ChainScore Labs
All Guides

Comparing Leading RWA DeFi Protocol Designs

LABS

Comparing Leading RWA DeFi Protocol Designs

Chainscore © 2025

Core RWA Tokenization Models

The foundational architectural approaches for representing real-world assets on-chain, each with distinct trade-offs in legal structure, liquidity, and composability.

Direct Tokenization

Asset-Backed Tokens (ABTs) represent direct legal ownership of a specific underlying asset, like real estate or fine art, through an on-chain security token.

  • Each token is a digital share in a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) holding the asset.
  • Requires robust legal frameworks and custody solutions for the physical asset.
  • Enables fractional ownership and programmable dividends but faces regulatory complexity.

Collateralized Debt Position

Overcollateralized Loans tokenize the debt obligation secured by an RWA, not the asset itself. Protocols like MakerDAO use this model for stablecoin backing.

  • A borrower locks a real-world asset (e.g., treasury bills) as collateral to mint a stablecoin like DAI.
  • The RWA is held off-chain by a licensed custodian.
  • Provides capital efficiency for borrowers and yield for protocol users, with liquidation risks managed by overcollateralization.

Revenue Share Token

Cash Flow Tokens securitize the future income streams from an asset, such as royalties, rental income, or project revenues.

  • Token holders are entitled to a pro-rata share of the generated revenue, distributed on-chain.
  • The underlying asset's ownership may remain unchanged.
  • Ideal for assets with predictable yields, transforming illiquid future cash flows into tradable digital securities.

Fund Tokenization

Tokenized Funds or ETFs represent shares in a diversified pool of RWAs, managed by a professional entity. This model is common for private credit and treasury funds.

  • A single fund token provides exposure to a basket of assets, reducing individual asset risk.
  • Fund management and compliance are handled off-chain by the sponsor.
  • Offers simplified DeFi access to institutional-grade portfolios, though it introduces manager counterparty risk.

Synthetic Exposure

Synthetic Assets use derivatives and oracle price feeds to create tokens that track the price of an RWA without requiring direct legal claim.

  • Protocols use collateral (often crypto-native) to mint synthetic tokens like sAAPL that mirror a stock's price.
  • Avoids direct securities regulation but relies on oracle integrity and collateral stability.
  • Provides permissionless global access to price movements of otherwise inaccessible assets.

Protocol Design Comparison

Comparison of core architectural and operational parameters across leading RWA DeFi protocols.

Design ParameterOn-Chain Custody ModelOff-Chain Custody ModelHybrid Custody Model

Asset Custody

Fully on-chain via tokenized vaults

Off-chain with licensed custodians

On-chain tokens backed by off-chain legal claims

Primary Collateral Type

Tokenized Treasuries, Real Estate

Private Credit, Trade Finance

Tokenized Equity, Commodities

Settlement Finality

Instant on settlement layer

1-3 business days

Instant token transfer, 1-3 days for underlying

Typical Minting Fee

0.10% - 0.50%

0.25% - 1.00%

0.15% - 0.75%

Redemption Period

Immediate to 24 hours

7-30 business days

3-10 business days

Primary Regulatory Approach

Security token exemptions (Reg D/S)

Full securities compliance

Asset-specific legal wrappers

Oracle Dependency

High (for price feeds)

Low (off-chain valuation)

Medium (for on-chain attestations)

Typical Minimum Investment

$100 - $1,000

$10,000 - $100,000

$1,000 - $10,000

Architectural Trade-offs

Core Design Philosophies

Tokenization models and custody structures define the primary trade-offs between security, efficiency, and accessibility. Protocols like Centrifuge and Goldfinch use distinct approaches. Centrifuge employs a pool-based model where assets are bundled into Tinlake pools, offering diversification but introducing pool-level risk. Goldfinch uses a direct lending model with borrower pools, providing clearer asset provenance but requiring deep due diligence on each loan.

Key Considerations

  • On-chain vs. Off-chain Data: Protocols like Maple Finance rely heavily on off-chain legal agreements and oracle price feeds, creating a trust dependency.
  • Liquidity Provision: Tangible's real-world asset vaults offer instant liquidity via its TNFT system, but this requires robust and frequent price oracles.
  • Regulatory Compliance: Architectures that centralize custody (e.g., via a licensed entity) simplify compliance but reintroduce centralization points contrary to DeFi ethos.

Example

When assessing risk in Centrifuge, an analyst must evaluate the pool sponsor's underwriting quality, as the failure of a major asset in a pool impacts all investors, unlike Goldfinch where risk is isolated to specific borrower pools.

Evaluating RWA Protocol Security

A systematic process for assessing the security and risk management of Real-World Asset protocols.

1

Analyze the On-Chain Asset Custody Model

Examine how real-world assets are represented and secured on-chain.

Detailed Instructions

Identify the custody structure used by the protocol. The primary models are direct tokenization (asset-backed tokens), special purpose vehicles (SPVs), or synthetic exposure via oracles.

  • Sub-step 1: Check the smart contract holding the underlying collateral. For SPV models, verify the legal entity address and its on-chain attestations.
  • Sub-step 2: Review the minting/burning logic. Ensure tokens are only issued upon verified deposit receipts from a trusted custodian or legal entity.
  • Sub-step 3: Analyze redemption mechanisms. Confirm there is a clear, audited process for burning RWA tokens and releasing the underlying asset to the user.
solidity
// Example: Checking a basic minting guard require(attestedDeposit[depositId] == true, "No attested deposit"); require(msg.sender == authorizedCustodian, "Unauthorized"); _mint(beneficiary, depositAmount);

Tip: Look for time-locks or governance delays on mint/redemption functions, which can mitigate certain attack vectors.

2

Audit Legal Entity and Off-Chain Attestations

Investigate the legal framework and verifiability of off-chain asset backing.

Detailed Instructions

RWA security depends heavily on off-chain legal enforceability. Scrutinize the documentation for the legal entity (often an SPV) that holds the assets.

  • Sub-step 1: Locate and review the protocol's publicly available legal opinions or entity formation documents. Verify the jurisdiction.
  • Sub-step 2: Examine the attestation feed. Determine who provides it (e.g., a licensed trustee, auditor) and how it's delivered on-chain (oracle, multi-sig signature).
  • Sub-step 3: Assess the frequency and granularity of attestations. Daily proof-of-reserves is stronger than quarterly balance sheet summaries.

Tip: Protocols like Centrifuge publish periodic reports from independent auditors. The absence of regular, detailed attestations is a major red flag.

3

Review Oracle Design and Data Integrity

Evaluate the systems that bridge off-chain asset data to the blockchain.

Detailed Instructions

For protocols using price or data oracles for synthetics or valuations, the oracle design is a critical attack surface.

  • Sub-step 1: Identify the oracle provider (e.g., Chainlink, Pyth, a custom committee). Decentralized, battle-tested oracles are preferable.
  • Sub-step 2: Check the update frequency and deviation thresholds. Stale data for volatile assets poses liquidation risks.
  • Sub-step 3: Analyze fallback mechanisms and circuit breakers. Look for functions that can pause the system if oracle data is deemed faulty.
javascript
// Example: Checking a Chainlink price feed heartbeat uint256 stalePriceTime = 24 hours; require( block.timestamp - updatedAt < stalePriceTime, "Stale price data" );

Tip: For non-price data (e.g., loan repayment status), understand how the oracle cryptographically verifies information from the off-chain source.

4

Stress Test Economic and Incentive Models

Model protocol behavior under extreme market and default scenarios.

Detailed Instructions

Simulate tail-risk events to evaluate the stability of the protocol's economic design. Focus on the alignment of incentives between actors.

  • Sub-step 1: Model asset default scenarios. Calculate the loss absorption capacity of junior tranches or staked insurance pools.
  • Sub-step 2: Analyze liquidation mechanisms for undercollateralized positions. Check if liquidators are properly incentivized and if auctions can handle low liquidity.
  • Sub-step 3: Stress test the native token's role. If used for staking/insurance, model a bank run scenario where stakers withdraw en masse.

Tip: Use historical data from similar traditional finance assets (e.g., corporate bond default rates, real estate vacancy shocks) to inform your stress test parameters.

5

Map Governance and Upgrade Risks

Assess the centralization vectors and control mechanisms within the protocol.

Detailed Instructions

Understand who can change critical parameters or logic. Excessive governance power can undermine other security measures.

  • Sub-step 1: Review the smart contract upgradeability. Is there a TimelockController (e.g., 48-hour delay) on the proxy admin? Note any functions that are excluded from delays.
  • Sub-step 2: Analyze governance token distribution and voting power concentration. A multi-sig with 5/9 signers is less centralized than a 2/3.
  • Sub-step 3: Identify privileged roles. List all addresses with permissions to pause contracts, change oracle addresses, adjust fees, or modify asset whitelists.
solidity
// Example: Checking for a timelock-controlled upgrade address public timelock = 0x42cd...; function upgradeTo(address newImplementation) external { require(msg.sender == timelock, "Caller is not the timelock"); _upgradeTo(newImplementation); }

Tip: Proposals that alter fee structures or asset eligibility can have significant, subtle impacts on security assumptions.

SECTION-IMPLEMENTATION-FAQ

Implementation and Integration FAQ

Ready to Start Building?

Let's bring your Web3 vision to life.

From concept to deployment, ChainScore helps you architect, build, and scale secure blockchain solutions.