#dusk $DUSK
I still think the bigger RWA question isn’t just how to put an asset onchain, but how much of its actual lifecycle can really stay there.
Tokenization can put an asset onchain, but things like custody, transfer rules and settlement can still rely on offchain systems.
That’s where Dusk’s native issuance approach gets interesting. The idea is to design more of the asset lifecycle around onchain workflows, while still supporting things like eligibility controls, confidential transfers, selective disclosure and settlement.
Dusk also lists native issuance for digital securities like equity, debt and structured products as a use case, depending on the regulatory and product setup.
Because putting a token onchain is one thing. Moving the actual financial workflow onchain while keeping compliance and investor controls in place is a much bigger challenge.
So I’m curious: as regulated markets move further onchain, could native issuance end up mattering more than simple RWA tokenization?
@Dusk
I still think the bigger RWA question isn’t just how to put an asset onchain, but how much of its actual lifecycle can really stay there.
Tokenization can put an asset onchain, but things like custody, transfer rules and settlement can still rely on offchain systems.
That’s where Dusk’s native issuance approach gets interesting. The idea is to design more of the asset lifecycle around onchain workflows, while still supporting things like eligibility controls, confidential transfers, selective disclosure and settlement.
Dusk also lists native issuance for digital securities like equity, debt and structured products as a use case, depending on the regulatory and product setup.
Because putting a token onchain is one thing. Moving the actual financial workflow onchain while keeping compliance and investor controls in place is a much bigger challenge.
So I’m curious: as regulated markets move further onchain, could native issuance end up mattering more than simple RWA tokenization?
@Dusk