APIA, Samoa, July 27, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — HTX Research, the research arm of crypto exchange HTX, has released a report titled From Asset Tokenization to Cash-Flow Tokenization: RWA and DeFi Enter the Second Half of Programmable Finance. The report examines how real-world asset, or RWA, tokenization and DeFi cash-flow valuation, while often treated as separate themes, are pointing toward the same industry shift: the crypto market is moving from “asset existence” to “asset utility,” and from “protocol usage” to “protocol profitability.”

In this context, RWA tokenization refers to representing claims on offchain assets such as Treasuries, credit, commodities, or funds on blockchain networks. The report’s focus is not only whether these assets can be issued onchain, but whether they can become usable financial primitives inside lending, trading, collateral, and settlement systems.

Proof of concept is complete, but financialization is not

According to the report, the market for tokenized assets excluding stablecoins has expanded from less than $3 billion in mid-2024 to more than $30 billion in April 2026, and later remained at around $34 billion. HTX Research said this growth shows that traditional financial assets can be effectively mapped onchain, while institutions are increasingly treating blockchain as infrastructure for issuance, settlement, and asset management.

However, the report notes that $34 billion is still a small portion of global bond, equity, gold, and credit markets, which are measured in tens of trillions of dollars. HTX Research describes RWA today as better characterized as “proven feasible” than mainstream. Onchain issuance, holding, and settlement have been demonstrated, but large-scale composability, credit creation, and secondary liquidity have not yet been established.

As a result, the metrics used to evaluate the market need to change, the report says. Measures such as tokenized asset size, issuance counts, and holder numbers are being replaced by utilization rates, turnover, collateral ratios, borrowing demand, real yield, default handling, secondary market depth, and protocol revenue.

The onchain utilization paradox

One of the report’s key findings is what it calls a “scale–activity inversion,” in which the largest asset categories often show the lowest onchain utilization. Public data cited in the report shows that tokenized bonds are among the largest RWA categories, but only about 5% of their supply is deployed in DeFi. By contrast, reinsurance tokens, which are much smaller in scale, have a far higher proportion deployed in DeFi protocols.

HTX Research said this underscores an important distinction between “being tokenized” and “being used in onchain finance.” The first concept focuses on representing asset rights, while the second depends on composability, collateral usability, and transferability. Many Treasury and gold products, the report says, still function mainly as onchain receipts: they provide a more efficient interface for registration and transfer, but do not offer open transferability, permissionless collateralization, or automated liquidation.

The report identifies four constraints behind low utilization. The first is compliant transfer restrictions, which limit open composability. The second is discontinuous redemption and NAV cycles, which do not match the 24/7 operation of blockchain protocols. The third is immature pricing and risk modeling, as assets without continuous secondary markets must rely on NAVs, broker quotes, or model-based valuations. The fourth is offchain legal recourse, because smart contracts cannot complete foreclosure or bankruptcy liquidation.

From TVL logic to profit logic

On the DeFi side, HTX Research said valuation frameworks are evolving as protocols accumulate real users, transactions, and fees. Metrics such as total value locked, trading volume, and FDV/TVL primarily reflect scale, rather than profitability or the ability to capture value.

The report proposes a more operational test: whether the transmission chain from protocol activity to token value is complete. It says that chain has at least six links. These include whether revenue reflects real demand rather than short-term incentives; whether the protocol can retain revenue, because net revenue is more relevant to valuation than gross fees; whether revenue covers risk costs such as bad debt, liquidation failures, and oracle risk; whether the DAO has capital allocation capability; whether the token has an explicit value-capture mechanism; and whether regulation recognizes that transmission.

HTX Research cites Aave as an example of this shift, pointing to real borrowing demand, real interest income, and observable fee structures. DeFiLlama breaks down Aave V3’s fee sources across borrow interest, flash loan fees, liquidation fees, Paraswap swap fees, and Chainlink SVR. The report cautions, however, that governance tokens are not stocks, and that protocol revenue does not necessarily belong to token holders.

That distinction is central to the report’s argument: a protocol can generate measurable fees without creating a direct or legally recognized claim for token holders. For analysts, the relevant question becomes how activity, retained revenue, governance decisions, and token design connect in practice.

Three layers and increased complexity

The report says onchain finance is forming a three-layer structure. The first layer consists of compliant stablecoins and onchain cash management for payment and settlement. The second includes tokenized Treasuries, money market funds, private credit, gold, and securitized assets that provide yield and collateral. The third is made up of protocols such as Aave, Maple, Sky, Pendle, Uniswap, and Hyperliquid, which handle lending, trading, rates, risk, and leverage.

HTX Research said greater efficiency also combines offchain financial risk, smart contract risk, liquidity risk, and regulatory risk into one system. In a 24/7, leveraged, composable, automatically liquidated environment, risk transmission can be faster than in traditional finance.

The report identifies five areas that require continuous monitoring: asset authenticity and reserve transparency; liquidity mismatch; compliant composability; DAO governance and value transmission; and oracle pricing.

The competitive focus of the second half

HTX Research said the first half of RWA was defined by issuance, while the second half will be defined by usage. Similarly, it said the first half of DeFi was defined by function, while the second half will be defined by profitability.

The report highlights five scenarios that it says could create real financial depth. These are tokenized Treasuries entering collateral and repo markets; private credit integrating with institutional lending protocols to form onchain fixed-income markets; tokenized gold and commodities becoming derivatives and margin assets; compliant equities and fund shares entering 24/7 trading and financing systems; and DeFi protocols entering a cash-flow valuation era through explicit value-capture mechanisms.

Together, these scenarios indicate a broader shift, according to HTX Research. RWA competition is moving from the speed of tokenization to the depth of onchain usage, while DeFi competition is moving from TVL scale to cash-flow quality.

The report said market participants’ analytical tools must evolve alongside this process. Beyond asset size and TVL rankings, indicators such as utilization, collateral depth, revenue structure, and risk parameters are becoming more explanatory. HTX Research said it will continue tracking the evolution of tokenized assets, stablecoins, and onchain financial infrastructure through data-driven market analysis.

About HTX Research

HTX Research is the research arm of HTX Group. It conducts in-depth analyses, produces reports, and delivers expert evaluations across topics including cryptocurrency, blockchain technology, and emerging market trends. The organization says it focuses on data-driven insights and strategic foresight, and supports informed decision-making within the digital asset industry through research methodologies and analytics.