If you're curious why $1.5 billion in tokenized t-bills moved from Ethereum L1 to Apotos, Avalanche, Polygon last week look at incentives.
BUIDL fees dropped from 50 bps to 20 bps for those chains (and Solana) vs Ethereum - that's $4.5m in annualized savings on $1.5 billion.
I don't have insider baseball on this but it's likely BlackRock didn't cut fees because Larry's feeling generous.
A simple theory:
Aptos, Polygon, Solana, Avalanche are paying BlackRock incentives for this privilege - or else, why only those chains at 20 bps while Optimism and Arbitrum are 50 bps?
If you're Avalanche with rich AVAX treasury would you pay a couple million to BlackRock in exchange for #2 on the RWA t-bill charts?
Wouldn't be the worst marketing dollars you've spent.
And once again we see goodhart's law in crypto - when a measure becomes a target it ceases to be a good measure.
RWAs without deep liquidity and DeFi ties to the underlying network are vanity metrics - they don't really need the underlying chain, there's minimal moat.
If the theory is right a few lessons:
- Untethered RWAs are vanity metrics
- Chains are spending for these metrics
- "Spending" is token sell pressure
There's good BD spend and there's bad BD spend. I'm not sure this is good spend.



8,463
0
本页面内容由第三方提供。除非另有说明,欧易不是所引用文章的作者,也不对此类材料主张任何版权。该内容仅供参考,并不代表欧易观点,不作为任何形式的认可,也不应被视为投资建议或购买或出售数字资产的招揽。在使用生成式人工智能提供摘要或其他信息的情况下,此类人工智能生成的内容可能不准确或不一致。请阅读链接文章,了解更多详情和信息。欧易不对第三方网站上的内容负责。包含稳定币、NFTs 等在内的数字资产涉及较高程度的风险,其价值可能会产生较大波动。请根据自身财务状况,仔细考虑交易或持有数字资产是否适合您。

