From US Treasuries to Real Estate: How $24B of Real-World Assets Moved On-Chain – And Why Institutions Prefer Tokens Over Paper

Most people think “crypto adoption” means memecoins, ETFs, and stablecoins.
Meanwhile, a quieter market has been growing: real-world assets (RWAs) like US Treasuries and private credit showing up as tokens you can hold and transfer.

Depending on how you measure it, RWAs on-chain (excluding stablecoins) sit at $24.02B on a conservative “Distributed Asset Value” metric – with a broader $19B–$36B range quoted by other dashboards and research.
This piece focuses on what’s real, what’s buyable today, and what can break – without pretending tokenization magically removes risk.

Want this market tracked daily without the hype? Subscribe to Web Snack – a short, practical email every day with the key crypto + macro moves, what actually changed, and what to watch next. If RWAs are “quiet crypto,” this is how you stay ahead of the noise.

TL;DR

• On-chain RWA market (ex-stablecoins): $24.02B as of Jan 28, 2026 (Distributed Asset Value), with $19B–$36B alternative estimates depending on methodology

• Tokenized US Treasuries: ~$8.7B–$9.3B, the largest RWA category, with “>$10B” often cited when including broader issuance definitions

• Institutions tend to care about yield, operational efficiency (24/7 rails), and programmable compliance more than “DeFi narratives”

• Most serious RWA products are permissioned: KYC, allowlists, and transfer rules are features, not bugs

• The big risks are issuer structure, redemption mechanics, and legal classification – not just smart contracts

What Counts as an RWA Token – And What Doesn’t?

An RWA token is a blockchain-based claim on something off-chain (fund shares, loans, real estate exposure, commodities), while the underlying asset usually stays in traditional custody or a legal wrapper.
The messy part is that people use “RWA” to describe very different legal structures – even when the token UX looks similar.

RWAs vs Stablecoins vs Tokenized Securities: Three Buckets People Mix Up

Stablecoins are primarily designed for payments and maintaining a peg.
RWAs are typically investment exposures where you take credit, duration, counterparty, and liquidity risks in exchange for yield or collateral utility.

Tokenized securities are the tricky overlap zone: if a token behaves like a security (fund share, debt instrument), it may fall under securities rules in addition to or instead of crypto-asset rules.
In other words, “on-chain” is a distribution rail, not a legal escape hatch.

Measuring “On-Chain Value”: Why Dashboards Disagree

When someone says “$24B on-chain,” they might mean distributed value held by wallets, represented assets in underlying vehicles, or DeFi TVL built on top of RWA tokens.
Those metrics can all be “true” at the same time – they’re just answering different questions.

A practical rule: compare at least two sources on the same day and call out methodology gaps instead of assuming one side is lying.

How Big Is the On-Chain RWA Market Today?

On a conservative “tokens actually held in wallets” metric, RWAs (ex-stablecoins) total $24.02B as of Jan 28, 2026.
If you broaden the definition (different dashboards, inclusion rules, and wrappers), estimates commonly land in a $19B–$36B range.

Primary Market Snapshot (January 28–29, 2026)

The cleanest way to present this is as a snapshot with explicit methodology, not a single viral headline number.
Below are the specific metrics the market is mixing together.

Market Breakdown by Asset Class (January 2026)

US Treasuries are the largest category at roughly $8.7B–$9.3B, which helps explain why “RWA” often feels like shorthand for “tokenized T-bills.”
Other categories are meaningful but smaller, and they tend to come with more bespoke underwriting and liquidity constraints.

Growth is real, but it’s also easy to misread in a young market.
The cited trajectory is roughly $8.5B in early 2024 → $24B in Jan 2026 for RWAs ex-stablecoins, with tokenized Treasuries growing from under $1B to above $10B by January 2026 under broader issuance framing.

If you like this skeptical approach (numbers with context, not vibes), you’ll like Web Snack. We send a daily market brief that flags what’s signal vs dashboard noise – plus the few charts and narratives institutions are actually trading. Subscribe here and get tomorrow’s snapshot in your inbox.

Why US Treasuries Won First

Tokenized Treasury exposure is winning because it solves a very specific institutional problem: cash management with yield, but on rails that work 24/7.
Compared to tokenizing real estate or private credit, Treasuries are easier to benchmark, easier to explain, and easier to approve.

The Institutional Logic

Treasury yields are public and widely understood, so tokenization mostly changes settlement and distribution – not the core risk profile.
That tends to land well with risk committees, especially versus “new yield” that depends on crypto-native leverage.

Tokenized Treasuries also address the “stablecoin yield problem”: when stablecoins yield ~0%, capital looks for a yield-bearing cash-like alternative without leaving crypto rails.
That doesn’t remove risk – it reshuffles it into issuer, structure, and redemption mechanics.

Product Walkthroughs: Access & Structure

These examples matter because they’re live products, not PowerPoint tokenization.
They also show the same theme: compliance gates are the default.

BlackRock BUIDL (BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund)

• What it is: tokenized fund exposure to US Treasuries, cash equivalents, and repo

• Access: only “Qualified Purchasers,” with $5M referenced as the individual threshold and $25M often cited for institutions

• Process: onboarding via distributor, KYC/AML, wallet allowlisting, mint/redeem via fiat

• Yield: shown as roughly ~3.8%–4.5% in cited materials, varying with rates

Franklin Templeton BENJI (Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund, ticker FOBXX)

• What it is: a US-registered mutual fund using blockchain as system-of-record, investing 99.5%+ in US government securities, cash, and repo

• Access: retail in some jurisdictions via an app plus institutional channels, with eligibility depending on jurisdiction and channel

• Chains: listed as including Avalanche, Ethereum, BNB Chain, Stellar, and Solana as of Jan 2026

Ondo Finance USDY & OUSG

• USDY: described as short-term Treasuries + bank deposits, around ~5% APY, available globally except US persons

• OUSG: described as a Treasury wrapper reserved for qualified/accredited investors, around ~3.75% APY

• Controls: freeze/pause + upgradeable compliance layers are stated as observable on verified contracts

Yield Comparison: Tokenized Treasuries vs TradFi (as of January 2026)

Tokenized products are often competitive on yield, but the comparison only works if you account for fees, access restrictions, and redemption mechanics.
In practice, the “win” is frequently 24/7 rails and collateral utility, not a permanently higher APY.

How RWA Tokenization Works Technically – And Why Permissioning Matters

Most RWA tokenization is “TradFi structure + on-chain recordkeeping,” with the token enforcing legal and compliance rules in code.
Permissioning is common because issuers and distributors must control who can hold and transfer tokens to meet compliance requirements.

Core Architecture: Issuer → Custodian → Token Contract → Distributor

The common pipeline looks like issuer/fund vehicle, traditional custodian, token contract, and a distributor/CASP handling onboarding and KYC.
A concrete example often used: KYC via distributor, wallet allowlisted, USD deposited off-chain, tokens minted to the wallet on-chain.

The key mental model is simple: code enforces the rules lawyers wrote.
If you ignore the legal layer (prospectus, custody, issuer structure), you don’t really know what you own.

Compliance Patterns: Allowlists, Transfer Restrictions, Admin Controls

RWA contracts often include allowlists, freeze/pause functions, transfer restrictions, forced transfers, and role-based permissions.
This is compatible with standards like ERC-3643, described as an identity layer plus a compliance layer for rule enforcement.

That’s not a “crypto betrayal” – it’s usually how regulated distribution works.
But it does mean you should check admin powers and governance (multisig vs single admin) before treating a token like bearer cash.

Chain Choice: Ethereum vs Polygon vs Solana (What Drives It)

Ethereum dominates one widely cited RWA league table at 60.6% share, with smaller shares shown for Solana (4.9%) and Stellar (4.4%) in that same snapshot.
The “why” presented isn’t purely technical – it’s custody integrations, distributor tooling, and legal precedent that make institutions comfortable.

What Regulation Changes in 2026 – And What Stays Messy

In 2026, the biggest change is operational: EU-facing platforms and service providers move deeper into MiCA-era licensing and compliance processes, which shapes distribution.
But “RWAs” still span multiple legal regimes, especially when tokens look like securities.

MiCA Timeline for RWA Platforms & Operators

The often-cited timeline: CASP rules live from Dec 30, 2024, with a transition window commonly described as running to around July 1, 2026 for certain existing providers under grandfathering logic.
Some summaries also cite CASP minimum capital ranges of €125k–€150k depending on services.

A practical takeaway: MiCA matters most at the platform layer – custody, distribution, marketing, and who is allowed to serve whom.
For tokenized securities, MiCA doesn’t automatically eliminate the need to consider MiFID II and prospectus rules.

Tokenized Securities Reality: MiFID II + Prospectus + DLT Pilot

If a token represents a security (or behaves like one), securities rules may still apply alongside or outside crypto-asset rules.
The EU DLT Pilot Regime (Regulation 2022/858) is also often referenced as a parallel track focused on market infrastructure experimentation.

So yes, there’s more clarity – but it’s not “one regulation to rule them all.”
In the real world, compliance-driven design (eligibility, transfer restrictions, disclosure, redemption process) is what determines whether a product can scale.

What Can Go Wrong – And How to Diligence an RWA Token Like a Pro

RWAs don’t remove risk – they redistribute it across issuer entities, legal agreements, and contract admin controls.
If you diligence only the smart contract and ignore the issuer structure, you’re doing half the job.

Issuer & Structure Risk: Bankruptcy Remoteness, SPVs, Redemption Gates

Start with the basics: issuer jurisdiction, who custodies the assets, what the token legally represents, and how redemption works under stress.
SPV structures are commonly used as a tool for bankruptcy remoteness.

Redemption gates are the underrated risk: a token can be transferable 24/7, while fiat redemption still happens in windows and can be gated.
That’s not necessarily malicious – it’s how funds work – but you want to know the rules before you need liquidity.

Valuation & Oracle Risk: NAV Calculation, Stale Pricing, Liquidity Illusion

If a token references NAV, you should know how NAV is calculated, how often it updates, and what happens if data is wrong or delayed.
Also watch for the “liquidity illusion”: transfers may be easy while real exit liquidity is concentrated.

Smart Contract & Admin Risk: Upgrade Keys, Pausability, Freeze Functions

Many RWA contracts include pause, freeze, and upgrade mechanisms.
The question isn’t whether admin power exists, but who controls it (single key vs multisig), whether there are timelocks, and whether audits exist.

RWA Diligence Checklist (for Different Reader Types)

A good checklist changes based on who you are: retail, yield seeker, builder, or institution.
But the backbone is always the same: eligibility, structure, redemption, admin controls, and disclosures.

If You’re a Retail Investor

Assume access is the first bottleneck, not technology.
Check jurisdiction eligibility, minimums, KYC, and redemption mechanics, then read the risk section like it matters – because it does.

If You’re a Semi-Pro Yield Seeker

Compare net yield and redemption liquidity, not just the headline number.
Then verify admin controls on-chain and look for credible audits, because operational control is part of the product.

If You’re Building a Crypto Product

Design for permissioning early: allowlists, transfer restrictions, and compliance logs are requirements in most regulated RWA distribution models.
Also plan custody and legal pathways from day one, because you can’t “ship fast” around securities and AML/CFT constraints.

If You’re an Institution

Decide what you’re optimizing – settlement speed, distribution, collateral utility, or modernization of fund rails.
Then treat chain choice as secondary to custody, legal structure, and control frameworks.

Practical Takeaways by Reader Type

The market is already investable in pieces, but it’s not equally accessible to everyone.
Use the right expectation: RWAs are closer to “financial infrastructure” than “permissionless DeFi lego.”

Retail Investor

Check access, KYC, minimums, and whether redemption is real or mostly theoretical for your situation.
If you can’t legally hold or redeem it, the APY is irrelevant.

Semi-Pro Yield Seeker

Treat any yield advantage as temporary until proven durable.
What you’re really buying is a bundle of yield + operational rails + issuer structure, so diligence all three.

Product Builder

Assume you’ll need compliance-aware token standards (like ERC-3643-style patterns) and partners who already do regulated distribution.
Build the UX around the constraints instead of fighting them.

Institution

Pilot first, scale after – and make redemption mechanics the core of your operational testing.
If redemption breaks under stress, everything else is just optics.

Conclusion

RWAs are the least flashy part of crypto – which is exactly why they’re interesting.
A conservative snapshot puts RWAs (ex-stablecoins) at $24.02B as of Jan 28, 2026, with a broader $19B–$36B range depending on measurement choices.

Tokenized US Treasuries are the proof-of-work here: tokenization can be boring and still win.
The next 12 months will likely be less about new chains and more about distribution and compliance integration: access, redemption, disclosure, and collateral utility.

RWAs won’t go mainstream with a single headline – they’ll creep up through weekly inflows, regulatory deadlines, and product launches. If you want to catch that shift early, subscribe to Web Snack – a daily email that keeps you current in 5 minutes: market moves, what mattered, and what’s coming next.

P.S. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Always conduct your own research and make independent decisions.