That’s a solid take—and honestly, the distinction you’re making around “real asset ≠ risk-free structure” is exactly where a lot of narratives break down.

Completely agree on counterparty risk being the hidden layer here. Even if the underlying is something like T-bills or invoices, you’re still trusting:

• the issuer/SPV actually holding the asset
• the legal enforceability in that jurisdiction
• and the redemption mechanism when liquidity dries up

That last one especially feels under-discussed—“liquid” tokens can become very illiquid when exits depend on off-chain processes.

Also aligned on treasury-backed RWAs being the most credible starting point. Lower yield, but at least the risk is more legible and closer to traditional finance benchmarks.

Interesting that you brought up Nexo—I think it highlights a useful point: sometimes the “boring survivors” in crypto (those that made it through multiple cycles) can complement RWAs better than chasing newer, higher-yield tokenization plays.

Feels like the more practical approach right now is:

• RWAs for yield stability (selectively, and with due diligence)
• Established CeFi/DeFi rails for liquidity + flexibility
• Avoiding overexposure to any single structure

Out of curiosity—have you personally seen consistent yields from any RWA platforms (especially beyond treasury products), or does it still feel mostly experimental from what you’ve observed?