According to external sources, as digital asset holdings expanded, the market began to shift its focus from “how to buy” to “how to use existing assets”. XPlace CEO Artem Ponomarev stated that investors should be able to obtain liquidity without selling long-standing warehouses, provided that the lending instruments themselves were more robust and transparent.
DeFi, it's not too small.
The chain lending market already has a significant volume. DefiLlama data show that as of August 18, the total value of the DeFi loan agreement was approximately $42.06 billion, covering 571 agreements, of which Aave ' s warehouse was about $14.44 billion and active lending was about $11.26 billion.
Ponomarev compares this model to finance security pledges or mortgages in traditional finance. At its core, users use bitcoin, other encrypted assets, or monetized securities as collateral in exchange for cash or stable currency liquidity, rather than selling assets directly. As long as the collateral price does not break the liquidation line, the user may retain an opening on the original asset.
The article mentions that new collateral is also entering the credit market on the chain. In August, XRP entered the ETA lending scene through the Morpho Treasury, screened by FXRP and Sentora in Frare, and the holder could borrow Ripple USD without selling XRP.
Coinized shares expand the collateral range.
Currencyized shares are considered the next category of scalable collateral. According to RWA.xyz data, as at 18 August, the value of currencyized stock in the chain was approximately $2.34 billion, while the total value of real world assets in the chain was about $38.21 billion.
However, the legal attributes of such assets are not entirely consistent. Part of the currency corresponds to the direct or beneficial ownership of the securities, while part only tracks the composite opening of the price. According to the article, this distinction would have a direct impact on the acceptability of the collateral and its valuation, trusteeship and liquidation.
In recent months, United States regulators have also been moving products closer to existing securities systems. In January this year, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission indicated that securities such as stocks, bonds, papers and options were subject to federal securities law even if they were to be monetized. In March, NASDAQ ' s DCOS framework was approved, allowing eligible securities and their forms of monetization to share the same stock code, CUSIP, shareholder rights and order books. The New York Stock Exchange has also submitted proposals for relevant rules.
Risk focused on liquidation and hosting
According to the article, the key to encrypted mortgage lending is not to expand leverage but to control liquidation risks. Similar to traditional collateral loans, borrowers may face changes in the cost of additional collateral, passive sales and interest. After entering DeFi, these risks were added to the 24-hour fluctuations and automatic liquidation mechanisms.
The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) has previously noted that DeFi loans usually require over-collateralization because the borrower may be anonymous and the price of the collateral is more volatile. When the mortgage rate breaks the threshold, the agreement automatically sells the collateral to repay the lender. This would allow borrowers to bear the loss, costs and loss of the assets they would otherwise have wished to hold for a long time.
According to Ponomarev, such products should be subject to a more conservative loan value ratio, continuous monitoring of the collateral status and clear disclosure of interest rates and liquidation terms. If an early warning can be given before the warehouse position approaches the liquidation line, the borrower will have the opportunity to replenish the collateral or to repay part of the loan in advance.
It was also mentioned that prophecy design is also a source of risk. The DeFi agreement relies on the external price system as a collateral valuation, with the risk of miscalculating the health of the position if price upgrades are delayed or manipulated; and in the case of a rapid decline in the market, the chain of accounts may further press down prices.
There are still institutional gaps in the United States market.
In addition to market risk, United States investors also face hosting and capital rule issues. SEC staff guidelines indicate that non-securities-based encrypted assets are not covered by the Securities Investor Protection Act and that if a broker is insolvent, the customer ' s assets are protected in isolation depending on how they are held and whether they are included in the estate.
The article also cites Crowell & Moring ' s August analysis that, according to current bank capital rules, digital asset collateral is not yet eligible for credit risk ablution. For non-bank lending institutions, the need for a state licence may also depend on their specific business arrangements.
Overall, the review argues that as the markets for bitcoin, monetized stocks and chain credit continue to expand, encrypted mortgage lending is shifting from high-volatility trading instruments to services digital wealth management infrastructure. However, for this model to enter the wider market, collateral standards, liquidation controls and fiduciary compliance remain issues that cannot be bypassed.