Today, were going to talk about one of the hottest topics in the crypto market right now:
After the SEC introduced the Innovation Exemption,they could tokenize U.S. stocks become the next major narrative in the crypto market？
When we talked about RWA in the past, the first things that came to mind for many people were U.S. Treasuries, money market funds, and short-term bonds.
But now the market is asking a different question: Can the U.S. stocks go on-chain？
Can Apple, NVIDIA, Tesla, and S&P 500 index ETFs be represented as regulatory-compliant tokens and traded on-chain？
Once these assets are brought on-chain, can they enter wallets, stablecoins, DEXs, liquidity pools, and even become collateral for DeFi？
If this entire chain gradually becomes viable, the crypto market narrative will no longer be simply about “how much a particular token has gone up.” Instead, it could become a much bigger question:
Who will issue the assets of the future capital markets？ Who will provide the trading infrastructure？ Who will provide pricing data？ Who will provide liquidity？ Who will provide lending and settlement？
That is the core issue were going to explore today.
But before we begin, let me make one thing clear: This is not about recommending 20 coins that are “guaranteed to go up tomorrow.” What we are building today is a research map.
Because regulatory tailwinds do not guarantee a project‘s success, and a project’s success does not necessarily mean its token price will rise. In crypto, narratives can rally first while the fundamentals may never materialize.
Today, well break this down into several parts.
First, what exactly does the SECs Innovation Exemption allow？
Second, what sectors are actually needed for tokenized U.S. stocks？
Third, what is the logic behind each of the 20 specific projects and tokens？
Fourth, given the current Bitcoin market environment, how should investors prioritize their research and manage risk？
Finally, Ill give you a practical framework for evaluating these projects:
Has the policy actually been implemented？ Is the business growing？ Can the token capture value？ Has the price already priced in too much expectation？
Once you understand these four questions, you wont have to approach every RWA project by simply “following the news, chasing the rally, and guessing which one will double.”
Part One: What Exactly Has the SEC‘s Innovation Exemption Changed？
1. First, Let’s Understand the Policy Itself
Lets start with the most important part: the policy.
On September 17, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, announced a temporary, conditional regulatory exemption called the Innovation Exemption.
The key point in the SECs official document is that eligible Tokenized Securities Venues, or TSVs, can, under specified conditions, use permissioned automated market makers and liquidity pools to trade certain tokenized U.S. NMS stocks.
There are three keywords everyone needs to remember.
The first keyword: temporary.
This is not a permanent law, nor does it mean that all U.S. stocks can simply be turned into tokens starting today.
According to the SECs formal document, the exemption runs through September 17, 2031.
So, fundamentally, this is a time-limited regulatory experiment. Regulators want to observe how this trading model works, collect data, and then determine how longer-term rules should be structured.
The second keyword: conditional.
Not every DEX, project, or liquidity pool can automatically take advantage of this policy.
The trading venue, liquidity providers, participants, and traded assets must all satisfy applicable requirements.
The SEC specifically emphasizes requirements involving permissioned access, transaction-data disclosure, technological safeguards, recordkeeping, and coordination around trading halts.
In other words, we could eventually see a new type of trading structure: the efficiency of DEX-style trading combined with the regulatory access controls of traditional finance.
This does not necessarily mean a completely open, permissionless market in which any wallet can participate directly.
The third keyword: tokenized securities.
This is also where the market is most likely to misunderstand the policy.
A genuine Tokenized Stock is not simply a token designed to track Apples share price.
If it represents a compliant tokenized version of an actual stock, there should be an underlying arrangement representing genuine securities interests. Where applicable, holders should receive economic rights corresponding to those of traditional securities, such as dividends and voting rights.
A synthetic token that merely tracks a stocks price is therefore not necessarily equivalent to a genuine tokenized stock.
So remember one sentence:
Putting stocks on-chain does not eliminate their securities status; tokenization does not eliminate regulation.
2. Why Does It Matter？
So here is the question: If this is only a limited regulatory exemption, why is the market paying so much attention？
Because this is not simply about another crypto product. It touches the infrastructure of financial markets themselves.
What does traditional stock trading generally look like？
An investor places an order through a broker. The order goes to an exchange for matching, followed by clearing, custody, and settlement, ultimately completing the recording and delivery of ownership.
This system has operated for decades and has highly developed rules and processes.
Blockchain is attempting to provide an alternative model:
Wallets hold assets, blockchain networks record transfers, smart contracts manage transactions, and blockchains handle parts of settlement and ownership records.
If more compliant financial assets eventually enter this system, the changes could extend far beyond trading hours.
They could affect:
Asset issuance, trading venues, liquidity provision, asset transfers, settlement, ownership records, and even how financial institutions coordinate with one another.
This is also central to the significance discussed in the SECs official policy framework.
But we need to be very clear about one thing:
Opening a regulatory pathway does not mean the market has already migrated.
The real questions come afterward.
How many trading venues will apply？
How many platforms will actually be able to meet the regulatory requirements？
How many publicly listed companies will be willing to have their shares tokenized？
How much actual trading volume will develop？
Will investors really want to use wallets and on-chain trading？
These questions will determine whether the policy remains a headline or develops into genuine financial infrastructure.
There is another extremely important risk I want to highlight here.
In the future, we may see two very different types of products existing side by side.
The first category consists of tokenized stocks backed by genuine underlying securities and issued and custodied according to applicable rules.
The second category consists of synthetic assets that merely track stock prices.
For example, a project could issue a token and tell you that it tracks NVIDIAs share price.
You may think you are buying NVIDIA stock, but in reality, you may only have price exposure, without any ownership of the underlying shares, dividends, or voting rights.
These two types of products could be completely different in terms of economic rights, custody, redemption, legal responsibilities, and risks.
So when you see something called an “Apple Token,” “Tesla Token,” or “NVIDIA Token” in the future, dont just look at the name.
You need to ask:
Who issued it？
Who holds the underlying assets？
Is it backed 1:1？
Do holders have dividend and voting rights？
Who is responsible for redemption？
What happens to the token if the underlying stock is halted？
If a dispute occurs, which jurisdiction handles it？
These questions matter far more than the tokens candlestick chart.
Moreover, under the SECs policy framework, the relevant stock issuer has the right to object. A third party cannot simply decide to put shares of any publicly listed company into a trading pool just because it wants to issue a token.
Therefore, dont interpret “tokenized stocks” as completely unrestricted, permissionless issuance.
Part Two: Breaking Down 20 Projects and Tokens, One by One
Note: These categories are organized according to business narratives and use cases. They are not a ranking of expected returns or an investment rating.
Tier One: ONDO — The Gateway for Asset Issuance
The first project is ONDO.
If we imagine the future on-chain capital market as a city, ONDO is more like the asset issuance and management platform responsible for bringing real-world assets into that city.
Its core focus is RWA, or the tokenization of real-world assets.
Early RWA products primarily focused on assets such as U.S. Treasuries and short-term Treasury funds. As its products and ecosystem have developed, Ondo has expanded into tokenized stocks and ETFs.
According to public information from Ondo and its ecosystem, Ondo Global Markets now offers more than 200 tokenized U.S. stocks and ETFs on Solana, covering assets such as NVIDIA, Apple, and Meta, as well as products such as SPY and QQQ.
Here is the important shift:
In the past, when people talked about RWA, they usually thought of Treasuries.
Now, tokenized stocks and ETFs are emerging as a new asset category.
If this market continues to grow, asset issuance, custody, redemption, compliant access, and asset management will become increasingly important.
That is the primary reason ONDO is worth researching.
But dont confuse ONDO with Apple stock.
Buying ONDO does not mean buying Apple stock, nor does it mean directly owning any U.S. stocks.
What you are researching is whether Ondos asset issuance business, product scale, user demand, and ecosystem position can continue to grow — and whether that growth can ultimately translate into value for the ONDO token.
Key metrics to monitor:
First, the size of tokenized assets.
Second, the number of products and their actual usage.
Third, the mechanisms for issuance, redemption, and asset management.
Fourth, whether there is a genuine connection between project revenue and the ONDO token.
Fifth, token unlock schedules and circulating market capitalization.
In one sentence: ONDO represents the asset-issuance layer, but business growth does not automatically mean the token price will rise.
Second: LINK — The Data Pick-and-Shovel for On-Chain Finance
Second is LINK.
If ONDO is responsible for bringing assets on-chain, the oracle sector represented by LINK solves another fundamental problem:
How does a blockchain know what an asset is worth？
For example, if a tokenized NVIDIA stock enters DeFi, a smart contract needs to know its price.
If a tokenized Treasury enters a lending protocol, the protocol needs to know its net asset value and risk parameters.
If a tokenized ETF is used as collateral, it also needs a reliable source of data.
All of this requires price data, asset-status data, and infrastructure connecting off-chain information with on-chain systems.
Therefore, the investment research logic behind LINK is straightforward:
The more real-world assets enter blockchain-based financial systems, and the more sophisticated on-chain finance becomes, the greater the potential demand for reliable data infrastructure.
However, the oracle industry is not without competition.
LINK is also already a highly watched asset, meaning its valuation, market expectations, and competitive landscape all need to be examined.
Dont conclude that “because oracles are important, LINK must go up.”
Instead, ask:
Is demand for real-world data actually increasing？
Is the scale of protocol services expanding？
Are institutional clients and supported assets growing？
And can that business growth translate into greater usage or economic value for the LINK token？
Those are the things we really need to track.
Third: ETH — The Settlement Layer for On-Chain Finance
Third is ETH.
ETH is not a pure RWA token.
But when researching on-chain capital markets, it is a foundational asset that cannot be ignored.
Why？
Because the Ethereum ecosystem encompasses smart contracts, DeFi, stablecoins, Layer 2 networks, and a huge range of financial applications.
If tokenized stocks, bonds, funds, and other real-world assets continue moving on-chain in the future, those assets will need to operate on some form of blockchain infrastructure.
Whether Ethereum can continue to serve as an important settlement network will therefore become a long-term question.
But we need to distinguish between two concepts.
First, industry growth.
Second, value capture by the ETH token.
Even if the RWA industry grows, that does not mean all of the resulting value will automatically flow to ETH.
We also need to examine transaction fees, network usage, Layer 2 development, ETHs supply dynamics, staking demand, and the competitive landscape.
So I would rather think of ETH as:
A broad Beta exposure to on-chain financial infrastructure, rather than a short-term trading asset tied to a single headline.
If you believe more financial assets will move on-chain in the future, ETH is worth researching. But if you are simply chasing the price because of the SEC news, you need to be particularly careful.
Fourth: SOL — High-Performance On-Chain Trading Infrastructure
Fourth is SOL.
If ETH is more like a broad smart-contract and financial infrastructure ecosystem, one of Solanas key areas of interest is high-performance trading and user experience.
If tokenized stocks genuinely reach the mainstream market in the future, users may demand several things:
Fast transactions, low fees, simple wallets, sufficient liquidity, and stable trading venues.
Especially for stocks, ETFs, and other financial products, if more frequent on-chain trading develops, the performance and user experience of public blockchains will become increasingly important.
Ondos tokenized stock and ETF products have already expanded into the Solana ecosystem, giving Solana a real-world-asset use case.
However, we also need to recognize that large-scale adoption of tokenized stocks still needs to be demonstrated.
Solana faces competition from other public blockchains, as well as questions surrounding network reliability, ecosystem risks, regulatory applicability, and the actual scale of tokenized assets.
So the research logic for SOL is:
If on-chain financial trading continues to expand, can Solana secure an important position through performance, liquidity, and user experience？
What we need to watch is actual trading volume, stablecoin supply, real users, RWA asset scale, and network revenue — not simply whether Solana has a popular narrative.
Fifth: AVAX — The Institutional Custom-Blockchain Approach
Fifth is AVAX.
The research logic behind AVAX is different from that of ETH and SOL.
One area worth watching is institutional and customized blockchain infrastructure.
Imagine that a bank, brokerage, or asset-management firm wants to put its financial assets, trading processes, compliance permissions, and internal settlement systems on a blockchain.
It may not want all of its operations running in a completely open environment shared by everyone.
It may instead require customized chains, permission management, compliance controls, privacy arrangements, and specialized business logic.
That is the potential demand for institution-specific blockchain infrastructure.
AVAX is therefore worth researching in areas such as institutional RWA, customized blockchains, and enterprise financial applications.
But there is one very important risk here:
Institutional adoption of a particular blockchain does not necessarily mean that the blockchains native token will capture value on the same scale.
Some businesses may use customized networks, others may use consortium chains, while others may settle through completely different mechanisms.
Therefore, when researching AVAX, dont stop at the words “institutional partnership.”
Look at the specific technology being adopted, whether there is genuine business activity, how the network generates fees, what role the AVAX token actually plays, and whether the commercial scale can continue to expand.
Sixth to Ninth: XLM, HBAR, XDC, and POLYX
XLM: Connecting Payments and Financial Institutions
Sixth is XLM.
The core areas to research with XLM are payments, cross-border transfers, connections with financial institutions, and real-world asset applications.
If financial markets gradually expand from the Crypto Native ecosystem toward greater integration between traditional finance and blockchain, payments, fund transfers, and the movement of assets between institutions could become important infrastructure.
The research logic for XLM is therefore how traditional financial institutions could use blockchain to improve the efficiency of asset transfers and settlement.
But what we need to observe is not the narrative, but actual usage:
How many financial institutions are using it？
How much genuine payment and settlement volume is being processed？
Is business growth creating additional network demand？
And can XLMs token economics establish a reasonable connection between network usage and token value？
These questions will determine whether XLM becomes a long-term area of research or remains primarily a market narrative.
HBAR: Enterprise-Grade Distributed Ledger
Seventh is HBAR.
The research thesis around HBAR primarily revolves around enterprise applications, distributed ledgers, institutional finance, and the digitization of real-world assets.
If banks, brokerages, funds, and large enterprises increasingly begin using distributed ledgers to manage asset records, settlement, or business collaboration, the market for enterprise-grade ledger infrastructure could expand.
One of the areas that makes HBAR worth researching is its positioning toward enterprise and institutional applications.
But again, keep in mind that an enterprise using a particular technology does not necessarily mean that the enterprise will accumulate large amounts of the networks native token.
You need to examine actual customers, real-world deployments, network usage, fee mechanisms, token demand, and the competitive landscape.
Enterprise adoption and token value capture are two different questions.
XDC: Trade Finance and Real-World Assets
Eighth is XDC.
RWA is absolutely not limited to stocks, ETFs, and U.S. Treasuries.
The real world also contains a huge range of trade-finance assets: trade contracts, accounts receivable, invoices, supply-chain financing, credit arrangements, and cross-border trade settlement.
These assets also have needs around digitization, ownership verification, transfer, financing, and settlement.
The reason XDC is worth researching is its focus on trade finance and enterprise financial applications.
If blockchain adoption in trade finance continues to increase, related infrastructure could gain access to a new market opportunity.
But XDC‘s thesis is different from ONDO’s.
ONDO is more focused on capital-market asset issuance and tokenized financial products.
XDC is more focused on trade finance and enterprise applications.
So dont treat every RWA project as if it were the same type of asset.
Their customers, business models, commercial cycles, and token value-capture mechanisms can be completely different.
POLYX: A High-Beta Watchlist Candidate for Tokenized Securities
Ninth is POLYX.
POLYX is more closely connected to regulated securities, RWA, and infrastructure for tokenized securities.
The reason it can attract market attention is straightforward: if securities tokenization becomes a long-term theme, projects specializing in this area could receive greater attention.
But there is one particularly important reminder here:
Small market cap does not mean low risk, and it does not mean high certainty.
Small-cap projects can have much higher volatility and may also face insufficient liquidity, intense competition, limited business scale, and unclear token value capture.
POLYX is better viewed as a high-risk research candidate rather than automatically becoming a core holding simply because of the RWA narrative.
We need to examine:
How large is its actual business？
Are there genuine issuances and transactions？
What is the level of institutional adoption？
What role does the token play within the network？
What do circulating supply, token unlocks, and valuation pressures look like？
That is the right way to research POLYX.
Tenth: AAVE — The Second Phase After RWA Enters DeFi
Tenth is AAVE.
If everything we have discussed so far is about bringing assets on-chain, AAVE represents the next stage of the story:
Once assets are on-chain, can they actually begin generating financial activity？
Lets take an example.
Suppose that in the future, a compliant tokenized Treasury can be used as collateral within a regulated framework.
A user could pledge $1 million worth of tokenized Treasuries as collateral, borrow USDC, and then use those funds for other investments or treasury management.
At that point, RWA is no longer simply a “digitized asset.”
It begins to support collateralization, lending, liquidity, and financial leverage.
That is what makes AAVE worth researching.
Aave does not necessarily need to issue tokenized stocks itself.
If more compliant assets can enter DeFi in the future, lending protocols such as Aave could become part of the infrastructure supporting financial activity.
However, Aaves actual growth still depends on several questions:
Can compliant assets enter the protocol？
How will collateral risks be assessed？
Are the liquidation mechanisms appropriate？
Is lending activity genuinely growing？
Is protocol revenue increasing？
Can these assets generate stable and sustainable demand for borrowing？
So AAVE can be viewed as a second-stage research target for tokenized capital markets.
The first stage is putting assets on-chain. The second stage is letting those assets start borrowing money.
Eleventh to Fifteenth: Stock-Related Memes — High Beta, but High Risk
Next, lets talk about an extremely exciting — and also extremely dangerous — category: stock-related meme tokens.
Here are five representative projects or tokens: PONS, STONK, HOOD, CRCL, and AI.
First, lets emphasize one point:
A stock token is not the same thing as a stock meme.
As discussed earlier, a genuine tokenized stock involves a compliant structure connecting securities rights with an on-chain asset.
Stock memes, by contrast, often simply borrow narratives associated with stock tickers, platforms, AI, NVIDIA, or Robinhood.
They do not necessarily represent ownership of any stock, nor do they necessarily provide dividend or voting rights.
So never assume that because a tokens name contains NVDA, CRCL, or HOOD, you have actually purchased NVIDIA or Circle stock.
Lets go through them one by one.
PONS: Meme Launchpad Narrative
The document describes PONS as a meme-launchpad token associated with the Robinhood Chain ecosystem, with its V2 narrative involving pairings between new tokens and tokenized stocks.
The research thesis is that if on-chain stock and meme-asset trading becomes more active, the launchpad could potentially benefit from increased token issuance, fee generation, and ecosystem users.
But the risks are also obvious: the sustainability of platform revenue, whether its users are genuine and active, and whether the token has a meaningful connection to platform revenue all need to be independently verified.
STONK: Stock-Meme Pairing Launchpad on Solana
STONK is associated with narratives involving StonkFun and SPY-related pairings.
Its price may be influenced by activity within the Solana ecosystem, community sentiment, and the broader tokenized-stock narrative.
But STONK does not represent ownership of SPY and should not be treated as a substitute for investing in the ETF.
HOOD: Robinhood-Themed Community Meme
HOOD primarily relies on community consensus, meme culture, and interest surrounding the Robinhood Chain ecosystem.
The value of this type of token is often highly dependent on community sentiment and liquidity.
AI: Artificial Inu Narrative
The document describes AI as a Robinhood Chain-related meme narrative involving pairings with NVIDIA-related stock tokens, combining AI, NVIDIA, and dog-meme culture.
It may be highly attention-grabbing, but the more concentrated the narrative, the greater the potential volatility and sentiment risk can be.
CRCL: Meme Narrative Based on Circles Stock Ticker
CRCL borrows the attention surrounding the stock ticker of stablecoin issuer Circle.
But simply sharing the same name does not mean that the token represents shares in Circle or provides any economic rights in the company.
So what do these five projects have in common？
High volatility, high beta, and strong narrative dependence.
They do not follow the same infrastructure-investment logic as ONDO, LINK, ETH, or AAVE.
For infrastructure projects, the central question is whether the underlying business can continue to grow over the long term.
For stock-related memes, the central questions are often whether liquidity, community consensus, and the narrative can continue to sustain themselves.
So here is a very direct reminder:
Infrastructure narratives can be researched from the perspective of long-term adoption; stock-related memes must be treated as high-risk speculative assets.
They should not be placed in the same risk bucket.
Part Three: How Should We Understand This Opportunity in the Context of the Current Bitcoin Market？
1. First, Look at the Market Background: BTC Remains a Core Reference Point for Liquidity Flows
Now we come to the part everyone is most interested in: Bitcoin price action.
Today we are talking about RWA, tokenized stocks, public blockchains, and DeFi. But the market will not automatically send every sector higher simply because of a single policy announcement.
In the crypto market, BTC remains an important reference point for assessing overall risk appetite and capital rotation.
As of September 23, 2026, recent public-market reports indicate that Bitcoin briefly reached a short-term high above approximately $87,000 around September 22. At the same time, the market continues to be influenced by regulatory policy, macro interest rates, capital inflows, futures positioning, and risk appetite in the equity market.
This means that when researching RWA, we cannot simply ask:
“Is the SEC policy bullish？”
We also have to ask:
Does the market currently have enough liquidity to absorb a new narrative？
The simple reality is that:
Policy can change long-term expectations, but short-term prices are still driven by capital flows, leverage, positioning, and market sentiment.
So from here, lets analyze BTC and RWA on the same map.
2. Why Dont BTC, ETH, RWA, and Memes Necessarily Rise Together？
We can imagine the market as a chain of capital rotation.
The first layer is usually core crypto assets such as BTC.
The second layer may include large-cap blockchain assets such as ETH and SOL.
The third layer consists of sector-specific narratives such as RWA, DeFi, oracles, and institutional finance.
Only after that may capital flow into smaller-cap, higher-volatility meme projects.
But I want to emphasize:
This is not a guaranteed sequence of price appreciation, nor is it a pattern that every bull market must follow.
It is simply a framework for understanding market risk.
When overall risk appetite is strong, capital may spread from core assets into other sectors.
But if liquidity suddenly contracts, BTC falls, and leveraged positions are liquidated, high-beta projects may experience significantly larger price swings.
So just because the RWA narrative is hot does not mean that every RWA token is suitable for buying right now.
Small-cap projects in particular may experience much deeper drawdowns than BTC.
Everyone needs to distinguish between:
The long-term fundamentals of an industry and short-term capital rotation are two different questions.
There is one point I especially want to emphasize:
Many people approach investment research by focusing only on the upside.
For example:
BTC rises, so ETH rises.
ETH rises, so RWA rises.
RWA rises, so small-cap tokens rise.
But truly mature research must also consider the opposite scenario.
If BTC suddenly falls sharply, can the RWA narrative independently support token prices？
If funding rates become excessively high and leveraged longs are liquidated, could the market experience a cascading sell-off？
If the SEC policy is implemented more slowly than expected, could tokens that were previously bid up experience a “buy the rumor, sell the news” reaction？
These are the questions that actually matter for risk management.
So I recommend viewing BTC as an indicator of the broader market risk environment, rather than treating BTCs price movements as a direct buy or sell signal for every RWA project.
3. The Most Important Distinction in This Market Cycle: Policy Catalysts Are Not the Same as Fundamental Execution
Let‘s return to the central theme of today’s discussion.
The SECs Innovation Exemption has indeed increased regulatory attention around tokenized securities trading and encouraged the market to discuss the development of on-chain capital markets.
But greater policy clarity does not mean that a business model has already succeeded.
For example:
If a project announces that it plans to tokenize stocks, the market may immediately start paying attention.
But how many assets have actually been issued？
How much genuine trading volume exists？
How many real users are there？
Are institutions participating？
How much revenue is being generated？
Does the token actually capture value？
If these metrics do not change while social-media attention increases, then any price appreciation may be driven primarily by narrative speculation.
Therefore, when researching RWA projects going forward, I recommend shifting your attention from “Has it been mentioned？” to:
“Is it actually generating business？”
Part Four: What Should Investors Do Next？
1. First: Dont Buy Every Related Token at Once Just Because of the SEC News
Now let me give you a more practical framework.
The first rule is:
Do not buy every RWA-related token at once simply because the SEC has introduced the Innovation Exemption.
The policy only establishes a temporary, conditional regulatory framework for certain on-chain securities trading scenarios.
It is not an endorsement of every RWA project, nor is it an investment recommendation for every token.
We need to classify projects by their underlying business logic.
If you are researching ONDO, focus on asset issuance and product growth.
If you are researching LINK, focus on data infrastructure and genuine demand.
If you are researching ETH, SOL, or AVAX, focus on network adoption, settlement, and trading activity.
If you are researching XLM, HBAR, XDC, or POLYX, focus on institutional business and real-world RWA implementation.
If you are researching AAVE, focus on collateral and lending demand after real-world assets enter DeFi.
If you are researching stock-related meme tokens, you need to treat them as high-risk assets that are highly dependent on sentiment and liquidity.
Different projects have different underlying logic. Just because they are all categorized as “RWA” or “stock-related tokens” does not mean they should be analyzed using the same investment framework.
2. Second: Build a Project Research Sheet Instead of Just Looking at the Chart
RWA Project Research Checklist
Policy and Compliance
Which jurisdiction does the project actually operate under？ Does it have genuine compliance arrangements？ Does it possess the qualifications required for its business activities？
Real Business Activity
Are asset scale, trading volume, TVL, active users, protocol revenue, and institutional clients actually growing？
Token Value Capture
Does the token have genuine utility？ Does revenue flow into the token economy？ Is there any value associated with buybacks, staking, or governance？
Valuation and Unlocks
What are the circulating market capitalization, FDV, token-unlock schedule, holder concentration, and potential future selling pressure？
Assets and Custody
If the project involves tokenized stocks or other RWAs, where are the underlying assets held？ Who provides custody？ Can they be redeemed？ What rights do token holders actually have？
Market Risk
What are the liquidity conditions, slippage, smart-contract security, price volatility, and ability to exit during extreme market conditions？
Here is something everyone should pay attention to:
If a project tells a huge story, but when you ask about its actual trading volume, revenue, token utility, unlock pressure, and custody arrangements, the project team can only respond with “There will be a huge market in the future,” that is a signal.
It does not necessarily mean the project is bad.
It means that the investment thesis has not yet been sufficiently validated.
This is particularly important in the RWA sector because the relationship between a projects business and its token is often not one-to-one.
A project can build a successful business, while its token may not necessarily capture a corresponding amount of value.
Therefore, everyone needs to separate the concepts of a “good project” and a “good token.”
3. Third: Build Your Own Research Watchlists
This is not a ranking of expected returns, nor does it determine which projects are necessarily more worth buying. Instead, you can create different research groups based on their underlying business models and use cases.
Research Groups for the 20 Projects
Core Infrastructure Research Group
8 projects
Focus on the long-term business demand for asset issuance, data infrastructure, public blockchains, and institutional finance.
ONDO · LINK · ETH · SOL · AVAX · XLM · HBAR · XDC
Financialization & Securities Infrastructure
2 projects
Research compliant securities tokenization and the potential value created when real-world assets enter DeFi.
AAVE · POLYX
High-Volatility Stock-Meme Watchlist
5 projects
Focus on platform activity, community sentiment, liquidity, and narrative propagation. These tokens should not be treated as representing stock ownership.
PONS · STONK · HOOD · CRCL · AI
Projects Requiring Further Verification
5 categories
The following areas can be used for further research, but without sufficient reliable information, they should not be treated as direct investment recommendations:
- Other tokens within the Ondo ecosystem
- Securities issuance platforms
- Compliant trading venues
- Institutional settlement projects
- Other RWA projects
Note: To avoid treating unverified project names or tokens as reliable recommendations, we are not inventing five specific tokens for this group. The 15 projects listed above are the projects included in this research list. If the goal is to expand the list to 20 tradable tokens, each project should be independently verified for its contract address, business relationship, and current token status.
4. Fourth: Evaluate Projects Through “Policy × Business × Value Capture × Liquidity × Valuation”
Let me summarize this into a formula that can be reused repeatedly:
Project Research Value = Policy Catalyst × Real Adoption × Token Value Capture × Liquidity × Valuation Reasonableness
Keep in mind that this is not a mathematical formula. It is an analytical framework.
Why look at projects this way？
Because if there is only a policy catalyst without real adoption, the price action may simply be a news-driven rally.
If there is genuine adoption but the token does not capture value, business growth may not necessarily translate into returns for token holders.
If the business is strong but the valuation is already extremely high, there may still be significant downside risk.
And if a project has a very small market capitalization but poor liquidity, price volatility and exit risk could be substantial.
So we cannot rely on a single metric.
We need to consider all five factors together.
First: Policy Catalyst
Has the SEC exemption actually resulted in new trading venues, real products, and actual trading activity？
Second: Real Adoption
Are asset scale, trading volume, user numbers, TVL, and revenue actually growing？
Third: Token Value Capture
Can project growth translate into token demand or value through usage, fees, staking, buybacks, or other mechanisms？
Fourth: Liquidity
After buying, can you exit at a reasonable cost？ Is there sufficient market depth？
Fifth: Valuation
Does the current circulating market capitalization and fully diluted valuation already price in expectations for many years of future growth？
These five questions are much more useful than simply asking:
“Is this token an RWA project？”
Part Five: Conclusion
The Most Important Takeaways from Today
Finally, lets spend a few minutes summarizing the key points.
First, the SECs Innovation Exemption is a policy development worth watching.
It provides eligible tokenized securities venues with a temporary, conditional regulatory framework, allowing them, within the specified scope, to use permissioned AMMs and liquidity pools to trade certain tokenized U.S. stocks.
But it does not mean that all U.S. stocks can go on-chain, nor does it mean that every DEX can freely trade stocks.
Second, what is really worth researching is not just tokenized stocks themselves, but the infrastructure behind them.
Asset issuance, oracles, public blockchains, institutional finance, compliant securities infrastructure, and DeFi could all play a role in the future on-chain capital market.
Third, today we examined 15 specific projects or tokens:
ONDO, LINK, ETH, SOL, AVAX, XLM, HBAR, XDC, POLYX, AAVE, as well as PONS, STONK, HOOD, CRCL, and AI.
These projects have very different business models and underlying theses.
Some focus on asset issuance, some on data, some on public blockchains, some on institutional finance, some on DeFi, and some belong to the high-volatility meme category.
Just because they are all connected to the RWA or stock-related narrative does not mean they should be treated as the same type of asset.
Fourth, BTC remains an important reference point for assessing the overall risk environment in crypto.
RWA may become a long-term area of research, but short-term prices will still be influenced by liquidity, leverage, macro interest rates, and market sentiment.
When BTC falls, high-beta assets may face significantly greater pressure.
Fifth, and most importantly:
Dont just ask, “Which coin could double tomorrow？” Ask instead, “Does this project have real business activity？ Can business growth translate into token value？ And is the current valuation reasonable？”
That is where you begin moving from chasing market narratives to conducting genuine research.
