many people believe, and argue that rwa will serve as a major bullish catalyst for the crypto market. i don’t think that’s wrong. since rwa is fundamentally a blockchain-based concept, it’s only natural that the underlying crypto infrastructure would benefit as well.

however, i don’t believe that every coin will ride that wave simply because tokenization is happening. if anything, i think a moment is coming when tokenized real-world assets will enter into direct liquidity competition with existing crypto assets.

right now, the liquidity of real-asset markets and that of crypto markets operate as if they exist in separate worlds, and i don’t mean they respond to different liquidity conditions, but rather that they’re treated as entirely different domains.

when rwa adoption hits full stride and equities can be traded in tokenized form just like cryptocurrencies, i believe coins with relatively little intrinsic value will find themselves stripped of liquidity.

this is an extension of a view i’ve held for some time: that many coins essentially function as exit vehicles for projects that never made it to an IPO.

of course, as the market adapts to this new environment, crypto will likely develop its own valuation frameworks and fresh narratives. but they will need to look fundamentally different from what came before.

assets that have historically generated substantial wealth will continue to fulfill that role, and through tokenization, they stand to gain even greater liquidity and flexibility.

the reason people invest in stocks, crypto, real estate, and bonds is simple: to make money. in pursuit of returns that outperform the market, investors go searching for the right assets, and for a long time, many chased that dream in crypto. but as the expected returns from crypto gradually compress, the question worth asking is:

where does the liquidity flow next?

Henry Ford, the king of automobiles, had also mentioned the concept of “Energy Currency,” although it was premature to be adopted at that time.

In my personal point of view, the interesting thing is that $BTC is acquiring new narratives. As all of us already know, when Satoshi Nakamoto first revealed Bitcoin—as written in the white paper—it was introduced as “peer-to-peer digital cash.” However, after one cycle, Bitcoin attained the position of “digital gold,” whether it was true or not. And this has pushed Bitcoin’s price up consistently.

What do you think? Have the narratives of Bitcoin, starting from “digital cash” to “digital gold,” lost their power and no longer attract people? If the next narrative of Bitcoin is “energy currency,” can Bitcoin become collateral for the next fiat system and be pegged directly?

Strategy has recently introduced $STRC, which seems to be almost cash, as it is pegged at $100 like a coupon bill. This kind of bill, in other words, means cash. In my personal opinion, this is an experiment in printing dollars using Bitcoin as collateral.

“On one side, it’s creating a new narrative; on the other, it’s testing collateral.”

These situations look interesting.