#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
Today I saw some data, and my first reaction wasn’t excitement—it was more like a bit of concern for Dusk.
Tokenized RWA on Solana is already close to $420 million. And in July alone, it processed 420 million transactions—while the RWA market continues to grow.
This shows one thing:
RWA is no longer short on public chains.
Ethereum, Solana, BSC, Stellar... are all competing to attract issuers. CoinGecko shows that by March 2026, excluding stablecoins, Tokenized RWA has grown from $5.42 billion at the start of 2025 to $19.32 billion, a 256.7% increase over 15 months.
So now I actually feel that Dusk’s most dangerous competitor might not be another "RWA chain".
It could be those general-purpose public chains that already have liquidity and users.
Because when an institution issues a Tokenized Fund, the first thought is unlikely to be:
“Which chain has the most advanced privacy technology?”
It’s more like:
“Is there already someone trading on that chain?”
That’s also why I think Dusk’s recent move to push DuskEVM to Testnet matters far more than merely announcing another RWA collaboration.
Right now, Dusk is making a very smart—yet also risky—choice:
The native Dusk layer handles deterministic settlement, ZK, privacy, and compliant assets. DuskEVM, meanwhile, brings Solidity developers in with familiar tooling, and Hedger provides a privacy path.
In other words:
Dusk knows it can’t win just by saying, “Our technology is more suitable for finance.”
It also has to solve the most practical problem of all—
Why would users come here to trade?
I think that’s the real battleground for Dusk’s next phase.
Solana has already proven that RWA can run on general-purpose high-performance chains. What Dusk needs to prove is whether compliance, privacy, and deterministic settlement can ultimately create strong enough reasons for financial institutions to migrate.
If it can’t, Dusk might end up with a beautiful set of financial infrastructure, but not enough actual financial activity.
But if it can, the logic is totally different:
General-purpose public chains handle “bringing assets on-chain,” while Dusk ensures institutions dare to keep those assets on-chain.
So when I look at $DUSK now, I’m not too concerned about how large the next issuance will be.
I want to see one metric instead:
On Dusk, when do assets start truly generating sustained trading and settlement demand?
What do you think? Leave a comment below 😎
Today I saw some data, and my first reaction wasn’t excitement—it was more like a bit of concern for Dusk.
Tokenized RWA on Solana is already close to $420 million. And in July alone, it processed 420 million transactions—while the RWA market continues to grow.
This shows one thing:
RWA is no longer short on public chains.
Ethereum, Solana, BSC, Stellar... are all competing to attract issuers. CoinGecko shows that by March 2026, excluding stablecoins, Tokenized RWA has grown from $5.42 billion at the start of 2025 to $19.32 billion, a 256.7% increase over 15 months.
So now I actually feel that Dusk’s most dangerous competitor might not be another "RWA chain".
It could be those general-purpose public chains that already have liquidity and users.
Because when an institution issues a Tokenized Fund, the first thought is unlikely to be:
“Which chain has the most advanced privacy technology?”
It’s more like:
“Is there already someone trading on that chain?”
That’s also why I think Dusk’s recent move to push DuskEVM to Testnet matters far more than merely announcing another RWA collaboration.
Right now, Dusk is making a very smart—yet also risky—choice:
The native Dusk layer handles deterministic settlement, ZK, privacy, and compliant assets. DuskEVM, meanwhile, brings Solidity developers in with familiar tooling, and Hedger provides a privacy path.
In other words:
Dusk knows it can’t win just by saying, “Our technology is more suitable for finance.”
It also has to solve the most practical problem of all—
Why would users come here to trade?
I think that’s the real battleground for Dusk’s next phase.
Solana has already proven that RWA can run on general-purpose high-performance chains. What Dusk needs to prove is whether compliance, privacy, and deterministic settlement can ultimately create strong enough reasons for financial institutions to migrate.
If it can’t, Dusk might end up with a beautiful set of financial infrastructure, but not enough actual financial activity.
But if it can, the logic is totally different:
General-purpose public chains handle “bringing assets on-chain,” while Dusk ensures institutions dare to keep those assets on-chain.
So when I look at $DUSK now, I’m not too concerned about how large the next issuance will be.
I want to see one metric instead:
On Dusk, when do assets start truly generating sustained trading and settlement demand?
What do you think? Leave a comment below 😎
