Google AI ModeSep 26, 2026
Data as of Oct 5, 2026Based on 325 AI responses from ChatGPT Search and Google AI Mode
Reviewed by Dimitry Apollonsky ·
For portfolio diversification into tokenized assets, top-rated platforms are categorized by asset class. For regulated U.S. Treasury products and institutional liquidity, Franklin Templeton, Securitize (partnered with BlackRock), and Ondo Finance are highly regarded. For fractional residential real estate ownership, RealT and Lofty are the most recognizable options, providing global access and in some cases daily rental yields.
Explore the market rankingDeFi Yield & RWA Tokens
Brands AI recommends here
Recommended in · Sep 6 – Sep 26, 2026
Google AI ModeSep 26, 2026
ChatGPT SearchSep 26, 2026
Google AI ModeSep 18, 2026
ChatGPT SearchSep 18, 2026
ChatGPT SearchSep 14, 2026
Google AI ModeSep 14, 2026
ChatGPT SearchSep 10, 2026
Google AI ModeSep 10, 2026
Google AI ModeSep 6, 2026
ChatGPT SearchSep 6, 2026
17% of citations to these sources link to brands' own websites.
blockchainappfactory.com
tokeny.com
stablecoininsider.org
When looking at tokenized real-world assets (RWAs)—such as U.S. Treasuries, private credit, funds, and equities—as portfolio diversifiers, institutional reputation and compliance with regulatory frameworks are paramount.
The most reputable and heavily regulated platforms bridge traditional finance (TradFi) and on-chain infrastructure through direct registrations with regulatory bodies like the U.S. SEC, FINRA , or European/Swiss equivalents.
If you want to narrow this down, let me know:
I can provide a more tailored breakdown of the yield mechanics and onboarding requirements for those specific options.
If your priority is portfolio diversification with a strong regulatory/institutional framework, I’d separate the market into tokenized Treasuries/money-market funds and tokenized real estate. They have very different risk profiles and regulatory maturity.
As of September 2026, the U.S. regulatory framework has also become clearer: the SEC explicitly recognizes tokenized securities as securities represented on blockchain, but the legal rights attached to a token depend heavily on its structure.
| Platform | Main RWA exposure | Regulatory/institutional structure | What stands out |
|---|---|---|---|
| Securitize | Treasuries, private credit, funds, real estate | SEC-registered transfer agent; broker-dealer/ATS infrastructure; investment-adviser registration | Institutional-grade infrastructure; powers BlackRock BUIDL and other major funds |
| Franklin Templeton / BENJI | U.S. government money-market fund | U.S.-registered mutual fund | One of the clearest regulatory structures for retail investors |
| BlackRock / BUIDL via Securitize | U.S. Treasury bills, cash and repo | Institutional 3(c)(7) private fund; Securitize regulated infrastructure | Very large traditional asset manager + BNY Mellon custody |
| Ondo Finance | Treasuries via OUSG/USDY | Compliance/KYC and securities-law exemptions, but structures differ from registered mutual funds | Strong RWA-native platform; broader crypto/on-chain accessibility |
| Securitize real-estate offerings | Real-estate/private-market securities | Security-by-security regulatory structure | More institutional approach than retail property-token marketplaces |
For someone specifically looking for Treasury-like diversification, Franklin's Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund (FOBXX), represented by BENJI, is particularly interesting.
It's not merely a token that claims to be backed by Treasuries. FOBXX is a U.S.-registered mutual fund, and Franklin says BENJI has been operating on a public blockchain since 2021.
That's an important distinction:
Traditional regulated fund → shares recorded/transferred using blockchain
rather than:
Crypto token → issuer promises to maintain Treasury backing.
For regulatory conservatism, I'd investigate this category first.
BUIDL is another major institutional example. It is a tokenized BlackRock fund investing in short-term U.S. government securities, cash and repo, with Securitize providing the tokenization infrastructure. BNY Mellon is the cash/securities custodian.
Securitize is especially noteworthy as a platform, rather than merely a token issuer. Its U.S. entities include an SEC-registered transfer agent and broker-dealer/ATS infrastructure.
The catch for an individual investor is important: BUIDL isn't equivalent to buying a normal Treasury ETF. It has historically been restricted to qualified investors and has a $5 million initial minimum under its offering structure.
So I'd regard Securitize/BUIDL as a very significant institutional benchmark, but not necessarily the most accessible choice.
Ondo is one of the more prominent crypto-native RWA platforms. Its OUSG provides exposure to short-duration U.S. Treasuries, while USDY provides exposure to short-term Treasuries through a different structure.
The distinction is important: Ondo itself explicitly says OUSG is limited to accredited investors/qualified purchasers, while USDY is economic exposure to short-term Treasuries rather than the investor directly owning Treasury securities.
So I would not put Ondo in exactly the same regulatory bucket as Franklin's registered mutual fund.
That's not necessarily a criticism—it simply means you should examine:
This is where I'd be much more selective.
Tokenized real estate can give you exposure to rental income and property appreciation, but "tokenized" does not automatically mean regulated in the same way as a publicly registered REIT or mutual fund.
The SEC itself has noted that real-estate tokenization creates unusual regulatory challenges because individual property offerings can involve securities exemptions, broker-dealer requirements, transfer-agent rules and state securities law.
For that reason, I'd look more closely at institutional real-estate/private-market securities issued through regulated infrastructure such as Securitize than at retail platforms offering hundreds of $50–$100 property tokens.
Securitize, for example, has already been used for tokenized real-estate-related interests, including a loan-interest offering tied to a Maldives hotel development.
That's different from saying the underlying property is a particularly attractive investment—the point is the legal/institutional infrastructure.
I'd be wary of choosing a platform simply because it advertises:
"Own real estate for $50 and receive daily rent on-chain." The recent history of the sector illustrates why. RealT, once one of the better-known fractionalized real-estate platforms, reportedly entered voluntary liquidation in July 2026, making platform/counterparty risk very tangible for tokenized-property investors.
That doesn't mean fractional real estate is inherently bad. It means property-level diversification doesn't eliminate platform, legal-structure, liquidity and servicing risk.
If the goal is specifically portfolio diversification rather than maximizing crypto exposure, I'd investigate the categories roughly in this order:
The key point is that "RWA" isn't an asset class. A token representing a Treasury fund, a token representing a rental-property LLC, and a token representing private credit can have completely different risks.
For a conservative investor, I would put considerably more weight on the legal claim represented by the token, custody, redemption rights and regulatory status than on the blockchain it's issued on.
If you tell me whether you're a U.S. retail investor, accredited investor, or institutional investor, I can narrow this to the 5–8 platforms/products actually accessible to you and compare minimums, yields, liquidity, custody, fees, tax treatment, and regulatory structure.
I'd be wary of choosing a platform simply because it advertises:
"Own real estate for $50 and receive daily rent on-chain." The recent history of the sector illustrates why. RealT, once one of the better-known fractionalized real-estate platforms, reportedly entered voluntary liquidation in July 2026, making platform/counterparty risk very tangible for tokenized-property investors.
That doesn't mean fractional real estate is inherently bad. It means property-level diversification doesn't eliminate platform, legal-structure, liquidity and servicing risk.
When looking at tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) as portfolio diversifiers, legitimacy is defined by legal bankruptcy-remoteness, transparent proof-of-reserves, and direct regulatory oversight (such as SEC registration, FINRA broker-dealer status, or equivalent global financial licenses).
The most reputable and heavily regulated platforms leading the institutional and on-chain market span across tokenized Treasuries, private credit, and real estate/funds:
If you'd like to narrow this down, let me know:
I can help you evaluate the specific compliance requirements and yield profiles for your portfolio.
For a diversification-focused portfolio, the more established RWA platforms tend to be those with regulated fund structures, identifiable custodians, audited assets, and clear redemption/legal rights. Examples:
| Platform / issuer | Main assets | Regulatory/credibility factors |
|---|---|---|
| BlackRock + Securitize | Tokenized Treasury money-market fund (BUIDL) | Institutional-grade structure; Securitize provides tokenization/transfer infrastructure; access is generally permissioned. |
| Ondo Finance | Short-term Treasuries (OUSG), yield products (USDY) | One of the largest Treasury-focused RWA issuers; KYC/eligibility varies by product and jurisdiction. |
| Franklin Templeton | Tokenized government money-market fund (BENJI/FOBXX) | Traditional asset manager with registered fund experience. |
| Circle | Tokenized money-market exposure (USYC via Hashnote) | Institutional focus; regulated-market infrastructure orientation. |
| Centrifuge | Private credit, structured assets | More credit-risk exposure; evaluate underlying borrowers and legal structures carefully. |
| Maple Finance | Institutional private credit | Higher-yield category with materially different risks from Treasuries. |
For real estate tokenization, the market is less mature than Treasuries. Many offerings are fractional ownership or debt interests rather than liquid REIT-like substitutes; scrutinize property rights, SPV structure, servicing, valuation, and redemption terms.
A conservative RWA allocation framework often starts with:
Before investing, verify: legal ownership claim, regulated entity status, audited reserves, custodian, redemption process, investor eligibility, and jurisdiction.
If your goal is portfolio diversification rather than crypto speculation, I’d put the highest weight on platforms where the token represents a legally enforceable interest in a conventional regulated security, with institutional custody, audited assets, and clear transfer restrictions.
As of September 2026, my shortlist would be:
| Platform / product | RWA exposure | Regulatory/institutional quality | My take |
|---|---|---|---|
| Franklin Templeton — BENJI | U.S. government/short-term securities | Very high | ⭐ Best conservative choice |
| BlackRock BUIDL via Securitize | U.S. Treasuries + cash | Very high | ⭐ Best institutional Treasury option |
| Securitize | Treasuries, private credit, funds, real estate | Very high | ⭐ Best overall RWA infrastructure |
| Ondo Finance | Treasuries + tokenized securities | High, but more fintech/crypto-native | ⭐ Strong growth/liquidity option |
| INX | Tokenized securities, real estate, other RWAs | High | ⭐ Interesting regulated marketplace |
| Real-estate-specific platforms | Property/SPV interests | Mixed | Use much more cautiously |
Franklin Templeton's Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund (BENJI) is probably the cleanest example of what I would consider "institutional-grade tokenization."
Franklin says BENJI was the first U.S.-registered money-market fund to use a public blockchain as its system of record. It remains a conventional regulated money-market fund; blockchain is essentially the distribution/recordkeeping layer.
That's an important distinction: you're not simply buying a crypto token whose issuer promises to own Treasuries—you are buying an interest in an established regulated fund.
Best for: cash/Treasury diversification, relatively low duration risk, on-chain settlement.
BlackRock's BUIDL is another top-tier choice. It invests in cash, U.S. Treasury bills and other short-term government obligations and is tokenized/distributed through Securitize.
Securitize's SEC filing reported roughly $1.7 billion in BUIDL assets as of December 2025, making it one of the largest institutional tokenized Treasury funds. Securitize itself reported more than $3.1 billion in tokenized assets under management at the end of 2025.
The institutional infrastructure has continued expanding: in 2026, Standard Chartered began providing regulated custody for BUIDL collateral in a framework involving BlackRock and OKX.
Best for: investors who specifically want Treasury exposure on blockchain rails.
One caveat: BUIDL isn't necessarily the best product for a small retail investor because eligibility, minimums, fees and access depend on the distribution channel.
This is the name I'd investigate if you want exposure to multiple RWA categories.
Securitize isn't itself simply a "Treasury token." It's infrastructure for issuing, administering and distributing tokenized securities. Its institutional partners include BlackRock, Apollo, KKR, Hamilton Lane, BNY and VanEck. Its SEC filing describes it as an SEC-registered transfer agent providing recordkeeping, distributions and compliance services.
It also has a particularly interesting real-estate connection: Securitize reported tokenizing loan interests tied to the Trump International Hotel & Resort, Maldives in 2026.
So if you're asking, "Which infrastructure provider has the strongest institutional validation?", Securitize is probably at or near the top.
Ondo Finance has become one of the most important crypto-native RWA companies.
Its attraction is access and breadth: Treasury products and, increasingly, tokenized stocks/ETFs.
Importantly, Ondo announced in July 2026 that its tokenized U.S. securities were structured using a third-party custodial model, with underlying securities remaining inside the traditional regulated custody chain. Its transfer agent mints tokens backed 1:1 by the underlying securities.
That's considerably more reassuring than an opaque "trust us, we own the assets" arrangement.
My distinction: I'd rate Ondo highly for RWA innovation and access, but for the most conservative allocation I'd still favor Franklin/BlackRock products because the underlying investment products and institutional structures are more established.
INX operates a regulated digital-asset marketplace and offers tokenized securities/RWAs, including real estate and other asset classes.
Its current platform explicitly describes tokenized RWAs as being backed by regulated securities and says availability depends on investor eligibility and jurisdiction.
I'd put it below Franklin/BlackRock/Securitize for a core portfolio allocation, but it is one of the more credible names if you specifically want a regulated marketplace for digital securities.
This is where I'd be substantially more cautious.
Tokenization does not magically make real estate liquid, diversified, or low risk. You still have:
Academic research also finds that many tokenized RWAs—particularly real estate—still have very limited secondary-market liquidity despite the theoretical 24/7 trading advantage.
I'd therefore distinguish tokenized Treasuries from tokenized property. The former can be a relatively straightforward digital wrapper around a highly standardized liquid asset. The latter adds a blockchain layer on top of an inherently illiquid alternative investment.
And I'd avoid assuming that every real-estate token platform is equivalent to a regulated REIT. The 2026 experience of RealT, including reported property-management and investor-distribution problems, is a useful reminder that the underlying asset manager/operator can matter more than the blockchain.
If I were constructing an RWA sleeve, I'd think about it approximately like this:
Tier 1 — strongest institutional/regulatory foundation
Tier 2 — strong but more crypto-native 4. Ondo 5. INX
Tier 3 — selective/special situations 6. Tokenized private credit 7. Tokenized real estate 8. Individual property tokens 9. Less-established RWA protocols
The key point is that "tokenized" isn't itself a diversification benefit. If you already own a Treasury fund, replacing it with a tokenized Treasury fund doesn't create much additional economic diversification—it primarily gives you a different settlement/ownership technology.
For actual portfolio diversification, I'd rather combine Treasuries + private credit + real estate + perhaps commodities/equities, while keeping the blockchain exposure modest.
Before buying any RWA token, I'd verify these six things:
1. What exactly does the token legally represent?
Fund shares? Debt? An SPV? A contractual claim? Synthetic exposure?
2. Who legally owns the underlying asset?
3. Who is the regulated custodian?
4. Is there an SEC-registered transfer agent / broker-dealer / fund structure?
5. What happens if the platform disappears?
This is arguably more important than whether the smart contract is audited.
6. How do you actually redeem it?
"24/7 blockchain trading" is meaningless if there isn't meaningful secondary liquidity.
RWA.xyz currently puts the overall tokenized-asset market at roughly $27.7B in distributed asset value, illustrating that this is no longer a tiny experiment—but the market is still small compared with conventional securities markets.
Bottom line: If your priority is reputation + regulation + capital preservation, I'd start with Franklin BENJI and BlackRock BUIDL/Securitize, not a speculative real-estate token. If your priority is broader RWA diversification and growth, add Ondo and Securitize. I'd treat individual tokenized real-estate deals as an alternative-investment allocation, not as a substitute for a conventional diversified real-estate fund.
If you tell me your investment amount (e.g. $25k/$100k/$500k), U.S. or non-U.S. residency, and whether you're accredited, I can narrow this down to the 3–5 products you can actually buy and compare yields, fees, liquidity, custody, regulatory structure, and risks side-by-side.
When looking at tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) as portfolio diversifiers, the most reputable platforms are those bridging traditional financial (TradFi) compliance with onchain liquidity. Regulatory clarity is highest around U.S. Treasuries, money market funds, and institutional debt , while tokenized real estate remains more fragmented and subject to local property laws.
The most prominent, institutionally validated, and regulated RWA platforms are organized by asset class and market standing:
To help you narrow down your allocation strategy, let me know:
If your priority is portfolio diversification with the strongest combination of regulation, institutional backing, and underlying-asset quality, I’d put the market into two tiers:
| Platform / product | RWA exposure | Regulatory quality | My take |
|---|---|---|---|
| Securitize / BlackRock BUIDL | U.S. T-bills, cash, repos | Very strong | #1 for institutional-grade tokenized Treasuries |
| Franklin Templeton / BENJI (FOBXX) | U.S. government securities | Very strong | #2; arguably the cleanest regulated mutual-fund structure |
| Securitize platform | Treasuries, private credit, real estate, funds | Very strong | Best overall RWA infrastructure/platform |
| Ondo | Treasuries / government-backed assets | Strong, but structure differs | Interesting crypto-native option |
| Lofty / similar fractional real-estate platforms | Rental real estate | More limited/asset-specific | Higher risk; useful only as a small satellite allocation |
| RealT / similar property-token platforms | Residential real estate | More limited | Speculative compared with regulated fund products |
Securitize is probably the strongest platform to investigate if regulatory infrastructure is your primary criterion.
Its current U.S. structure includes an SEC-registered transfer agent, broker-dealer/FINRA member, ATS, investment adviser and fund-administration capabilities. Securitize reported about $5 billion of tokenized assets/AUM in July 2026 and works with institutions including BlackRock, Apollo, BNY, KKR and VanEck.
The flagship example is BlackRock's BUIDL:
That's a materially different proposition from buying an anonymous DeFi "RWA token." The token represents an interest in an actual regulated fund, with traditional financial institutions sitting around the structure.
Verdict: 🟢 Highest-quality choice for tokenized Treasuries, assuming you're eligible.
Franklin Templeton's Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund (FOBXX) is particularly interesting.
Franklin says BENJI represents the fund's shares and that FOBXX was the first U.S.-registered mutual fund to use a public blockchain as its official system of record. It launched in 2021 and invests in U.S. government securities, cash and repos.
This is attractive because you're not really betting on a crypto project. You're accessing a conventional regulated money-market fund whose share ownership is represented on-chain.
Verdict: 🟢 One of the best choices for conservative RWA exposure.
Between BUIDL and BENJI, I'd actually prefer owning both rather than trying to decide which is "better." They give you diversification across issuers/platforms while keeping the underlying exposure relatively conservative.
If you're asking specifically about platforms rather than individual tokens, Securitize is my clear first choice.
It has moved considerably beyond Treasuries into institutional private credit, private equity, real estate and alternative assets. Its 2026 filings describe an end-to-end regulated infrastructure covering issuance, transfer agency, trading and servicing.
That's important because "tokenized" doesn't automatically mean "regulated." The SEC itself has emphasized that tokenized securities can fall under federal securities laws, but structures vary considerably depending on who issues the token and what legal rights it represents.
So I'd favor:
traditional regulated asset → regulated issuer → regulated transfer agent/custodian → token
over:
crypto company → token claiming to represent an RWA
Ondo Finance is one of the most important crypto-native RWA businesses and has products such as OUSG and USDY.
I think Ondo is worth researching, particularly if you want more crypto-native composability and liquidity, but I wouldn't equate its regulatory profile with a BlackRock/Franklin Templeton mutual-fund structure.
The distinction matters:
"The underlying assets are Treasuries" ≠ "the token has the same investor protections as directly owning a Treasury fund."
You need to examine the issuer, legal claim, custody arrangement, redemption mechanism, jurisdiction and eligibility requirements.
This is where I would not put tokenized real estate in the same risk bucket as BUIDL or BENJI.
Fractionalized-property platforms can provide genuine exposure to rental properties, but you're adding:
In other words, you're stacking real-estate risk + private-security risk + tokenization risk.
For diversification, I would therefore consider tokenized real estate a small satellite allocation, rather than a core RWA position.
If I were constructing a diversified RWA sleeve based primarily on reputation + regulatory infrastructure + underlying asset quality, my rough hierarchy would be:
One particularly important point: don't diversify merely by buying five different RWA tokens. If three of them ultimately depend on the same custodian, issuer, stablecoin, blockchain bridge or redemption mechanism, you may have much less diversification than it appears.
For an investor specifically looking for diversification, I'd think about something like:
I would not treat tokenized Treasuries as a replacement for an ordinary brokerage Treasury fund or Treasury ETF. The tokenization adds convenience/composability, but it also introduces additional operational and smart-contract/platform considerations. The SEC's current guidance explicitly recognizes that tokenized securities can have different structures and rights.
Bottom line: if "reputable and regulated" is the filter, Securitize, BlackRock BUIDL, and Franklin Templeton BENJI are the names I'd put at the top of the list. For real estate, I'd be considerably more selective and allocate much less.
If you tell me whether you're a U.S. retail investor, accredited investor, or institution, I can narrow this down to the 5–10 products you can actually buy, including minimum investment, yield, liquidity/redemption terms, fees, custody, and regulatory structure.
I would not treat tokenized Treasuries as a replacement for an ordinary brokerage Treasury fund or Treasury ETF. The tokenization adds convenience/composability, but it also introduces additional operational and smart-contract/platform considerations. The SEC's current guidance explicitly recognizes that tokenized securities can have different structures and rights.
When evaluating tokenized real-world asset (RWA) platforms for portfolio diversification, reputation and regulatory posture are paramount. The market has largely shifted away from speculative, unregulated token minting toward institutional-grade compliance, precise legal wrappers, and official registrations (such as SEC-registered transfer agents or broker-dealers).
The most reputable and heavily regulated platforms across U.S. Treasuries, private funds, equities, and real estate include:
If you're looking to allocate capital, let me know:
I can help narrow down which specific platform matches your geographic restrictions and liquidity needs.
When evaluating tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) as portfolio diversifiers, the market has largely polarized into two categories: institution-native issuers backed by Wall Street heavyweights (BlackRock, Apollo, Franklin Templeton) and crypto-native infrastructure layers that bring institutional credit and compliance on-chain.
The most reputable, compliant, and regulated platforms across Treasuries, private credit, and real estate are organized below by category.
This sector has experienced massive institutional adoption, serving as the dominant low-risk on-chain yield block.
If you are looking to diversify into private credit, corporate debt, or liquidity pools backed by real-world business cash flows:
Real estate on-chain remains structurally more fragmented due to local property laws, titling requirements, and cross-border regulatory constraints, but a few platforms stand out for regulatory rigor:
Key Considerations for Portfolio Allocation
If you'd like to narrow this down, let me know:
Yes. If your priorities are reputation + regulatory structure + quality of underlying assets, I would focus much more on tokenized securities issued by established asset managers than on speculative “RWA tokens.”
One important distinction: the platform can be regulated while the token itself is not a registered U.S. security. Eligibility, transfer restrictions, and investor protections vary considerably.
| Platform / product | RWA exposure | Regulatory strength | My view |
|---|---|---|---|
| Franklin Templeton — BENJI / FOBXX | U.S. government securities / money market | Very high | 🥇 Best conservative choice |
| BlackRock BUIDL via Securitize | T-bills, cash & repo | Very high | 🥇 Institutional-quality |
| Securitize | Treasuries, private credit, funds, real estate, etc. | Very high infrastructure | 🥇 Best overall platform |
| Ondo — OUSG | Short-duration U.S. Treasury products | High, but private-fund structure | 🥈 Strong qualified-investor option |
| Ondo — USDY | Short-term Treasuries + cash | High offshore/Reg-S structure | 🥈 Attractive but different risk |
| Tokenized real estate platforms | Individual properties / real estate funds | Generally lower/more fragmented | 🥉 Selective only |
Franklin Templeton's Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund (FOBXX) is particularly compelling because this isn't merely a crypto company putting a Treasury claim on a blockchain.
It's an actual U.S.-registered government money-market fund whose ownership records and transactions use blockchain infrastructure. Franklin says it was the first U.S.-registered mutual fund to use a public blockchain as its official system of record.
As of July 31, 2026, the fund had about $721 million in assets, with AAAmmf/AAAm ratings from Fitch/S&P.
Why I like it:
For a portfolio diversifier, this is the one I'd regard as closest to "traditional finance, but on-chain."
BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund (BUIDL) is another top-tier choice.
BUIDL invests in cash, U.S. Treasury bills and repurchase agreements, and is tokenized through Securitize. BlackRock launched it in 2024, and it subsequently surpassed $1 billion in assets.
The important caveat is access: BUIDL is designed for qualified investors rather than being a retail mutual fund.
Securitize is particularly interesting because its U.S. entities include an SEC-registered broker-dealer, FINRA/SIPC member, SEC-registered transfer agent and SEC-regulated ATS.
That makes Securitize one of the strongest names I'd consider when evaluating the RWA infrastructure itself, not merely an individual token.
If you're asking specifically "which RWA platforms should I trust?", Securitize is probably my first answer.
It has worked with BlackRock, Apollo, Hamilton Lane, KKR, VanEck, BNY and other major institutions. As of July 2026, Securitize reported more than $5 billion of RWA assets across its ecosystem.
The regulatory infrastructure is unusually substantial for a crypto-native company:
That doesn't make every asset offered through Securitize safe. That's an important distinction. Securitize itself explicitly warns that digital securities can be speculative and illiquid.
But as a platform/infrastructure provider, it is one of the names I'd put at the top of the list.
Ondo Finance's OUSG is another serious contender.
OUSG is structured as a 3(c)(7) private fund, with tokens representing limited-partnership interests, and it invests in U.S. Treasury products. It's therefore restricted to Qualified Purchasers rather than being a retail-accessible Treasury fund.
I'd rank it below Franklin/BUIDL from a "traditional regulatory wrapper" perspective, but it is much more credible to me than the average DeFi RWA protocol.
USDY is particularly interesting because it is a tokenized debt instrument, rather than a U.S.-registered money-market fund.
It is issued through a bankruptcy-remote SPV and secured primarily by short-term U.S. Treasuries. Ondo currently reports roughly $2.14B of USDY outstanding against $2.21B of underlying assets, with approximately 97% of the collateral in Treasuries.
That is a strong structure, but there's a crucial difference:
USDY is not the same legal claim as owning a Treasury fund such as FOBXX.
Ondo itself states that its tokens have not been registered under the U.S. Securities Act and that USDY is offered under a continuous Regulation S structure, with restrictions around U.S. persons.
So I'd consider USDY a higher-complexity RWA credit/security exposure, not simply "a tokenized Treasury."
This is where I'd be considerably more cautious.
Tokenized real estate is potentially attractive because it can give you exposure to:
But the regulatory and structural quality varies much more than with tokenized Treasuries.
For example, platforms such as Lofty allow fractional exposure to individual U.S. properties, but you're dealing with property-specific entities, tenants, maintenance, vacancies, local property markets, financing and potentially thin secondary-market liquidity.
That's a very different risk profile from owning a government money-market fund.
I'd therefore treat tokenized real estate as alternative/private-market exposure, not as a Treasury substitute.
If I were constructing a conservative RWA sleeve, I'd think about it roughly like this:
Tier 1 — strongest combination of reputation + regulation + underlying assets
Tier 2 — very interesting, but more structural/eligibility complexity 4. Ondo OUSG 5. Ondo USDY
Tier 3 — potentially useful, but substantially more asset-specific risk 6. Tokenized real estate 7. Tokenized private credit 8. Commodity/alternative RWA tokens
I wouldn't diversify simply by buying five different RWA tokens. BUIDL, BENJI and OUSG can all ultimately give you exposure to very similar short-duration U.S. government assets. Owning all three isn't necessarily much diversification.
I'd instead diversify across risk sources:
And I'd give considerably more weight to the legal claim you own, custody, redemption mechanism, bankruptcy remoteness, investor eligibility and secondary-market liquidity than to the blockchain on which the token happens to reside.
If you tell me whether you're a U.S. retail investor or accredited/qualified investor, I can narrow this to the 5–7 RWA products you can actually buy today, compare their yields, fees, liquidity, minimums, custody and regulatory structures, and rank them for a portfolio.
And I'd give considerably more weight to the legal claim you own, custody, redemption mechanism, bankruptcy remoteness, investor eligibility and secondary-market liquidity than to the blockchain on which the token happens to reside.
If you tell me whether you're a U.S. retail investor or accredited/qualified investor, I can narrow this to the 5–7 RWA products you can actually buy today, compare their yields, fees, liquidity, minimums, custody and regulatory structures, and rank them for a portfolio.
So I'd consider USDY a higher-complexity RWA credit/security exposure, not simply "a tokenized Treasury."
