2026-01-13 01:35:42

Regarding whether real-world assets (RWA) must be deployed on fully decentralized chains, there are different opinions within the community. A common consensus is: RWA does not necessarily have to choose the maximum decentralization option, but this choice is available. The key lies in market demand— as long as buyers are willing to accept, asset issuers will explore this path.

From the perspective of the Ethereum community, the general concern is: does the blockchain ecosystem need to incorporate more real-world assets? The answer seems to be gradually becoming clearer. Although opinions vary, the industry as a whole is experiencing a shift from theory to practice. RWA on-chain involves both technical feasibility and the choices of market participants. When traditional financial assets meet decentralized infrastructure, the final decision-making power belongs to users and counterparties— if convenience, cost, and liquidity advantages are sufficiently apparent, adoption will naturally occur.

ETH5,4%

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.

7 Likes

Reward
7
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

zkNoob

· 20h ago

Basically, it's still about profit. Whether to go decentralized or not doesn't really matter; what's important is whether you can make money. As for RWA, the market will vote itself. Don't fuss over it so much. Really, doesn't putting traditional financial systems on the blockchain undermine their original intent? Want both convenience and decentralization—how can you have both? Wait a minute, can RWA really go mainstream, or is it just another new concept hype?

View OriginalReply0

LuckyBlindCat

· 01-13 13:39

Basically, it's still driven by利益. No matter how good decentralization sounds, as long as there's money to be made, that's all that matters. As for RWA, essentially it's about who is willing to use it, not fussing over how the chain is. Wait, do those traditional finance folks really want to go on-chain? I'm a bit skeptical. Market demand决定一切, there's no doubt about that, but are there really that many demands now? Convenience, cost, liquidity... sounds great, but what about in practice? I've said it before, in the end, it all comes down to where the money flows. People are actually concerned about how much they can earn; the decentralization spiel is just a cover.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-ccc36bc5

· 01-13 02:03

Basically, the market makes the call—who cares about decentralization or not? Wait, can RWA really solve liquidity issues? It still feels like an idealistic dream. Instead of obsessing over technical routes, it's better to see whose assets break through the circle first. The moment traditional finance touches blockchain, decentralization is doomed to compromise. Some people will definitely make a fortune, while others suffer heavy losses... that's the fate of RWA.

View OriginalReply0

FOMOmonster

· 01-13 02:02

Basically, it's the market that makes the decisions. Decentralization is just an option, not a religious belief. Whether RWA is popular or not still depends on whether traditional finance folks are willing to play. Profit motivation will always come first. Arguing about decentralization again, I'm exhausted. Users with real needs have already been using it. All these discussions are pointless; it's better to wait for market validation. Anyway, when Bitcoin rises, everything else is easy to talk about. Decentralization or not doesn't really matter; what's important is whether you can make money. Don't talk about those empty concepts.

View OriginalReply0

OfflineValidator

· 01-13 01:59

Basically, the market will choose itself. The decentralization idealism always has to bow to reality. RWA can really take off only if it’s convenient and cost-effective. Who cares how "pure" your chain is? Wait, does this mean stablecoins also need to follow the RWA model? Things are getting a bit confusing. By the way, when it comes to real assets being on-chain, it seems that traditional finance folks don’t really care about decentralization. As long as they can make money, that’s all that matters. Market demand is king. Stop with all those theories.

View OriginalReply0

WalletDivorcer

· 01-13 01:59

Is the RWA thing still about decentralization? Honestly, it's the market that decides—if there's profit, they'll move up. Talking all fancy, but in the end, it's all about returns... Convenience? Cost? Ha, traditional finance has plenty of tricks. The real question is who will take the blame for this. Ethereum wants a piece of this cake but pretends to be so noble—kind of a slap in the face. I'm optimistic about the RWA direction, but it feels like just a different flavor of the same old thing.

View OriginalReply0

FreeMinter

· 01-13 01:45

Basically, the market rules everything. Who cares which chain you're using? RWA will eventually go on-chain; it just depends on who gets the benefits first. Decentralization? That's the dream of idealists. Practicality is king. Cheap, easy to use, and high liquidity—that's all that matters. Who cares if it's centralized or not? Traditional finance has already made its move; complaining won't help if you can't keep up.

View OriginalReply0