2025 – the year of real-world asset tokenization: bonds, real estate and treasuries on-chain

The crypto world is used to cycles – DeFi, NFTs, memecoins, L2s… But 2024/2025 has brought a trend that looks far less flashy and potentially much deeper: tokenization of real-world assets (RWA). Instead of profile pics and pixelated apes, we’re slowly seeing government bonds, real estate, money-market funds and receivables move onto blockchains.

By late 2025, the market value of tokenized real-world assets is estimated at around 30 billion dollars, after a multi-year surge from a very low base. The majority is made up of tokenized government bonds and T-bill funds, but more and more projects are targeting real estate, commercial loans and other traditional instruments.

The question is no longer whether RWAs will exist, but who will control that infrastructure, under which rules – and what it means for retail investors.

Tokenized real-world assets on a blockchain network

What are RWAs and why do they matter?

In simple terms, a real-world asset (RWA) token is a digital token on a blockchain that is backed by some off-chain asset:

  • government bonds and treasury bills,
  • money-market funds,
  • real estate and development projects,
  • business loans and receivables,
  • even art pieces or collectibles.

The core idea is to slice traditional assets into smaller, liquid digital units that can:

  • move 24/7,
  • be used as collateral in DeFi protocols,
  • be traded globally with fewer intermediaries,
  • be integrated into smart contracts (e.g. coupon or rental payments via code).

For a regular investor, this in theory means:

  • lower minimums – instead of 100,000 € in a fund, you buy a small set of tokens;
  • easier access to instruments usually reserved for large institutions and private banks;
  • potentially lower fees thanks to fewer middlemen.

Of course, that’s the marketing version. In practice, tokenization also introduces entirely new layers of risk – which we’ll get to shortly.

Franklin Templeton and Benji: when a money-market fund becomes a token

One of the early RWA pioneers is Franklin Templeton, a traditional asset manager that launched the Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund back in 2021 – a money-market fund whose ownership is recorded on blockchain.

  • Each share of the fund is represented by a BENJI token –
    1 BENJI = 1 fund share.
  • The fund invests in short-term U.S. government securities, cash and repos.
  • Investors get the familiar world of money-market funds combined with crypto-style UX – digital wallets, on-chain transfers, integrations into DeFi/cex infrastructure.

By the end of 2025:

  • Benji has expanded to multiple networks, including more institutional chains like Canton Network, making it easier to plug into banks and clearing houses.
  • Franklin Templeton has launched tokenized versions of the fund across the U.S., Luxembourg, Singapore and Hong Kong, signalling that this is not a gimmick but a strategic direction.

In essence, a money-market fund that once lived only in traditional custody systems now has a “digital twin” on blockchain. That paves the way for the same model to be applied to:

  • pension funds,
  • ETFs,
  • loan portfolios,
  • even private equity vehicles.

China, real estate and RWAs: from Seazen to regulatory brakes

RWAs are not just an American game. One of the more interesting cases comes from China’s real-estate sector, which has been struggling with massive debt and slow growth.

Developer Seazen Group announced that it would set up an institute in Hong Kong focused on tokenizing real-world assets, with emphasis on:

  • tokenizing revenue from its malls and property projects,
  • issuing digital tokens linked to Wuyue Plaza properties,
  • exploring how tokens could unlock fresh liquidity in a heavily indebted sector.

A few months later, a cold shower: China’s securities regulator (CSRC) informally urged brokers to pause RWA businesses in Hong Kong until the risks and standards are better defined. The message is clear:

  • Beijing wants tight control over how and where Chinese assets are tokenized,
  • Hong Kong wants to position itself as an RWA and virtual asset hub,
  • the difference in risk appetite and speed is already visible.

For investors, that is a reminder that RWAs are not just a technology story, but also a geopolitical and regulatory chess match: who is allowed to tokenize what, on which network, and under whose supervision.

How big is the RWA market, really?

Estimates of market size differ depending on methodology:

  • more conservative counts put non-stablecoin RWAs at roughly 20–30 billion dollars in 2025;
  • broader definitions (including parts of the stablecoin universe) push the number higher, but stablecoins still make up well over 90% of tokenized assets;
  • major consulting and research firms project hundreds of billions to several trillions of dollars in tokenized assets by 2030.

In plain language: RWAs are still a small fraction of global capital markets, but the growth curve is interestingly different from classic crypto:

  • this is not about a memecoin going 100x then crashing in two weeks,
  • it’s about parts of bonds, funds and real estate getting a second life on blockchain rails.

What does this mean for retail investors?

If you’re a small or medium-sized investor, RWAs potentially bring three major changes:

1. Access to previously “locked” instruments

Tokenization makes it possible to:

  • buy fractions of a fund or bond portfolio with a far smaller ticket size;
  • tap into structures that used to be off-limits (PE/VC funds, commercial real estate deals);
  • use those same tokens as collateral in DeFi apps (with all the caveats that implies).

2. More flexible liquidity

Instead of waiting for:

  • T+2 or T+3 settlement,
  • the opening hours of an exchange or broker,

an RWA token can in theory enable 24/7 transfers and trading, regardless of geography. In practice, there are still constraints (regulation, KYC, whitelisted addresses), but the direction of travel is clear.

3. A new layer of risk – what do you actually own?

The biggest problem isn’t technological, but legal and structural:

  • does the token represent direct ownership of the asset (e.g. a share in a fund or a slice of a building),
  • or do you merely hold a claim on a company that promises to hold the asset and honour the token?

The global securities regulator IOSCO has explicitly warned that investors may not understand what they legally own – an actual interest in the asset or just a digital wrapper sitting on top of it. On top of that, you get:

  • third-party risks (issuers, custodians, platforms),
  • technical risks (smart-contract bugs, hacks),
  • regulatory risks (rule changes, bans, “pauses” like those seen in Hong Kong).

RWAs and DeFi: bridge or Trojan horse?

For DeFi protocols, RWAs are both an opportunity and a potential Trojan horse:

  • an opportunity, because they can import “real yield” from traditional finance (coupons, interest, rent) into on-chain products;
  • a threat, because they introduce complex legal structures, centralized entities and regulatory risk into an ecosystem originally built as a reaction to over-centralization.

We already see protocols offering:

  • loans collateralized by tokenized bonds,
  • vaults combining stablecoins and RWA tokens,
  • products promising “real yield” sourced from government treasuries.

For users, this can look very attractive – finally, yields backed by something more tangible than pure speculation. But it also means DeFi is importing all the cracks and weaknesses of TradFi: from poorly regulated issuers to opaque ownership structures.

Conclusion: hype or new financial infrastructure?

Is RWA just another buzzword, or the foundation of a new financial stack?

The current picture looks like this:

  • the market is still relatively small, but growing fast – from a few billion to tens of billions in just a few years;
  • large incumbents like Franklin Templeton signal that this is not just a crypto fad, but a strategic move by traditional finance;
  • regulators like IOSCO acknowledge the potential but loudly flag legal, operational and market risks;
  • jurisdictions (US, EU, Hong Kong, mainland China) are already playing regulatory ping-pong over who gets to be an RWA hub.

For investors, a reasonable takeaway might be:

  • RWAs are not an “all-in” playground – they are a field for cautious, well-researched experimentation;
  • the upside is significant, but until you truly understand what the token represents, you don’t know what you are risking;
  • if 2020 is remembered for DeFi and 2021 for NFTs, then 2024/2025 will probably be remembered as the starting point of serious real-world asset tokenization.

Whether RWAs become standard by 2030 or remain a pilot project for enthusiasts will depend less on technology and far more on regulation, trust and how ready we are to genuinely connect traditional finance to open blockchain networks.