信用 · 4597

Dalio, founder of Qiaoshui Fund: Warns that the US debt crisis will arrive within three years as soon as possible. It is recommended to reduce bond holdings and increase the allocation of gold and Bitcoin

Comparing news, Dalio, founder of the Bridgewater Fund, warned that the US annual balance gap is as high as 2 trillion US dollars, and that about 10 trillion US dollars of debt needs to be refunded urgently. If the current trajectory is not changed, the debt crisis “within three years, with an error of up and down” of two years, may arrive. In terms of asset allocation, Dalio suggests investors reduce their bond holdings to avoid debt risks; increase their holdings to 10% to 15% of the portfolio by allocating additional gold; and hold a small amount of Bitcoin to hedge against government credit risk. Dalio also called on the US to reduce the budget deficit from the current level of about 6% of GDP to 3%, including by cutting spending, increasing taxes, and lowering interest rates. Affected by these remarks, the price of gold rose to its highest level since May on Friday, and Bitcoin surpassed $77,000, the biggest weekly increase since 2023.

18h ago

Bank of Italy research: Stablecoin remittances have no systemic cost advantage, and on-chain links account for only a small part

Comparatively, in a research report released in July 2026, the Bank of Italy first passed the “mystery customer” empirical survey to track 200 USDC transfers across ten corridors between Italy and Argentina, Brazil, South Africa, the United Arab Emirates, and Japan. The results showed that the total cost of stablecoin remittance fluctuated greatly, with a minimum of only 0.3% and a maximum close to 9%. The average transfer on the blockchain chain accounts for only 0.4%. Most of the costs are concentrated in fiat currency withdrawal and recharge — traditional intermediary fees such as exchange transaction price differences, credit card fees, and withdrawal fees are decisive factors. Compared with traditional channels such as Wise, stablecoins have a cost advantage in some channels such as Brazil → Italy, but channels such as the UAE → Italy are more expensive and show a high degree of “channel specificity.” In terms of speed, blockchain transfers themselves only take a few minutes, but end-to-end efficiency depends entirely on the quality of traditional payment infrastructure in the destination country. Countries with instant payment systems such as Brazil (PIX), Italy (TIPS), and Argentina (Transferencias 3.0) can control the entire process within 20 minutes; countries that rely on traditional bank transfers, such as South Africa, extend the delivery time to 1 to 2 business days. The report points out that the efficiency of stablecoin remittance is determined by itself and the surrounding traditional payment infrastructure, and the two are complementary rather than alternative relationships. The report also analyzed the impact of global regulatory fragmentation: the European Union's MiCA and the US GENIUS Act represent a mature compliance framework; Japan's strict “safety priority” entry reduces nominal costs, but the process is complicated, causing users to flow out to offshore platforms; countries such as India and Turkey are in a transitional regulatory phase; prohibited countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia have failed to curb demand and instead push transactions into gray channels. This article is sponsored by GENG, Build Your Fortune on GENG (https://geng.one)

1d agoburnking

If it's just tokenized assets and doesn't connect to DeFi, what's left of RWA?

Author: Jesus Rodriguez, co-founder of Sentora Compiled by: Luffy, Foresight News Original title: Does RWA still make sense without DeFi? Discussions in the RWA industry often begin with a simple vision: take a treasury bill, fund share, stock, invoice, megawatt hour, or GPU for one hour, then mint a token representing it. Is it useful? It's really useful. But can it be called transformative? It's far from there. This is like putting a bar code on a container and claiming that a global trade problem has been solved. Barcodes make containers recognizable and machine-readable, but they don't create ports, cranes, customs, insurance, financing, shipping routes out of thin air, or bring in buyers from afar. A token is simply an addressable token of interest, and DeFi is a marketplace operating system. The question really worth discussing is not how many types of assets can go on the chain, but how many assets can complete valuation, financing, hedging, transaction monetization, and loss disposal in a stressful environment, and there is no need for offline meetings and coordination every time a transaction occurs. Tokenization completes the representation of equity; what DeFi brings is actual utility. Tokenization is just a bar code, and a similar scene has happened in the history of the supply chain finance market. The reason why mortgages can be scaled up is not as simple as turning a paper document into an electronic record. To actually achieve large-scale expansion, a complete set of operating mechanisms was created around this type of asset: credit review, post-loan services, securitization, credit rating, warehousing and financing, repurchases, hedging, clearing and settlement, and loss allocation rules. RWA also needed to go through the exact same evolutionary process. An asset that can be adapted to DeFi requires six levels: legally enforceable rights, reliable data sources, clear transfer and redemption rules, enforceable secondary market liquidity, collateral parameters that match actual behavior, and a credible settlement and loss disposal path. Most tokenization projects, on the other hand, tend to stop at the top five levels. There is a simple test that can be used to test the maturity of an asset. It only requires answering three questions: How much is this asset currently worth? Can the agreement complete withdrawal and monetization at this point? If the first two judgments are all wrong, who bears the loss? When smart contracts can definitively answer the above three questions, RWA can truly become a basic component of finance. Before that, it was mostly just a digital packaging shell. The deepest technical contradiction of RWA's quadruple time clock is that RWA runs under multiple sets of different time clocks at the same time. The blockchain can complete settlement in seconds and operate uninterrupted for 7 x 24 hours; oracles may update prices every hour or every day; underlying traditional exchanges are closed at night and on weekends; custodians follow bank working days; and the asset redemption process may take 1 day, 5 days, or even 30 days. If you use such a slow-paced RWA asset to support fast-maturing DeFi liabilities, such as stablecoin loans. This is the term shift, and it is also the core model that banks have relied on for hundreds of years: using short-term debt to fund long-term slow assets. This model has practical value, but the risk must be reasonably priced. Imagine a scenario: At 2 a.m. on Sunday, assets hit the liquidation threshold. Smart contracts can seize tokens immediately, but the underlying real-world market won't open until Monday, and the issuer's redemption business will not be processed until Tuesday. On-chain liquidation has been completed, and real-world asset disposal has only just begun. This creates a clearing gap. DeFi requires immediate withdrawal for monetization, but the real world does not allow it. The time difference between the two. This gap has counterintuitive consequences. Even treasury bonds with very low volatility are riskier than native crypto assets that are more volatile when used as collateral. The price of ETH fluctuates drastically, but it can be traded around the clock; the price of RWA assets appears to be stable, and it may only be up to a dozen hours without a new price tag. A flat price sometimes represents safety, and sometimes it's just a disguise of stale data. Liquidity is an exit channel, not TVL. The digital public also has common misunderstandings about liquidity. Liquidity is not equal to TVL, does not equal the existence of a trading pair, nor does it mean that the issuer promises to eventually redeem it according to net worth. Liquidity refers to the ability to convert a position into the settlement asset you need at an acceptable discount within the time window allowed by your debt. Take a crowded theater for example: the size of the hall cannot determine whether it is safe in the event of a fire; what really matters is the width of the exit channel. One copy of RWA to...

1d agoForesight News#DeFi #RWA

Ripple lays out the RLUSD lending ecosystem to support institutional credit funds to provide loans to fintech companies

In comparison, Ripple is supporting a new institutional credit fund that will partner with lending platform Clearpool and credit management agency Cicada Partners to provide working capital loans to fintech and payment companies using RLUSD, a stablecoin issued by Ripple on XRP Ledger. According to the disclosure, the fund will issue loans in RLUSD. Cicada Partners will be responsible for finding borrowers, formulating loan terms, and managing credit risk; Clearpool will be responsible for building the infrastructure to create and manage loan pools; and Ripple will provide financial support as one of the investors, but the exact size of the investment has not been disclosed. Currently, this product is not available on the XRP Ledger mainnet. Ripple will participate as a limited partner, enjoy the same terms as other investors, and will not be liable for loan losses. Borrowers will receive RLUSD and use RLUSD to repay loans, which will drive demand for this stablecoin while introducing borrowing activity to XRP Ledger.

1d ago

Millions of dollars are rushing into the market, but some are in a hurry to exit: Pharos's high-interest treasury causes a “view of time” collision

Article: Sanqing, Foresight NewsSharos Network joined forces with Vault infrastructure agreement R25 and credit asset management agency Axil to launch Axil Prime Credit Vault (APC), an institutional consumer credit RWA wealth management product issued by Pharos on July 15. The products were launched simultaneously with Binance Wallet, TopNod, OKX Wallet, Bitget Wallet, and KuCoin Wallet, with a total fundraising limit of 100 million USDC, with a target annualization of about 14.3%. As of the closing of the deposit window, a total of $45.39 million had been deposited. This year, there have been frequent security explosions in Web3 on-chain strategies. User funds are looking for new stable income sources, and project parties are also there. Binance Wallet is now offering an additional $300,000 PROS as an incentive to explore RWA Vault's market space, causing the Vault to generate a lot of discussion in the market. The launch time coincided with the redemption period of the Pharos TGE pre-deposit campaign. The previous treasury required the submission of a redemption application about half a month before the end of the lockdown period, stop accruing interest on July 20, and complete the redemption within 7 days. Users accustomed to DeFi T+0 looked back and found that they couldn't help but missed the redemption period and began to question the redemption time and asset safety. R25 and Axil then held an AMA at Binance Square. Well-known KOLs such as Haotian and Tianqing participated in discussions, detailing the differences between RWA assets and DeFi Vault, the role of fund managers (Curators), why consumer credit is worth allocating, and risk management methods from pre-investment to post-investment. In complex asset logic and mixed social media discussions, some users put in one million funds on the last day, while others sought early redemptions from the project party. On July 23, Pharos issued an announcement: Users who submitted applications on time in the previous issue have received all principal and interest, breaking the “financial security” concerns; funds that missed the window will automatically be carried forward to the next three-month cycle according to the treasury's preset rules, and interest will continue to be accrued at 14% USDC per annum. The controversy revealed more important issues than the redemption itself. Although the RWA TVL has exceeded $38 billion, non-institutional chain users are clearly dissatisfied when investing in RWA products. Institution-driven, stable, and high interest rates, but often require longer lockdown periods and complex understanding costs. From DeFi to RWA, is the market really ready? High yield, low threshold, and high liquidity. BlackRock's “impossible triangle” of RWA's BUIDL threshold is $5 million. It is only open to qualified buyers, yet it can be redeemed almost instantly through the stablecoin channel; the APC threshold is so low that ordinary users can buy it at will; instead, it must be locked for three months. Liquidity has never been determined by how high or low the threshold is, but rather how quickly the underlying assets can be realized. The bottom layer of BUIDL is US treasury bonds, and the world's deepest secondary market can take over at any time; the bottom layer of APC is hundreds of thousands of emerging market consumer loans, and few people are ready to buy large amounts of capital at any time. This has formed a triangle that RWA cannot bypass at this stage: high yield, low threshold, and high liquidity; the three can only take two. For example, Franklin Templeton's BENJI starts at $20 (low threshold) and supports daily redemption (high liquidity), and the annualization is only 3% to 5%; if you want double-digit returns, you have to accept non-standard assets and a lock-up period. This is the liquidity premium. A significant portion of the excess income is the consideration for abandoning liquidity. APC, on the other hand, is a combination of high returns and a low threshold, and the cost is liquidity. There is nothing wrong with this trade-off itself; it also explains the full source of this controversy. Retail investors have obtained assets that were originally only open to institutions, and they have also taken over the agency's time rules that focus on long-term matching. The period of use of institutional funds is scheduled before investment, and the lockdown period is a predictable cost; private equity credit and closed-end funds already have redemption restrictions. However, most ordinary users on the chain are not the same; most of the latter's first appeal is to go in and out. So the current “retail” RWA is mostly just distribution-side retailing, to be precise. Web3 wallets and low initial investment amounts have contributed to a low threshold, but the liquidity structure is still designed according to institutional logic. Having understood this triangle, the remaining questions became specific: why must the liquidity side be sacrificed, a high income of 14.3%...

2d agoForesight News#WEB3

Industry leaders warn AI agents may turn billion-dollar crypto hacks into “change money”

Comparatively, at the 2026 Wyoming Blockchain Conference, Global Settlement Network CEO Ryan Kirkley warned that AI agents could allow hackers to hack Wi-Fi networks, passwords, and wallets on an unprecedented scale, dwarfing current billion-dollar cryptographic attacks. Kirkley said, “We thought these bridging attacks were serious; in fact, they were just change money.” Attacking one person with $20,000 in assets used to be too expensive, but now a single agent can attack everyone at the same time. Bill Laboon, vice president of technical operations at the Web3 Foundation, agreed, believing that the efficiency improvements brought about by decentralized systems are also beneficial to attackers. Midnight Foundation President Fahmi Syed emphasized that agents require clear parameter settings and should not be granted unlimited access to credit cards, social security information, and various accounts. Kirkley believes that setting proxy permissions is relatively easy to solve, and that the security of the underlying system is the greater concern. On the issue of trust, Laboon notes that big language models are still occasionally illusory, so they don't want to let agents manage individual pensions. Richard Incurred, founder of Silvermine Capital Advisors, believes proxy AI technology is growing faster than people can accept. Kirkley also mentioned the issue of supervisory liability, that is, when autonomous agents make mistakes or even break the law, accountability and fund recovery mechanisms have yet to be clarified.

2d ago#On-chain dynamics

Goldman Sachs prepares $1.15 billion junk debt to finance CoreWeave-linked AI data centers

In comparison, Goldman Sachs is testing investors' demand for an approximately $1.15 billion junk bond issuance. The bond funds will be used to build a data center leased to AI cloud computing company CoreWeave. People familiar with the matter revealed that the project is located near Richmond, Virginia, USA, developed by PowerHouse Data Centers and Chirisa Technology Parks under American Real Estate Partners, and is expected to enter the market as early as September. The funding comes at a time when investors are wary of AI infrastructure debt. Due to the increase in AI data center related bond issuance this year, the market is beginning to demand higher yields. CoreWeave previously supported the issuance of high-yield bonds by a large number of data center developers through long-term lease agreements, but its speculative credit rating also boosted financing costs.

2d ago

Forbes: Bitcoin may solve the dollar triffin problem and become a global neutral reserve asset

Comparing news, a Forbes article said that US Vice President JD Vance's previous views on the US dollar's status as a global reserve have sparked discussions on the long-standing contradictions in the US dollar system. The article argues that although the US dollar brings financing advantages as a global reserve currency, it also causes the Triffin Dilemma (Triffin Dilemma) problem: it is difficult for a country's currency to meet domestic economic needs and global reserve requirements at the same time. The article points out that the US dollar reserve position drives global capital inflows into the US, increases the value of the US dollar, and enables American consumers to obtain cheap imported goods, but at the same time weakens the competitiveness of the US manufacturing industry and increases the trade deficit. The author believes that after the Bretton Woods system ended the gold exchange in 1971, the US dollar system continued to operate through US treasury bonds and the global dollar market, but the core conflict did not disappear. Although stablecoins can expand the scope of use of the US dollar, they still rely on US government debt and cannot completely solve the problem of reliance on the debt of a single country for reserve assets. The article said that although gold has non-sovereign properties, there are restrictions on transportation, verification, and settlement efficiency. Bitcoin, on the other hand, has characteristics such as fixed supply, no national credit endorsement, global verification, and rapid digital settlement, and may become a new neutral reserve asset. The author suggests that in the future, the US dollar can continue to be used as a global transaction and commercial currency, while Bitcoin may gradually assume more of the role of a reserve asset, thereby reducing the global monetary system's dependence on the debt of a single country. However, the article also points out that Bitcoin still faces problems such as price fluctuations, limited institutional adoption, and insufficient maturity of the custodian system. Gold has hundreds of years of financial history, and Bitcoin is only 17 years old, and it will take time to verify whether it can become a global reserve asset.

2d ago

Strategy Releases Investor Briefing: 840,000 BTC Bottomed Out, Digital Credit Strategy Becomes Growth Engine

Comparatively, Bitcoin reserve company Strategy (released the latest investor briefing, disclosing that as of August 9, the company held 840,447 bitcoins, accounting for about 4% of the total Bitcoin supply. The company said its core strategy is not only to hold Bitcoin, but also to build a “Digital Credit (Digital Credit)” platform through the capital market to increase Bitcoin holdings per share. As of August 10, Strategy stock (MSTR) had a market capitalization of approximately $38.368 billion, corresponding to 1.06 times MNaV (market capitalization/net bitcoin value per share). The company pointed out that MSTR is not a Bitcoin ETF, and common shareholders do not directly own the bitcoins held by the company, but are holders of remaining equity after debt and preferred shares. Strategy said its “digital credit” strategy aims to issue digital credit products equivalent to 10% to 20% of Bitcoin reserves every year when market conditions permit, with an estimated corresponding scale of about 5.4 billion to 10.8 billion US dollars. The company said that if Bitcoin's long-term yield is higher than the cost of financing, the model could increase common shareholders' exposure to Bitcoin per share. Strategy emphasizes that MSTR, as a common stock of a Bitcoin reserve company, has the dual properties of amplifying returns and risks. The main risks listed by the company include Bitcoin price fluctuations, changes in the financing environment, MNaV compression, dilution of stock issuance, and pressure to repay debt and preferred shares. Up to now, Strategy is still one of the listed companies with the largest amount of bitcoins in the world. The company said it will continue to increase long-term Bitcoin holdings and Bitcoin exposure per share through capital market instruments, digital credit issuance, and active asset allocation in the future. This article is sponsored by GENG, Build Your Fortune on GENG (https://geng.one)

3d agoburnking

Korean stocks were sold for 3.5 trillion won by foreign investors today. Samsung and SK Hynix are facing global interest rate tests

Comparative news, Korea Exchange data shows that foreign investors sold off massively in the Korean stock market on the 19th, with a net sale of 3.485 trillion won in a single day. Institutional investors also had a net sale of 1.324 trillion won, while individual investors bought 4.633 trillion won to bear the selling pressure. Previously, foreign investors made net purchases in the Korean stock market for 5 consecutive trading days (11th to 18th), with a cumulative purchase volume of 8.129 trillion won. However, the sales amount in a single day on the 19th reached 42.9% of the previous cumulative purchase amount, and the market began to pay attention to whether the return trend of foreign investment could continue. Recently, foreign purchasing power has mainly been concentrated in the semiconductor sector. According to the data, between the 12th and 18th, about 87% of net foreign purchase capital went to semiconductor stocks, especially Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix. On the 18th, the total net foreign investment in the Korean stock market was only 91 billion won, but the semiconductor sector attracted more than 1 trillion won in capital inflows, indicating that foreign capital is more betting on the AI chip cycle than fully restoring the risk appetite of the Korean stock market. This shift in foreign investment was mainly affected by the rapid rise in US and Japanese long-term treasury bond yields. The yield on US 30-year treasury bonds rose to 5.337% intraday on the 18th, the highest level since 2007; the yield on Japanese long-term treasury bonds also continued to rise, triggering increased volatility in the global bond market. According to market analysts, the rise in long-term interest rates in the US is not mainly due to expectations that the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates again, but is affected by factors such as the widening US fiscal deficit, increased pressure to issue treasury bonds, and investment in AI data centers driving increased issuance of large technology corporate bonds. Since the increase in long-term bond yields is significantly higher than short-term interest rates, the market is more inclined to interpret this as an increase in term premiums. If long-term interest rates between the US and Japan remain high, foreign capital flows in the South Korean stock market may be further pressured. Due to the high weight of exports and semiconductors in the Korean stock market, Korean stocks are sensitive to changes in US market interest rates, dollar trends, and global liquidity, and foreign investors may continue to make profit settlements in recent profitable stocks such as Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix. However, according to some opinions, this round of interest rate shock may not necessarily evolve into a continuous withdrawal of funds. The pressure to issue treasury bonds, which has recently driven the rise in US long-term bond yields, may ease in stages. At the same time, if US inflation and geopolitical risks cool down, term premiums may fall back, and foreign capital may still flow back into the semiconductor sector with high profit certainty. Currently, the Korean market's own ability to accept foreign sales has declined. As of the 18th, the deposit volume of Korean investor accounts was 104.7551 trillion won, a significant decrease from about 130 trillion won at the end of June; the credit transaction financing balance was also below the June high. Therefore, future interest rate trends between the US and Japan will continue to be a key variable affecting the capital side of the Korean stock market. (Daum) This article is sponsored by GENG, Build Your Fortune on GENG (https://geng.one)

3d agoburnking