2026-01-12 16:21:17

Whenever discussing the onboarding of real-world assets onto the blockchain, many voices focus on the numbers—300 million euros, 1 billion euros, 10 billion euros. These figures certainly catch the eye, but honestly, the real challenge lies elsewhere: How are these assets issued, held, traded, and settled within a regulatory framework? How can we protect investors' privacy while meeting audit and regulatory requirements? How can developers create usable products with existing tools instead of always remaining at the white paper and demo stage?

Dusk’s pace this year is worth paying close attention to. Not because it claims to work on RWA, but because it pushes three key initiatives simultaneously on the same timeline. DuskEVM is expected to go live on the mainnet in the second week of January, DuskTrade plans to launch in 2026 with a waitlist opening in January, and Hedger, an EVM-based compliance privacy engine, is already in Alpha testing. These three components together look like a complete institutional-grade system delivery plan, rather than the typical crypto approach of launching in a lively, noisy manner, then patching issues later.

At this point, it’s important to discuss the fundamental differences between two systems. What is the most common activity in open on-chain finance? Contracts are deployed first, assets flow on-chain first, and if problems arise, they are fixed afterward. In regulated financial systems, it’s the opposite—the compliance requirements define what the system can do from the start, setting boundaries that determine the scope of user and asset access.

A truly regulated trading platform must answer questions far more complex than “Can orders be matched?” Who is qualified to trade here? Which assets are allowed to be listed? How should information be disclosed to be considered transparent? How are abnormal transactions handled? How is arbitration conducted if disputes arise? How is all data recorded for audit purposes? These are not issues to be fixed after the fact but are fundamental to system design from the outset.

The reason DuskTrade is emphasized repeatedly is ultimately because it aims to truly implement this logic, not just make promises on paper.

DUSK1,4%

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.

13 Likes

Reward
13
4
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MemeCurator

· 22h ago

Well, finally someone is telling the truth, not just hyping up numbers. To be honest, Dusk's recent move is indeed a bit different. It's not the traditional "I want to do RWA" and then disappear, but really pushing three lines simultaneously. This is a rare species in the crypto world. Compared to many projects here, which are lively on the first day of launch and start fixing issues in the second week, the idea behind DuskTrade is actually derived from reverse engineering the rules, and it quite resembles what a financial system should look like. But frankly, I still need to observe because from paper to implementation, there's still a long way to go.

View OriginalReply0

SurvivorshipBias

· 22h ago

Tired of playing the numbers game, the key is whether it can really take off. Dusk is indeed different this time, advancing on three fronts simultaneously — this is the right rhythm. --- Another bunch of white papers with promises, but how many can actually be implemented? If DuskTrade can truly streamline compliance, then it’s worth paying attention to. --- No matter what, it all comes down to this — either launch quickly to make fast money or build a solid foundation steadily. Most in the crypto space choose the former, but Dusk doesn’t seem so impatient, which is interesting. --- The regulatory framework definitely needs to be designed in advance; patching things up afterward just invites trouble. DuskTrade’s approach is on the right track. --- 300 million euros, 10 billion euros — sounds great, but on-chain real-world assets aren’t that simple. Balancing privacy and auditability is the real challenge. --- The idea of delivering institutional-grade systems sounds good, but we’ll have to wait and see how DuskTrade performs once it’s truly launched. --- Open finance moves first and then adjusts, regulated finance plans first and then executes — these two logics are indeed opposite. Dusk’s system architecture has some interesting ideas.

View OriginalReply0

YieldWhisperer

· 22h ago

It has taken so long, but finally someone is taking regulation seriously instead of bypassing it. This is what RWA should look like. --- No matter how beautiful the numbers are, passing approval is the real key. --- Dusk's set of combined measures is indeed different, not just empty talk. --- To put it simply, it's about building the cage first and then releasing the bird, rather than letting the bird fly out and then figuring out what to do. --- If DuskTrade really comes to fruition, this is the kind of thing worth watching. --- Pushing compliance + trading + privacy along one line? That’s a really bold approach. --- Let's wait and see if DuskEVM in January can hold up. --- So the question is, when will other projects learn to follow the rules? --- Institutional-grade systems should be designed like this, starting with compliance rather than patching it at the end. --- Finally, someone is taking RWA seriously and doing something about it. --- We've seen too many promises on paper; the key is whether it can truly be implemented and audited properly.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropCollector

· 23h ago

The hundreds of billions of euros may be visually overwhelming, but the real difference lies in the details... Dusk's recent moves are quite interesting, not just slogans, but actually connecting DuskEVM, DuskTrade, and Hedger together, which feels like they're really serious this time. The old practice in the crypto world of launching first and fixing later is completely different from a regulated system... The former is wild growth, while the latter involves embedding rules directly into the system—this is the fundamental difference. Honestly, being able to actually implement "first ensure compliance, then build the system" is more impressive than the numbers that are often hyped up.

View OriginalReply0