2026-01-09 16:20:23

Let's say something that might not be very popular—if you judge the Dusk Foundation project solely based on "on-chain activity and whether there are blockbuster applications," you're basically going off track. Recently, I revisited its progress, and the more I look into it, the more certain I am: this isn't something shiny and glamorous; rather, it's the kind of ugly but necessary underlying infrastructure, specifically designed for real regulated assets to be tokenized on-chain.

The reason I’ve refocused on it isn’t because of price fluctuations. Frankly, the market cap ups and downs no longer hold much appeal for me. What truly made me turn back is the change in market sentiment over the past six months. Discussions around RWA, institutions, and compliance have noticeably shifted—no longer just shouting concepts, but starting to ask serious questions about real-world issues that no one used to want to answer.

For example: How is privacy protected after assets are tokenized? When regulators want to audit data, do we hand it over or not? Who is responsible if something goes wrong? Can the system maintain composability on-chain? Many projects talk about these issues in dazzling PPT presentations, but when it comes to mechanism details, they start to become vague. Dusk, on the other hand, is one of the few that has been treating these as core issues from the very beginning and refining their approach accordingly.

Here’s the background. Based on my compiled public market data, DUSK currently has a market cap of just over $20 million, with average trading volume and not very sufficient liquidity. This means two phenomena can occur simultaneously: on one hand, sentiment and order book can easily amplify price fluctuations; on the other hand, if there is a substantial breakthrough in "compliance finance on-chain," the rebound potential will also be significant. If you don’t accept this premise, the subsequent logic doesn’t hold.

DUSK0,27%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

7 Likes

Reward
7
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

SelfSovereignSteve

· 01-09 16:50

There’s no way to find a balance between compromise and privacy, which is why most projects fail. Well, a small market cap of 20 million definitely has enough flexibility, but only if those problems can truly be solved. Exactly, there are too many PPT scammers; at least Dusk doesn’t pretend. Someone really needs to do the dirty work in RWA; it all depends on who can hold out until that day. The logical chain for on-chain compliance is a bit wild, but clearly more institutions are buying in now. Liquidity is still too poor; we have to wait, or a big order could easily crush the market.

View OriginalReply0

MissedAirdropAgain

· 01-09 16:46

Wow, finally someone has pointed out the details hidden in the small things. Infrastructure indeed isn't something people want to see, but without it, it's really impossible. Small-cap is small-cap, but the key is that no one really has a clear understanding of privacy + compliance. The issue of whether to submit regulatory data, now that's the core. Once compliant finance goes on-chain, the flexibility truly changes. There are too many projects that just talk big in PPT presentations, but Dusk is quite sincere about this point. Things with a market cap of 20 million can have their volatility easily amplified by emotions, but there's also room for rebound. But to be honest, most people only look at price and applications; no matter how much you say, they won't listen. The aspect of composability is indeed well thought out; can other projects keep up?

View OriginalReply0

SatoshiNotNakamoto

· 01-09 16:44

The underlying infrastructure has to be like this—not sexy, but someone has to do it. Really, no one dares to seriously address privacy + regulation; Dusk is still working out the details. Small-cap projects indeed carry high risks, but if RWA really takes off... the rebound potential is no joke. It's easy to boast in PPT presentations; how many projects can treat these challenges as actual problems to solve? Getting compliant assets onto the blockchain is a matter of time; instead of betting on concepts, it's better to bet on those actually doing the work.

View OriginalReply0

RooftopVIP

· 01-09 16:28

There is indeed little attention paid to the underlying infrastructure, but someone is quietly working on it. Projects like DUSK are afraid of being compared to meme coins... The contradiction between privacy and compliance—who can truly solve it? Low liquidity in small-cap projects is a hard flaw, but it also means different opportunity costs. Honestly, who dares to touch regulatory data? Dusk dares, and that's what makes it different. A project with a market cap of 20 million, storytelling can easily go off track. They are still refining the details, and their attitude is decent. Wait, can privacy protection and regulatory compliance really be achieved simultaneously? That’s the biggest suspense, isn’t it?

View OriginalReply0

LiquidationSurvivor

· 01-09 16:27

Aside from price hype, the underlying infrastructure is the real deal. All those RWA projects are just storytelling; projects like Dusk that focus on details are easily overlooked. Small-cap liquidity is poor, but once compliant finance breaks through... the resilience will be strong. Regulation, privacy, accountability—these issues are avoided by others, but they are being taken seriously.

View OriginalReply0