Gary Yang: The Trend of Asset On-Chainization under Stablecoin Pricing Models
Written on September 4, 2025, in Singapore
In August 2025, global financial cities began to experience dramatic market changes as they were hit by a wave of stablecoins. The promotion of the Genius Act and Project Crypto, along with the wealth creation examples set by Mstr and Circle, broke the equilibrium of traditional financial interests. Stablecoins, crypto-equity linkage, DAT, RWA, and on-chain asset management quickly became hot spots of competition in this new environment.
Essentially, the implementation of the stablecoin bill marks the starting point of a comprehensive reform towards global financial on-chain transformation. The second growth curve of Crypto will follow the application scenarios of stablecoins and the tokenization of various assets, combining the flexibility of Crypto finance with the historical experience of professional finance, and will develop in differentiated ways under different regional compliance frameworks.
tl;dr
1. The essence of the Genius Act is to delegate the right to issue and settle currency, thereby gaining enhanced currency pricing power.
2. Stablecoins have triggered reforms in global financial on-chain transformation and asset on-chain transformation by changing the form of currency pricing.
3. The reform is rapidly dismantling the long-standing cartel alliances of traditional finance, bringing opportunities for interest restructuring amid chaos.
4. Trump has successfully grafted his own interests onto this historical transformation node, creating an incredible legitimacy.
5. The two directions of crypto-equity linkage: Securitization and Tokenization, and their market characteristics.
6. Industry characteristics and issues of stablecoins, DAT, stock tokenization, RWA, and on-chain asset management.
7. The industry and cultural fragmentation after the launch of Crypto's second growth curve.
1. The essence of the Genius Act is to delegate the right to issue and settle currency, thereby gaining enhanced currency pricing power.
In a previous article < GENIUS Act and On-chain Shadow Currency >, the irreversible trend of declining traditional dollar control was detailed, as well as the Genius Act's intention to delegate issuance and settlement rights in exchange for broader circulation of the dollar. In fact, this move was further validated by the market within three months after the Genius Act was proposed. At this stage, relaxing and delegating the issuance and settlement rights of the dollar, in effect, allowed dollar-derived stablecoins to gain wider market application scenarios through the form of shadow currency, thereby strengthening broader pricing power. Currency pricing power is the true manifestation of consensus competitiveness in future on-chain finance, while issuance and settlement rights will gradually fade into ordinary, generic infrastructure, losing their moat and competitive value.
The future currency war will be a competition of consensus power in currency applications, not a competition over the rights to issue and settle currency. This is an essential reform forced upon traditional finance by on-chain finance, and it is clear that many countries and regions, as well as some traditional financial experts, scholars, and entrepreneurs, have not realized or find it difficult to shift this mindset. In other words, the M2 of future on-chain currencies will gradually lose its original meaning. The over-issuance of currencies and tokenized assets will become a form of freedom, but this freedom does not mean they have equivalent value. True value will exist in the consensus power of currency and tokenized assets, reflected in their liquidity, purchasing power, interoperability, community recognition, and other tangible, quantifiable market value feedback.
At this critical point of qualitative reform, the flexibility of paradigm-shifting thinking is crucial. Many traditional economic definitions, market control methods, and asset management models will change. For example, as M2 loses its original meaning, it may be corrected by multiplying with a liquidity value factor to obtain the effective circulation value of a currency or asset. Of course, various monetary and fiscal policies will also need to undergo fundamental changes to adapt to new methods of on-chain economic governance.
2. Stablecoins have triggered reforms in global financial on-chain transformation and asset on-chain transformation by changing the form of currency pricing.
After the Genius Act quietly ignited this new currency war, countries and regions around the world rushed to introduce their own stablecoin bills. Although many of these bills are still based on the inertia of traditional monetary and financial rules and require time to iterate and adapt, the overall reform of the financial market towards on-chain transformation has already begun.
Although assets settled in 1 USD and 1 USDC (or other stablecoins) may not seem very different in terms of pricing, their fundamentally different monetary mechanisms have brought significant changes to the financial meaning of assets. This is mainly reflected in the programmability, composability, market liquidity, differentiated ecological circulation, and flexibility of financial derivatives of various assets.
Recently, when friends from traditional finance backgrounds asked about the characteristics of on-chain asset management at CICADA Finance, I used the analogy of a "financial motherboard." Various financial asset strategies are like different algorithmic "financial chips," and through asset management selection and plugging, they form flexible financial combinations on the financial motherboard. Stablecoins, in this analogy, act as the "financial current" (Note 1) connecting the chips and the motherboard.
3. The reform is rapidly dismantling the long-standing cartel alliances of traditional finance, bringing opportunities for interest restructuring amid chaos.
From the Genius Act to Project Crypto, stablecoins and on-chain financial reform have fundamentally disrupted the inherent interest patterns of traditional finance. At other points in history, this would have triggered large-scale conflicts, but this time the transition has been surprisingly smooth and acceptable. Is it because modern financial legal systems have made competition fairer, or are contemporary institutions more civilized than those in history?
Of course not. The reason is simple: the current global social development curve is too fast, and the extra profits that companies can gain by quickly understanding trends and transforming far outweigh the loss costs of clinging to old interests and resisting together. The previous stage's financial cartel alliances were quickly broken and abandoned by fast-transforming companies. From Wall Street to all of New York, the overall choice this time was to enter the new game with a (+3, +3) model. This transformation process will inevitably lead to a period of chaotic restructuring in the financial market, and at the same time, create many new opportunities for asset and capital transactions.
Over the past month in the New York market, I have found that the degree of cartel solidification varies significantly across industries. Although the financial industry has rapidly transformed under the impetus of the Genius Act and Project Crypto, most traditional industries (such as real estate) remain very stubborn. Due to the strict control of entry conditions and information flow by monopoly alliances, the trading environment in many industries is still very primitive, and many RWA assets are far from ready for the current wave of tokenization upgrades.
4. Trump has successfully grafted his own interests onto this historical transformation node, creating an incredible legitimacy.
It is still worth mentioning the crypto president Trump, who has driven these rapid developments. Historically, pushing for reform has always been a high-risk, thankless task, especially when one's own interests are also involved, which can make things even more contentious. However, Trump's maneuver was indeed very skillfully timed at a special historical node, achieving an incredible level of correctness and legitimacy. He used the opportunity for interest restructuring brought by an inevitable industry trend to offset a large amount of negative resistance, creating a very special and unrepeatable effect.
5. The two directions of crypto-equity linkage: Securitization and Tokenization, and their market characteristics.
Crypto-equity linkage is a key topic in Q3 2025. Essentially, crypto-equity linkage has two directions: one is to inject token assets into listed companies, creating capital premiums in the form of stocks; the other is to develop stock tokenization along existing policies, mapping out a 7×24 hour tradable stock token market. The former is the process of securitization, usually managed by a country's or region's securities regulatory commission; the latter is the process of tokenization, usually temporarily managed by a country's or region's alternative asset management regulations—some under banking regulation for currency or payments, others under alternative securities regulation.
The securitization process of crypto-equity linkage evolved a new term in Q3 2025: DAT (Digital Asset Treasury). This is a more flexible and universal process than ETF, where token assets are injected into listed companies to create capital premiums for their stocks. DAT, following the success of first-generation cases like Mstr, has created a premium multiplier of 1.5x-2x (with peaks close to 4x), and has become the mainstream wealth creation method in major financial cities like New York and Hong Kong over the past six months. Compared to the initial Mstr-BTC model, the DAT market at the end of Q3 and beginning of Q4 differs in: 1) the expansion of injected assets, now including non-BTC token assets like ETH and SOL; 2) in addition to direct stock price premium multipliers from asset injection, financial instruments are now used to create leverage for higher capital or currency multipliers; 3) unlike Mstr's benchmark political and economic significance, most small and medium-sized listed companies' approaches are purely commercial, making the risk of a post-premium "Davis double kill" more pronounced.
The tokenization process of crypto-equity linkage is still in its early stages in Q3 2025. The main issues are: 1) It is too early for to-C scenarios, and current demand is not genuine (usually only for extended trading hours and tax avoidance during non-compliant periods), so it is still in the early stages of Infra construction and to-B; 2) It is not friendly enough for small and medium project participants, and due to the profit difficulties caused by issue 1), only mature players like Robinhood and Ondo Finance can support the early market; 3) Infra construction and to-B demand are relatively hidden and lengthy, and single business models are hard to profit independently, requiring an industry chain to achieve overall resonance, which needs time to grow. Many institutions entering the market have made certain incorrect assumptions about the early development of stock tokenization. The real needs at this stage are: 1) achieving compliant paths in different regions; 2) issuing large-scale stock tokenized assets through low-cost buying/lending/holding of stocks; 3) forming large liquidity providers; 4) creating leverage multipliers and derivatives markets through financial instruments like lending; 5) providing a large number of highly liquid assets with alpha mining value for the competitive token quant strategy market.
In comparison, as of Q3 2025, the securitization process of crypto-equity linkage is closer to money than the tokenization process, but the window of opportunity is also shorter. Conversely, the tokenization process of bonds, stocks, and forex is a long-term development direction, an important step in the asset on-chain process, and will open a larger market for strategy-based quantitative financial assets.
6. Industry characteristics and issues of stablecoins, DAT, stock tokenization, RWA, and on-chain asset management.
Stablecoins, DAT, stock tokenization, RWA, and on-chain asset management can be called the five golden flowers of Crypto's second growth curve and asset on-chain transformation. Stablecoins, DAT, and stock tokenization have already been discussed above.
RWA is an interesting track. Last year it was unpopular, but this year, although it has regained popularity, more problems have emerged, mainly including: 1) Most RWA assets or even platform parties treat RWA as a fundraising tool, without considering issues such as post-issuance asset turnover and purchasing power, exit, liquidity, yield, market making, and sustainability; 2) No or insufficient consideration of the assessability of RWA asset fair value and the Oracle process; 3) Apart from fundraising, there is no economic design or ecological construction for composability and programmability, making it no different from Web2's P2P and Crowd Funding approaches.
In the past few months, we have engaged with many RWA partners. Abstractly, RWA is essentially about building a tier-1.5 market for some non-standard assets. This is a classic "do not do unto others what you do not want done to yourself" dilemma. For assets that lack sufficient consensus, purchasing power, and liquidity, it is difficult to achieve instant success through RWA. The entire asset tokenization process still needs to go through standardization, fair valuation, marketization, and financialization. The most difficult problem for RWA assets is the issue of large-scale, medium-term, tradable liquidity, which is the same problem faced by structured finance and liquidity asset disposal institutions in traditional markets. This issue still lacks effective solutions in the current Crypto asset tokenization market.
Compared to the real estate, digital collectibles, and art that many people intuitively focus on, the most suitable RWA assets for tokenization at this stage are actually Supply Chain Fi and PayFi, whose underlying liquidity asset characteristics support the feasibility of tokenized trading flows.
On-chain asset management is essentially a comprehensive track for the classified management of various assets under the wave of stablecoins. It is essentially a systematic project connecting liquid assets and liquid funds. From economic model design to platform products, from asset screening to asset management operations, it is more complex than TradFi and requires multi-faceted professional actuarial and quantitative capabilities. CICADA Finance has rapidly iterated its on-chain asset management capabilities during the second growth curve over the past six months, pioneering new standards for on-chain asset management, and welcomes communication and cooperation with different assets and ecosystems.
7. The industry and cultural fragmentation after the launch of Crypto's second growth curve.
After the SEC launched Project Crypto in August, the rapid growth of Crypto's second curve accelerated the further differentiation of the entire Crypto market. North America, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Africa are all showing completely different differentiation.
The development of Native DeFi and stablecoin ecosystems is strongest in New York and the East Coast; RWA and crypto-equity linkage have opportunities in global financial cities, but each is affected by its own policy particularities and the habitual thinking of mainstream market participants, resulting in different interpretations; Africa, South Asia, and South America are developing more from the perspective of Supply Chain Fi and PayFi applications, which are actually the real mainstream emerging markets. They have not yet been priced in by the Crypto Market, but have huge potential; Southeast Asia has instead become the base for the continuation of the first curve, with centralized exchanges and narrative projects gathering here to form new purchasing power.
The different social environments in different geographies have created fragmentation and stratification in the Crypto market. Global finance is facing disruptive changes in financial reform and asset pricing methods from different dimensions, and stablecoins are just the first step.
Author: Yang Ge Gary
Date: September 4, 2025
Note 1: For the concept of financial current, see the article < Financial Circuits and Web3 Economic Model Principles > for definition.
Disclaimer: The content of this article solely reflects the author's opinion and does not represent the platform in any capacity. This article is not intended to serve as a reference for making investment decisions.
You may also like
Trump Opens 401(k) Investments to Crypto: What Are the Implications?
Crypto assets are being considered for inclusion in the most important wealth management systems in the United States.

Asia Bitcoin Summit: Eric Trump on Crypto and Freedom
Trump-backed American Bitcoin Surges 60% in Nasdaq Debut
Smarter Web Company Signs New 21M Share Subscription Agreement
Trending news
MoreCrypto prices
More








