As the concept of RWA (Real-World Assets) becomes a hot topic, I want to discuss from a traditional finance perspective—why do truly wealthy and influential institutions have genuine demand for certain new public blockchains?

Do you know where the biggest costs are? It’s not the transactions themselves. In bond or stock trading, the most money-consuming part is actually the "back-end clearing." The T+2 settlement cycle means funds are locked up for a full two days, and banks need to maintain a large middle and back-office team to reconcile accounts. This alone consumes hundreds of billions of dollars annually in the financial industry.

Many public chains claim they can solve this problem. But honestly, they don’t fully understand the core needs of financial institutions: the finality of settlement. Probabilistic confirmations like on Ethereum? For banks handling billions in assets, that’s simply unacceptable. They wouldn’t dare use a ledger that might "rollback."

And this is why some new consensus mechanisms on public chains are starting to attract attention—especially those designed to achieve instant settlement finality. Once a transaction is packaged, it becomes completely irreversible. Imagine issuing bonds on such a network: at the moment the transaction is completed, the legal transfer of ownership is also finalized.

Even more interestingly, these types of public chains are beginning to natively support automated corporate governance at the protocol layer. Distributing dividends to tens of thousands of shareholders or collecting votes? That’s a nightmare in the traditional world. But on these new networks, through token standards, dividends can be automatically airdropped to compliant wallets, and voting can be executed automatically.

This is not just a technical optimization; it’s a reconstruction of financial infrastructure.