A new P2P scam is brewing?

Produced by | MyTou APP

Author | Ding Ping

Featured Image | AI-Generated Art

RWA has recently become one of the hottest narratives in the financial circle.

From private credit to U.S. government bonds, "everything as a token" is being packaged into a $trillion digital migration. The global think tank Boston Consulting Group (BCG) predicts that by 2030, the market size of the non-standard assets RWA segment could reach $16 trillion—equivalent to 10% of the global GDP at that time.

Behind this prosperous scene, the market is also raising questions:剥开"tokenization"和"decentralization" these technical veils, how much fundamental difference does the core of RWA truly have from the P2P that left a mess in its wake?

If the downfall of P2P was rooted in asset opacity and platform betrayal, what does RWA have to ensure that the "real-world assets" it anchors will never be虚假?As the foundation of trust shifts from tangible collateral to lines of code, do we face a revolution in financial efficiency, or yet another financial scam disguised under the guise of technology?

RWA: New Bottles for Old Wine?

First, let's take a look at what RWA actually is?

RWA's original definition is "Real World Asset," a noun that refers to tangible (such as real estate, gold, art, etc.) or intangible (such as bonds, stocks, accounts receivable, intellectual property, etc.) assets that exist in the real world.

In the fields of blockchain and fintech, RWA is more of a verb for a financial revolution, essentially tokenizing traditional assets that are "unmovable, unsellable, and uninvestable," dividing them into several pieces and listing them for sale on the blockchain.

It seems that,Stablecoins and tokenized funds can both be categorized under the RWA category.Both are backed by real-world assets as value support, but they play different roles. Stablecoins serve as the "currency" within the ecosystem, aiming for value stability and high liquidity without generating returns; while tokenized funds are "investments," with the goal of achieving growth in returns.

Does that still sound somewhat abstract? Let's give you an example:

A Beijng courtyard mansion worth over 100 million yuan, once a top asset out of reach for the average person, can now be divided into 100,000 shares through RWA. For just $1,000, anyone can "buy a share" and become a "digital landlord" of the courtyard, passively receiving rental dividends. This exemplifies the ultimate realization of "asset fragmentation and mass participation."

Therefore, RWA provides an additional financing channel for individuals with assets and a lower entry-point investment opportunity for the capital providers. Theoretically, RWA achieves a win-win situation for both asset holders and investors.Doesn't this sound perfectly aligned with the inclusive finance promoted by the past P2P? Both aim to lower the barriers to traditional finance and achieve "disintermediation."”。

The traditional P2P model relies on internet platforms to enable individuals in need of loans to directly borrow funds from those willing to lend, with the major advantage being the reduction of financial intermediaries like banks. However, the core nature of P2P platforms is credit matching, which leads to challenges such as uncontrollable credit risks and lack of transparency, all structural flaws.

AndRWA actually iterates this "matching logic," transforming the intermediary bridge from an internet website to a blockchain.Blockchain is essentially a decentralized ledger, which can be envisioned as a ledger maintained by many people, accessible to all, where every piece of asset-related information is public and cannot be arbitrarily altered. RWA also leverages smart contracts—these are automated mini-programs written on the blockchain that can automatically perform operations such as fund transfers and profit distributions based on predefined rules, without human intervention.

Compared to the past where P2P relied heavily on borrowers' credit to persuade investors, the current RWA utilizes verifiable real assets as collateral, making the process more reliable, risk controllable, and harder to manipulate or cheat.。

RWA can be considered an upgraded version of P2P inclusive finance, inheriting the decentralization philosophy but reshaping the trust mechanism. We can provide a more precise definition of RWA:A collateralized, global, blockchain-based P2P 2.0。

Thanks to this optimization, as trillions of dollars in real assets flow across the blockchain anonymously and borderless, the traditional financial industry is facing unprecedented shocks and disruptions.

RWA allows asset owners to directly issue "asset tokens" to global investors, bypassing costly intermediaries and underwriters, achieving financing at a lower cost. Through blockchain-powered decentralized trading platforms, it facilitates round-the-clock, global P2P transactions, which is bound to disrupt the traditional stock exchange model.

The real estate industry is also facing challenges. RWA has transformed it from non-standard, regional "bulky" investment products into standardized, highly liquid global financial products, impacting traditional real estate intermediaries, developers, and REITs, making it possible for "everyone to invest in global real estate."

In summary, RWA serves as a bridge, connecting the trillions of dollars in value of assets accumulated in the real world with an efficient, transparent, and global digital financial world. The industries it caters to are precisely those that seek to enhance asset liquidity, lower financing barriers, and broaden their investor base.

While this brings back painful memories—the once-promised P2P lending was supposed to efficiently match our small amounts of money to those in need, only to result in countless families losing everything—we must ponder: Since the RWA model is very similar to P2P, could RWA also follow in P2P's footsteps?

RWA follows in the footsteps of P2P?

Advocates of RWA would quickly反驳, claiming it has perfectly resolved the four "sins" that led to the collapse of P2P through technical means:

（1）Asset opacity——RWA replaces "credit loans" with "hard asset collateral," leveraging technologies such as IoT and AI to link the operation data of assets (like charging stations, solar panels) in real-time, ensuring the authenticity and traceability of the assets.

（2）Funds are insecure.——RWA replaces the "platform fund pool" with "smart contract custody," where capital flows are automatically executed by smart contracts on the blockchain, ensuring rules are publicly transparent and tamper-proof.

（3）Risk management opacity——RWA's risk control rules have been embedded in smart contracts for automatic execution. For instance, if the value of the collateral asset declines, an automatic margin call or liquidation process can be triggered, reducing human intervention.

（4）Poor liquidity——RWA facilitates 24/7 trading on global decentralized exchanges with flexible capital withdrawal.

This theory闭环 sounds perfect on paper, but it's far from impenetrable in reality. While RWA has significantly improved over the early P2P model in terms of compliance architecture and risk control mechanisms, it still harbors more concealed and even more destructive new risks.

The root cause of P2P defaults is false listings, and RWA is equally unable to resolve this "original sin" of assets. No matter how advanced blockchain technology is, it cannot penetrate the screen to verify the authenticity of the house or loan off-chain.If the underlying assets are fraudulent or subpar, then what RWA does is merely digitize "junk."。

Several "fake RWA" projects are mere "air coins," devoid of any real physical assets, merely packaged with the abuse of concepts. Statistics indicate that a considerable proportion of newly added RWA projects globally in 2023 fall into this category. More sophisticated scams involve the use of AI to generate fake deeds and surveillance footage to cover up the fact that assets have been misappropriated.

When the foundation of trust — that "real-world asset" itself — is a lie, the transparency and immutability of the chain become a colossal joke.

The risk lies not just in fraud, but also in the challenges of asset liquidity and pricing.RWA primarily focuses on non-standardized assets, such as unlisted equity, art, and carbon credits, which are subject to significant value fluctuations and often lack objective valuation. These assets can experience token liquidity depletion or even complete depletion due to market panic or underlying asset depreciation. For instance, an art RWA project tokenized fractional ownership but, due to the limited size of the art market, token prices have experienced extreme volatility, making exits extremely challenging.

Compared to P2P, RWA has a broader impact.The risk of P2P is mainly confined within a single country, whereas RWA has fully globalized the risk.

For instance, imagine a property in Thailand issued tokens by a foundation registered in the Cayman Islands and sold to investors spread across the United States, Japan, and Brazil. Once the asset is falsified or the project party vanishes, the issues arise: Who regulates it? Which country's laws apply? To whom should investors seek redress? This is a perfect "legal孤岛."

虽然在香港、新加坡等合规友好的司法辖区，投资者可以通过SPV（如信托公司等独立法律实体）追索，缓释一定程度的风险，但在全球其他大多数区域，这个风险依然很突出。

In summary, RWA will not simply repeat the pitfalls of P2P, yet there's still a possibility of old tricks in new guises. With such high risks, why does capital continue to flow into the RWA track?

The biggest player is the country.

If our analysis stops at the risk level, we underestimate the true intent of RWA. RWA is not just a financial technology innovation; it is also a geopolitical tool. In the RWA game, the biggest players are actually at the national level.

Examining the composition of the current RWA market, although not directly led by the state, it is still dominated by national credit assets (such as US treasuries) and globally regulated financial giants (like BlackRock). The latest data shows that as of July 2025, the total size of the global RWA market (excluding stablecoins) is approximately $25.5 billion, with private credit and US treasuries accounting for nearly 90% of the share. Tokenization of US treasuries, represented by BlackRock's BUIDL, is becoming the most mainstream application in the RWA space.

This signifies that RWA is emerging as a tool for the continuation of the dollar's dominance in the digital age. It enables capital from any corner of the globe to bypass domestic capital controls and the complex traditional banking system, injecting into the dollar asset pool with minimal friction and 24/7 access.

In the past, a country's capital seeking to invest in U.S. debt had to navigate through layers of approval and financial intermediaries. Now, all it takes is a smartphone and a digital wallet—a fundamentally digital, silent "capital siphon" for non-U.S. economies. It more efficiently and discreetly channels global liquidity into the reservoir of dollar assets.

Faced with this situation, countries around the world are陷入a colossal "prisoner's dilemma."

As over 95% of mainstream stablecoins are anchored to the US dollar, embracing Real World Assets (RWA) means opening up financial boundaries to a system centered around US dollar assets. This could compress the demand for the domestic currency as a payment and reserve currency, weaken the regulatory capacity of the country's monetary policy, and even undermine its financial sovereignty. (For more detailed information on stablecoins, see "Trump's Last Stand.")

The most significant consequence of this structural "siphon" is a severe impact on the minting tax of non-American countries.Local consumers used to buy goods in their local currency, supporting its value and demand. The country could then collect seigniorage by printing more money. Now, with a large-scale shift to stablecoins, the currency issuance rights and seigniorage benefits "leak" to the stablecoin issuers and even the锚定 nations (usually the United States).

Huxiu Note: Seigniorage refers to the profit a country makes from issuing currency.GovernmentOr, when the central bank issues currency, the surplus income obtained after subtracting the actual issuance cost from the face value of the currency, this surplus is referred to as the "seigniorage," which is typically used asGovernmentA portion of the revenue.

Of course.Some regions are attempting to launch local currency stablecoins to mitigate the aforementioned risks. Although this has only "relative significance," it at least leaves some room for maneuver and policy tools for the country's financial sector compared to complete openness or passive defense.。

For instance, Hong Kong's "Stablecoin Ordinance" came into effect on August 1st, and the Eurozone is also accelerating the development of the digital euro and euro stablecoins. The core purpose of these measures is to prevent a large-scale shift of local financial activities towards the offshore stablecoin system dominated by the US dollar, thereby preserving the autonomy of national monetary and financial policies.

If choosing to block RWA, it may help prevent capital outflow and defend financial borders and sovereignty in the short term, but in the long run, it could marginalize the entity within the new global digital financial system and more likely result in the loss of influence for an economy in future global trade. Currently, some countries have already implemented strict controls over the cross-border flow of RWA by establishing "digital firewalls," due to concerns over financial security and sovereignty.

So, the ultimate form of RWA challenges not only traditional financial institutions but also shakes the global governance system based on nation-states since the Treaty of Westphalia.

Therefore, RWA is not only an upgraded version of the P2P inclusive goal, but also a grand storm intertwined with geopolitical, financial sovereignty, and technological revolution. It represents a new battlefield for national-level competition over new monetary discourse power. However, for ordinary people, while the business model of RWA lowers the investment threshold, it also exposes individual investors to many new risks that are similar to, if not more complex than, those in P2P.

So,Before investing in RWA, don't just look at the shell; it's crucial to understand what's inside the "box." You're investing in underlying assets; never overlook the most fundamental aspect.。

Disclaimer: The content of this article is for reference only, and the information or opinions expressed within do not constitute any investment advice. Readers are advised to make investment decisions with caution.

This article is from Huoshou, original link:

https://www.huxiu.com/article/4650194.html?f=jinritoutiao