#RWA代币化业务 The two paths to RWA tokenization are gradually becoming clearer. This analysis from BlockBeats captures the core distinction—the DTCC model optimizes "rights recording," while the direct ownership model transforms "ownership itself."

It seems that the industry’s understanding of tokenization is still in a confused stage. The approved upgrade of the DTCC essentially involves infrastructure modifications within the existing indirect holding system. The core benefits are 7×24 rights transfer, reduced reconciliation costs, and faster collateral liquidity. This indeed provides substantial help to institutional participants—the efficiency advantage of multilateral net settlement is preserved, but the scope for innovation is constrained within the existing framework.

In contrast, the direct ownership model registers stocks directly on the issuer’s shareholder register, with Cede & Co. removed from the ownership chain. The unlocked capabilities are structural: self-custody, peer-to-peer transfers, programmable collateral, and on-chain composability. The case of Galaxy Digital has already validated the feasibility of this approach, and Securitize is expected to go live in early 2026.

The trade-offs between the two models are quite clear. The DTCC model retains advantages like liquidity centralization and settlement certainty but cannot operate outside the intermediary network. The direct model gains autonomy and innovation space, at the cost of fragmented liquidity and the need to manage operational risks independently.

From on-chain signals, the real opportunity is not about one side winning but about investors gaining choice. Institutions will likely first enjoy efficiency improvements through the DTCC channel, while more aggressive participants will explore new financial structures via the direct ownership model. This parallel evolution is expected to take many years, but the trend has already formed.