXs, wallets, and DeFi protocols.
๐ง๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐๐ถ ๐๐ป๐ณ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐๐ฟ๐๐ฐ๐๐๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐ ๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐
ยท NSCC 24ร5 Central Clearing (Effective June 2026): Provides CCP guarantees from Sunday 8 PM to Friday 8 PM ET, mitigating overnight counterparty risk at the clearing layer.
ยท Nasdaq / NYSE Same-CUSIP Rules (Effective MarchโApril 2026): Tokenized equities share the same CUSIP, ticker, and order book as traditional shares (via an optional โTokenization Flagโ), enabling equal rights and reducing liquidity fragmentation.
ยท DTCC Production Pilot (Completed July 2026; Go-Live in October 2026): ~40 institutions (including BlackRock and JPMorgan) validated on-chain DvP, DvD, and margin-clearing capabilities for Russell 1000 stocks and SPY.
ยท On-Chain Cash Alignment: Citi Token Services is advancing 24/7 tokenized deposits, completing the critical โcash legโ required for instant settlement.
๐๐ฒ๐ ๐ฆ๐๐ฟ๐๐ฐ๐๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐น ๐๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐๐ต ๐๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐
1๏ธโฃ Atomic DvP Settlement: Real-time delivery-versus-payment (DvP), both on-chain and cross-chain, removes traditional T+1/T+2 settlement lags and capital lock-up costsโthe core catalyst for institutional migration.
2๏ธโฃ 24/7 High-Mobility Collateral: Blue-chip tokenized stocks are evolving from static custody receipts into active, 24/7 financial primitives for staking, lending, and perpetuals.
3๏ธโฃ State Synchronization & Interoperability: Oracles and cross-chain protocols (e.g., Chainlink) bridging legacy ledgers (DTCC/Swift), private networks, and public chains serve as the technical foundation for eliminating โdigital-twinโ data friction.