In tokenized bonds, it's product users vs. token betters
Scott Melker highlights a critical distinction in the RWA market between investors utilizing actual tokenized bond products and those speculating on the native tokens of platforms offering such services. While tokenized bonds provide investors with direct claims to interest payments and fund returns, native platform tokens often lack direct economic rights to the underlying revenue or assets. The commentary warns that market participants frequently conflate the utility of tokenized infrastructure with the speculative value of associated crypto assets. This confusion is exacerbated by marketing tactics that juxtapose massive traditional market caps against small-cap crypto tokens to imply inherent value growth. Melker emphasizes that demand for settlement and security services does not automatically translate into value accrual for a platform's native token. Investors are urged to conduct rigorous due diligence to understand whether they hold a legal claim to an asset or merely a speculative digital token. This distinction is vital for the maturation of the RWA sector as it moves toward institutional adoption and away from purely narrative-driven speculation.