How RWAs Are Bridging the Gap Between TradFi and DeFi
- Harsim Ranjit Singh
- Jan 23
- 9 min read
Jan 23rd, 2025 | RWA | Crypto | By Harsim Ranjit Singh
Introduction – Worlds Converging:
For years, traditional finance (TradFi) and decentralized finance (DeFi) existed in parallel universes, each with its own assets, infrastructure, and investor base. Today, tokenized real-world assets are building bridges between these two worlds. The concept is simple but powerful: use blockchain to bring real-world financial instruments (like bonds, loans, invoices, or real estate equity) onto DeFi platforms, so that value can flow seamlessly between traditional institutions and crypto-native protocols. This bridging of TradFi and DeFi is addressing a core issue – historically, DeFi’s collateral and activity were confined to crypto assets, limiting its relevance to mainstream finance. RWAs change that equation by anchoring DeFi to tangible assets and cash flows. In turn, they offer TradFi institutions new avenues for liquidity, cost savings, and 24/7 markets. A senior MAS official described this synergy aptly: DeFi provides “extraordinary innovation” in speed and transparency, while tokenization of securities can democratize access, but both need to integrate with real economies for sustainable growth1.
Bringing Off-Chain Assets On-Chain:
How exactly do RWAs bridge the gap? Consider a simplified example: A midsize U.S. bank has a portfolio of commercial loans. Traditionally, it might securitize these loans into bonds and sell tranches to institutional investors – a process involving investment banks, weeks of paperwork, and limited secondary liquidity. With RWA tokenization, that bank (or a fintech partner) can package a pool of loans into a digital SPV and issue loan tokens on a blockchain like Ethereum. These tokens represent claims on the loan repayments. Now, the bank can tap DeFi liquidity by, say, depositing these loan tokens into a lending protocol or DEX that accepts RWAs. On the other side, crypto investors (or other institutions) can supply stablecoins to trade or lend against these tokens, earning yield from real loan interest. Effectively, a traditional loan has been bridged into DeFi, where it can be used as collateral or an investment product. This creates a two-way flow: TradFi originators get a new source of capital (the DeFi investors), and DeFi gets real-world yield and diversification.
A concrete case is MakerDAO’s integration with a U.S. commercial bank. In 2022, MakerDAO (a DeFi protocol) approved a partnership with Huntington Valley Bank to tokenize some of the bank’s loans and use them as collateral for borrowing DAI stablecoin2. This allowed the bank to access liquidity from the DeFi ecosystem (borrowing DAI against its loan portfolio) at attractive rates, while MakerDAO earned interest from the arrangement. It was a landmark deal – a regulated U.S. bank directly interacting with a DeFi protocol – showing how RWAs can connect balance sheets across the divide. Another example: Societe Generale – Forge (SG’s digital assets arm) not only issued blockchain-based bonds, but in 2021 it used tokenized covered bonds as collateral to borrow $20 million worth of DAI from MakerDAO2. In essence, a French TradFi institution borrowed from a decentralized stablecoin issuer, a scenario unimaginable before RWAs.
These cases demonstrate real-world assets acting as the connective tissue between TradFi borrowers and DeFi lenders.
TradFi Benefits – Liquidity and Efficiency via DeFi:
From the perspective of traditional institutions, bridging into DeFi via RWAs offers several compelling benefits:
New Liquidity Pools: DeFi platforms collectively hold tens of billions in crypto liquidity. By tokenizing assets, TradFi issuers can tap into this liquidity without going through traditional gatekeepers. For instance, a private credit fund can finance loans by issuing tokens to DeFi yield farmers looking for stable returns. Platforms like Maple and Centrifuge have enabled fintech lenders to raise millions in stablecoin liquidity from DeFi to fund real-world borrowers. This can be faster and potentially cheaper than raising an equivalent amount via private placements in traditional markets. Moreover, because DeFi runs 24/7 globally, an issuer in Dubai might source liquidity from a DAO treasury in San Francisco overnight – a level of access not achievable before.
Faster Settlement & Lower Costs: Trading tokenized securities on-chain can eliminate layers of intermediaries. Settlement finality can be near-instant (minutes instead of T+2 days). For example, JPMorgan’s Onyx network found that tokenized collateral transfers could reduce the typical repo trade settlement time from hours to within minutes, freeing up capital more quickly. Similarly, Project Guardian in Singapore showed cross-border forex trades with tokenized deposits could be executed atomically on-chain, avoiding the need for multiple correspondent banks3. Fewer intermediaries and faster settlement mean lower transaction fees and operational overhead for TradFi participants. A European Central Bank study noted that DLT-based delivery-vs-payment could remove the need for a central counterparty in some cases by guaranteeing simultaneous exchange of cash and asset tokens1. That’s a big efficiency gain and risk reduction for institutions.
Expanded Investor Base & 24/7 Markets: TradFi assets brought into the crypto domain become investable to a new class of investors – namely the global crypto community and fintech-savvy wealth managers. For example, tokenized private credit offerings on platforms like Credix or Clearpool have drawn participants from around the world who might not traditionally have access to these deals. Platforms like Kasu (a private credit marketplace on Base) were offering up to 25% APY on loans without relying on any token incentives, and importantly, U.S. users could directly participate via their web3 wallets. This indicates that tokenization can make even esoteric asset classes globally accessible, bridging regulatory and distribution gaps (within compliance boundaries). Furthermore, once assets are on-chain, they can trade on a continuous basis. A tokenized bond could theoretically be traded at 3 AM on a decentralized exchange – there are no “market hours” on blockchain. Such flexibility and accessibility were unheard of in TradFi, potentially increasing trading volume and price discovery for the asset.
DeFi Benefits – Stability and Real-Yield via TradFi Assets:
The flow isn’t just one-way; DeFi stands to gain immensely by embracing RWAs, which in turn closes the gap with TradFi. Key benefits include:
Stable, Uncorrelated Yields: A perennial issue in DeFi was that yields often depended on speculative activity (trading fees, liquidity mining rewards) and were highly volatile. By contrast, real-world assets provide real yield – interest or income generated from off-chain economic activity (like loan interest, rent, or bond coupons). These tend to be more stable and less correlated with crypto market swings. When crypto markets are quiet or bearish, stable yields from RWAs can sustain DeFi platform revenues and user returns4. We’ve already seen evidence of this: as of late 2023, on-chain stablecoin lending yields had fallen below U.S. Treasury rates, prompting DeFi platforms to pivot to RWAs to stay competitive4. MakerDAO, for instance, invested heavily in short-term Treasuries and corporate bonds, enabling it to raise its DAI Savings Rate (a yield paid to DAI holders) to 5-8% APY in 2023 – levels on par with TradFi money markets. This attracted fresh capital into DeFi in a sustainable way. In essence, RWAs inject the vigor of real-economy returns into DeFi’s veins, making the ecosystem healthier and more appealing to conservative investors.
Improved Capital Efficiency: Another benefit is the better utilization of idle crypto assets by backing them with RWAs. Aave, a blue-chip DeFi lending protocol, introduced RWA markets (through a project called Aave Arc and now Aave’s Horizon initiative5 where institutions can borrow stablecoins against collateral like tokenized government bonds. By doing so, Aave generates revenue on otherwise idle liquidity and offers borrowers lower-risk, lower-rate lending options. This is capital efficiency – using excess crypto liquidity to fund real economy needs. MakerDAO similarly uses surplus collateral to earn yield off-chain, which ultimately supports more DAI lending capacity. The net effect is DeFi platforms can do more with the capital they have by engaging with TradFi assets, rather than being limited solely to crypto collateral that may sit unused in downturns.
Risk Diversification and Stability: Incorporating RWAs also diversifies the risk profile of DeFi protocols. Crypto markets can be extremely volatile and prone to boom-bust cycles. RWAs tend to respond to different macro factors. For example, during a crypto bear market, real estate or trade finance tokens might still perform steadily because their value comes from unrelated economic streams (property rents or trade receivables). This can make DeFi protocols more resilient. MakerDAO famously faced a crisis in March 2020 (“Black Thursday”) when crypto collateral values crashed; since then, it has pursued RWA collateral partly to avoid such single-source risk in the future. Galaxy Digital noted that RWA integration “dampens the cyclical nature of on-chain yields” and creates a steadier rate environment for DeFi4. Additionally, having regulated asset pools involved introduces more oversight and due diligence (e.g. real-world loan originators must perform KYC/credit checks), which can indirectly improve the risk culture in DeFi.
Challenges in Bridging – The Middle Ground:
While RWAs offer a powerful bridge, crossing between TradFi and DeFi is not without challenges. Legal and compliance alignment is the first hurdle. Traditional financial assets are heavily regulated, and when they move on-chain, those regulations don’t disappear. Ensuring that only authorized investors transact certain security tokens, or that sanctions and AML laws are respected, requires robust identity and permission frameworks in DeFi. This has led to innovations like permissioned DeFi pools (Aave Arc allows whitelisted institutions to interact in a KYC’d environment) and on-chain identity credentials. But these add friction and complexity to otherwise open DeFi ecosystems. On the other hand, if protocols ignore regulations, institutions simply won’t come. Striking the right balance is key – for example, using a “walled garden” DeFi pool for institutional players to participate under agreed rules, which then interfaces with the public pools in a controlled manner.
Another challenge is operational and technological integration. Traditional institutions aren’t used to managing private keys or interacting with smart contracts directly. They may need custodians or middleware tech to handle that. Likewise, DeFi protocols must adjust their interfaces and terms to accommodate off-chain asset workflows (e.g. what happens if a borrower defaults on a real-world loan backing a token? The protocol must have legal recourse). These are new scenarios being ironed out via pilot projects and legal engineering. Oracle trust is another consideration – DeFi relies on price oracles to know the value of collateral. For crypto, that’s straightforward (pull price from exchanges), but for a unique real-world asset, oracles might rely on third-party valuations or infrequent appraisals, introducing points of potential failure or manipulation. Progress is being made (some tokens are structured to update their NAV via oracles from trustees or auditors), but it’s an evolving area.
Lastly, liquidity fragmentation as mentioned earlier is a growing pain. Different jurisdictions and platforms may tokenize similar assets, but if they aren’t interoperable, the liquidity is split. We’re seeing efforts like Cosmos and Polkadot building interoperability solutions and platforms like RWA.xyz aggregating data across chains to address this2. Over time, perhaps standards will emerge (analogous to ISINs for securities) to allow tokens of the same asset on different exchanges to be fungible or at least easily swappable. Until then, bridging TradFi and DeFi with RWAs will involve bridging among multiple blockchains and systems too.
Conclusion – A Unified Financial Future:
Despite these challenges, the momentum behind RWA integration is unmistakable. On one end, we have major banks and asset managers dipping their toes into DeFi waters via tokenization pilots. On the other, we have DeFi protocols actively courting TradFi assets to bolster their utility and revenue. The line between the two realms is starting to blur. We can envision a not-so-distant future where “CeDeFi” (centralized-decentralized finance) platforms become commonplace – e.g. a trading venue where tokenized corporate bonds (regulated instruments) trade alongside crypto-native assets, with a unified user experience. Real-world assets could thus act as the catalyst that brings millions of TradFi users into contact with DeFi, perhaps without them even realizing they’re using a blockchain under the hood. They’ll simply see faster settlement, broader access, and new investment opportunities. Conversely, crypto natives will gain exposure to trillions in real economy asset value, moving DeFi from a niche playground to an integral part of global finance.
In summary, RWAs are forging a two-way bridge: TradFi institutions gain the technological prowess and openness of DeFi, while DeFi gains the legitimacy, scale, and stability of TradFi assets. The gap between these financial worlds is closing, one tokenized asset at a time.
Want to dive deeper into the impact of blockchain on supply chain management? Keep following Gravitas Crypto for the latest insights on trends and narratives driving the market.
Our story began with the deep desire to drive tangible, visible, and measurable outcomes for clients. With that as our guiding beacon, we launched Gravitas Consulting.
At Gravitas, we measure success by only one metric: each client’s satisfaction with our ability to drive Outcomes that matter.
Comments