Liquidity Challenges and Solutions for Tokenization of US Stocks

Recently, the cryptocurrency industry has sparked a trend of "US stocks on-chain." Several platforms have successively launched tokenized versions of American stocks and ETF trading services, and even introduced high-leverage contract products for these tokens.

Most of these platforms adopt a "physical stock custody + token mapping" approach, allowing users to trade US stock assets on the blockchain. Theoretically, users only need a cryptocurrency wallet to trade stocks like Tesla and Apple at any time, without going through traditional brokers to open an account or meet funding thresholds.

However, with the promotion of related products, issues such as price spikes, premiums, and decoupling have frequently emerged, exposing underlying liquidity problems: users can buy these Tokens, but they can hardly short efficiently, hedge risks, and it is even more difficult to construct complex trading strategies.

The current tokenization of the US stock market is essentially still in the initial stage of "only being able to buy on the rise."

1. The Liquidity Dilemma Facing Tokenization of US Stocks

To understand the liquidity dilemma of the "US stock tokenization" craze, it is first necessary to comprehend the underlying design logic of the current "actual stock custody + mapping issuance" model.

This model is currently divided into two main paths, with the core difference being whether it has the qualifications for issuance compliance:

1. One type is the "third-party compliant issuance + multi-platform access" model, which achieves a 1:1 peg to real stocks through collaboration with institutions like Fidelity.

2. Another category is licensed brokerage firms operating in a closed loop, relying on their own licenses to complete the entire process from stock purchase to on-chain Token issuance.

The commonality between the two paths is that both view US stock Tokens as purely spot holding assets, allowing users to only buy and hold in anticipation of an increase, thus making them "sleeping assets". This results in a lack of scalable financial functionality, making it difficult to support an active on-chain trading ecosystem.

Since each Token must be backed by an actual stock, on-chain transactions only represent the transfer of Token ownership and cannot affect the spot prices of US stocks, which can easily lead to the "two skins" problem between on-chain and off-chain, where a small amount of funds can cause a severe deviation in on-chain prices.

Secondly, the functionality of US stock assets is severely curtailed at present, as most platforms do not open up voting rights and re-staking channels. Essentially, they are just "on-chain holding certificates" rather than true trading assets, lacking "margin attributes." After users purchase these tokens, they cannot be used for collateralized lending, nor can they be used as margin to trade other assets, making it even more difficult to access other DeFi protocols to further obtain liquidity, resulting in an asset utilization rate that is nearly zero.

Objectively speaking, the current "US stock tokenization" has only managed to move the price onto the chain, remaining at the initial stage of digital certificates, and has not yet become a truly "tradable financial asset" to release Liquidity. Therefore, it is difficult to attract a broader range of professional traders and high-frequency capital.

2. Existing Liquidity Solutions

To address the liquidity issue, the mainstream solutions currently being discussed in the market mainly include:

1. Incentivizing Liquidity Pools: By issuing platform tokens, users who provide liquidity for trading pairs are rewarded, attempting to attract funds into the market with subsidies. However, this model has flaws such as relying on token inflation for incentives and failing to create a sustainable trading ecosystem.

2. Market makers dominate liquidity: Attempt to bridge on-chain and off-chain arbitrage through compliant channels. However, due to the complexity of compliance processes, cross-market settlements, and asset custody, the arbitrage window is often consumed by time costs, resulting in limited effectiveness.

3. High-speed off-chain matching + on-chain mapping: By completing the core transaction processes in a centralized engine and only recording the results on-chain, it theoretically can connect to the depth of US stock spot trading. However, this model has a high technical threshold and needs to solve the matching problem between traditional US stock trading hours and the 7×24 hour trading characteristics of on-chain.

These ideas each have their pros and cons, but they all assume that external forces "inject" liquidity, rather than allowing the US stock tokens themselves to "generate" liquidity. Relying solely on on-chain-off-chain arbitrage or incentive subsidies makes it difficult to fill the continuously growing liquidity gap.

3. Make US stock tokens "living assets"

The liquidity in the traditional US stock market is abundant, stemming not from the spot itself, but from the trading depth constructed by derivatives systems such as options and futures. These tools support the three core mechanisms of price discovery, risk management, and capital leverage.

The current U.S. stock tokenization market precisely lacks this layer of structure. For U.S. stock tokens to break through the predicament, they must allow the accumulated tokens to become "collateralizable, tradable, and combinable live assets."

If users can short BTC with US stock tokens and bet on the ETH trend with US stock tokens, then these idle assets will no longer be just "token shells", but rather margin assets that are put to use, and liquidity will naturally grow from these real trading demands.

Some platforms have begun to explore this path. For example, some platforms have launched Tesla stock token and Bitcoin index trading pairs on the Base chain, with the core mechanism being "coin-based perpetual options," allowing US stock tokens to truly become "margin assets available for trading."

This mechanism is not only a trading structure but also inherently possesses the market-making ability to activate the value of US stock tokens. Project parties can inject US stock tokens as initial seed assets into the Liquidity pool, building a "main pool + insurance pool". Holders can also deposit their US stock tokens into the Liquidity pool,承担部分卖方风险并赚取交易用户支付的权利金, creating a new "coin-based appreciation path."

Under this mechanism, US stock tokens are no longer isolated assets, but have truly integrated into the on-chain trading ecosystem, being reused and connecting the complete path of "asset issuance → liquidity construction → derivative trading loop."

Conclusion

This round of tokenization in the US stock market has resolved the initial question of "whether it can be issued." However, the competition in the new cycle has reached the stage of "whether it can be used"—how to create real trading demand? How to attract strategy building and capital reuse? How to make US stock assets truly come alive on the chain?

This no longer relies on more brokerages entering the market, but rather on the improvement of on-chain product structures. Only when users can freely go long or short, build risk portfolios, and combine cross-asset positions, can "tokenization of US stocks" possess complete financial vitality.

The essence of liquidity is not the accumulation of funds, but the matching of demand. When it becomes possible to freely achieve "hedging Bitcoin volatility with Tesla options" on-chain, the liquidity dilemma of tokenization in the US stock market may finally be resolved.