AMA on RWA TOKENIZATION with RWA Expert Kevin WONG

September 24, 2025

MATRIX CMTO Eric: Hello everyone, welcome to today’s AMA! I’m really excited to have our old friend Kevin with us. The last time we met was in Shanghai back in 2021, and it’s fantastic to be on the same stage again.

Today’s topic is extremely timely: RWA (Real-World Asset) tokenization. We’ll cover its technical foundations, asset ownership verification, governance design, the role of stablecoins, and Hong Kong’s regulatory framework. This will definitely help everyone better understand how blockchain connects with traditional finance.

Kevin, thank you for joining this AMA today with the Matrix AI Network community.

Kevin: It’s a great honor for me to have the opportunity to exchange ideas with all of you.

CMTO Eric: Kevin has significant practical experience with RWA technology, which makes him the ideal candidate to share his insights on this sector.

Kevin, shall we get started if you’re ready?

Kevin: I’m ready.

CMTO Eric: Alright, Kevin. First, could you clarify the underlying technical principles of RWA tokenization? And how does it fundamentally differ from the digitization of traditional assets?

Kevin: The essence of RWA tokenization lies in mapping real-world assets such as real estate, bonds, equities, and artworks onto tokens on the blockchain, enabling on-chain financial operations including trading, collateralization, portfolio management, and settlement.

The core technologies mainly cover four areas:

The first aspect is the role of the blockchain in asset ownership verification; this is a concept everyone should be familiar with.

The second aspect is distributed storage, used to store certain core metadata for Real-World Assets (RWA).

The third aspect involves synchronizing information between the centralized and decentralized worlds. For example, we need to synchronize legal documents related to specific physical assets onto the blockchain. Currently, Oracles are the most common method. Of course, we can also achieve this process in a simple and effective way through multi-node verification.

The fourth aspect is smart contracts. I consider this the most important technology for the future development of RWA. Through smart contracts, RWA assets will gain more financial features and functionality in the decentralized world.

As far as I know, MATRIX has a natural language-based smart contract platform. This platform is expected to play an important role in the RWA sector in the future and significantly lower the entry barriers for both individual users and enterprises looking to enter this market.

Compared to traditional asset digitization, RWA does not show significant differences in how assets are represented. Perhaps the most fundamental difference is the immutability and other features provided through decentralization.

However, there is one aspect where RWA clearly surpasses traditional asset digitization: the representation of asset rights on-chain and programmatic interaction.

With the help of RWA, real-world assets can be programmable, composable, and mapped into liquid on-chain units, providing unprecedented financial opportunities and global liquidity.

That’s essentially my view. Thank you.

CMTO Eric: Thank you, Kevin. The four core technological elements mentioned earlier ; asset verification, distributed storage, information synchronization (oracles), and smart contracts align perfectly with the content in the “Core Technical Architecture and Modules” section of our report. This demonstrates that our understanding of RWA technology infrastructure closely overlaps with leading industry perspectives.

While we believe that the digitization of traditional assets is primarily a form of data recording, RWA tokenization represents a financial innovation. This approach goes beyond simple digitization by endowing assets with entirely new properties: programmability, composability, and liquidity. This is precisely what we emphasize in the “Specific Application Scenarios” section of our report.

Q: Kevin, when it comes to the fundamental blockchain architecture, do RWA projects generally prefer consortium chains, public chains, or dual-chain structures? What are the technical advantages and disadvantages of these architectures, respectively?

Kevin: Technically speaking, both consortium chains and public chains can perfectly fulfill the functions of RWA. However, for RWA asset issuers, the primary distinction lies in the actual control over the assets. For customers, the main difference lies in the credibility of the assets.

Currently, consortium blockchains are primarily used within enterprises or between enterprises. From an ecosystem perspective, they are not well-suited as carriers for Real-World Assets (RWA) because consortium blockchains lack user consensus at the commercial level.

Therefore, most RWA projects tend to opt for a single public chain.

Some projects choose a hybrid approach combining consortium chains and public chains. In this model, the common practice is to store critical data on the consortium chain while placing the assets generated through RWA and their circulation on the public chain. This represents a prevalent solution among large enterprises I’ve observed pursuing RWA operations.

Done.

CMTO Eric: The analysis is highly accurate, particularly emphasizing that consortium blockchains are unsuitable as RWA carriers due to their lack of commercial consensus—a conclusion fully aligned with our industry observations.

As Kevin noted, placing critical data on consortium blockchains while positioning assets and liquidity on public blockchains represents a common solution adopted by large enterprises. This precisely encapsulates the core of the “dual-chain synergy” strategy detailed in Chapter 2 of our RWA Report.

Our natural language-based Intelligent Contract platform is designed to lower the technical barriers for direct issuance on public blockchains, enabling small and medium-sized enterprises and individuals without complex IT infrastructure to effortlessly issue RWA on public chains. This directly embodies the concept of “democratizing asset tokenization” highlighted in our report.

Q: When it comes to off-chain assets such as real estate, artworks, and wine, how can ownership be verified and reliably linked to the blockchain?

Kevin: These assets can essentially be divided into two categories. For real estate, owners typically possess formal legal title documents, making ownership highly transparent. For collectibles such as artworks or fine wines, there is generally no universally accepted proof of ownership.

Generally speaking, the first step in RWA is to establish a clear legal ownership mapping structure. Therefore, for real estate, this is a relatively straightforward matter.

For artworks and alcoholic beverages, I believe the first step may involve professional authentication through specialized institutions. Subsequently, the currently prevalent approach is to transfer asset ownership to an SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) entity. For instance, this constitutes a legal framework commonly adopted in numerous jurisdictions today.

Then the SPV issues the assets. Simultaneously, the SPV is governed by the corresponding protocol’s governance structure.

Done.

CMTO Eric: Thank you, Kevin.

Q: If a famous painting or a barrel of wine were tokenized, governance and voting would become complex. How should on-chain governance voting be designed for tokenized assets? Should voting rights be weighted proportionally?

Kevin: For fragmented assets, I believe a more reasonable governance approach is for everyone to vote based on the number of tokens they hold. This mirrors how traditional companies vote according to equity stakes. I consider this a fairer and more appropriate solution.

CMTO Eric: Matrix AI Network’s smart contract system, the Intelligent Contract Platform, is the perfect tool for implementing this governance model.

Automatic Voting Weight Allocation: Our intelligent contracts effortlessly enable automatic weighted voting. When users hold RWA tokens, their voting power is automatically calculated based on their holdings and recorded on-chain, ensuring transparency and immutability throughout the voting process.

Governance Voting Module: As mentioned in our report, we will provide a template for “frontend wallet → Matrix module call” that includes governance voting capabilities. This means our technology can help developers rapidly integrate proportionally weighted voting systems, significantly reducing project development costs.

At this point, we’ve covered the underlying logic, architecture, and governance of RWA. But when it comes to “value circulation,” stablecoins become an indispensable key component.

Q: Kevin, there is a common saying in the community: Stablecoins are seen as the “anchor” of the RWA circulation system.

From a technical perspective, how can a verifiable matching between on-chain assets and off-chain assets be achieved?

Kevin: The primary function of stablecoins is to serve as a “value anchor” and “settlement medium” within the Real-World Asset (RWA) circulation system.

The biggest issue facing most stablecoin companies today remains centralization. The authenticity of their off-chain assets cannot be directly reflected on-chain.

For instance, Tether and Circle’s off-chain assets are overseen by real-world financial or legal institutions. This approach differs significantly from on-chain governance models. It also reflects the current situation for most off-chain assets during the early development phase of Real-World Assets (RWA).

Under current circumstances, there is no optimal technical solution for achieving perfect verifiable mapping. However, in the future, assets held within banks can be mapped onto the chain via Oracles by retrieving encrypted data through bank interfaces. Other personalized assets may require decentralized AI technology for automated verification—an area where MATRIX excels.

CMTO Eric: The biggest challenge stablecoins face today lies in the disconnect between the authenticity of off-chain assets and on-chain governance. Specifically, Tether and Circle rely on centralized audits and legal entities to guarantee the authenticity of their assets. This precisely reflects the common dilemma currently faced by most RWA projects.

Kevin noted that in the future, advanced verification could be achieved by leveraging bank interfaces and decentralized AI technologies. This is precisely where Matrix’s core strength lies and represents our long-term strategic objective:

Bank Interface Integration: Our report emphasizes that the platform will support system integration with traditional financial institutions, enabling efficient and secure data flow. This means we have the technical capability to build a bridge allowing our Oracles to access encrypted data from banks and other institutions, thereby enabling automated asset verification.

Decentralized AI: Kevin specifically highlighted this as Matrix’s strength, which is critical. One of the core focuses of our report is “AI Empowerment.” Our AI engine processes and analyzes large amounts of unstructured data, such as real estate valuations, art market trends, and specialized wine reports. Through automated verification via decentralized AI, we reduce reliance on costly and inefficient manual reviews, paving the way for greater automation and verifiable mapping in the future.

Kevin’s response provides us with a highly valuable narrative framework: Matrix AI Network is a pragmatic yet forward-thinking RWA infrastructure provider.

At present, we can deliver compliant and trustworthy solutions through collaborations with off-chain institutions, while simultaneously leveraging our unique decentralized AI and Intelligent Contract technologies to lay the groundwork for fully automated, highly efficient on-chain and off-chain asset verification in the future.

Q: Beyond stablecoins, another challenge for RWAs is off-chain data. Kevin, could you advise on how off-chain asset data (such as valuations and storage conditions) can be reliably integrated onto the blockchain? What are the common solutions for integrating such data sources?

Kevin: To reliably integrate off-chain data onto the blockchain, four core issues typically need to be addressed:

1. Whether the data is trustworthy and has not been tampered with,

2. Whether the data is complete,

3. Whether the data represents the latest version,

4. Whether the data uploaded to the chain can be verified by on-chain users or smart contracts.

Currently, there are four common solutions:

1. Using an Oracle,

2. Setting up your own multi-node infrastructure to retrieve the data,

3. Signing the data off-chain with private keys,

4. Obtaining credible proof for the off-chain data such as legal documents and storing both the proof and the data on a distributed storage network.

Done.

CMTO Eric: The four core issues highlighted by Kevin ; data credibility, integrity, recency, and verifiability are precisely the critical challenges our technical architecture is designed to address. His proposed solutions ; Oracles, multi-node data acquisition, off-chain signatures, and trusted proofs are fully reflected in our technology stack and ecosystem development plans. This constitutes our unique competitive advantage in the RWA market across Hong Kong and the broader Asia-Pacific region.

Q: At the token standard level, the industry frequently references ERC-3643 and ERC-4626. What are the differences between these two standards, and what are their respective use cases?

Kevin: ERC-3643 is a token standard designed for regulated real-world assets such as securities, bonds, fund shares, and similar instruments. This standard emphasizes permission controls, identity verification, and compliance. It integrates identity systems with permission management mechanisms.

ERC-4626, on the other hand, is a standard designed for asset pool or vault products. It allows users to deposit a single asset and receive tokens representing their share.

Relatively speaking, compliance requirements for ERC-4626 are lower.

Therefore, generally, ERC-3643 is more suitable for highly regulated assets like securities and bonds, while ERC-4626 is better suited for other types of assets.

Done.

CMTO Eric:

Q: On the other hand, RWA also involves compliance with KYC (Know Your Customer) requirements. Can behavioral authentication and biometric methods be used for KYC purposes? What is the current level of technological maturity?

Kevin: Currently, for decentralized on-chain RWA processes, biometric technology cannot be used as a standalone KYC or DID verification method. It is generally employed as part of a single process within DID or KYC workflows, or combined with other verification methods.

Compared to traditional document-based KYC methods, biometric technology offers numerous advantages. For example, it effectively separates users’ on-chain and off-chain identities, ensuring both the authenticity of user identities and maintaining anonymity. Anonymity is a crucial feature in the Web3 world—something that traditional document-based KYC cannot achieve.

MATRIX possesses finger-vein-based authentication technology and will soon introduce brainwave-based DID. I believe these technologies can play a vital role in the RWA industry.

Done.

CMTO Eric: It’s time for our Matrix Bio-Wallet to go live.

After the last two questions, everyone can now submit questions for Kevin to answer.

Q: For cash-flowing Real-World Assets (RWAs) such as rent and coupon payments, how can these cash flows be automatically distributed via smart contracts? How can the technology handle situations like delayed payments or defaults?

Kevin: On-chain contract distribution typically begins with the asset owner transferring the corresponding rent or coupon payments to the designated SPV’s bank account. Subsequently, the bank’s API notifies the on-chain contract via multi-node or Oracle systems. The smart contract then transfers the corresponding amount of stablecoins from the SPV reserve pool into the contract. The contract reads real-time on-chain data or a specified snapshot at a designated time to obtain RWA token holder information and distributes the rent or coupon payments according to the corresponding amounts.

In the case of delays, the standard approach involves automatically freezing the SPV’s stablecoin reserve account via smart contracts while simultaneously restricting the circulation of the corresponding RWA asset tokens. Subsequent actions must be handled off-chain in accordance with the legal documents and agreements pertaining to the relevant RWA.

CMTO Eric: Kevin’s proposed “voting based on token holdings” governance model mirrors the equity-based voting system in traditional corporations. This aligns perfectly with the principles outlined in the Community Governance and Economic Models section of our report. Through intelligent contracts, we can automatically implement proportional weighting of voting rights, providing fair, transparent, and efficient technical support for the governance of fragmented assets.

It’s now 12:20 AM. Great work, Kevin.

Final Q: From a technical perspective, what profound impact will RWA tokenization have on the traditional financial system? How will RWA technology reshape the global financial landscape over the next decade?

Kevin: From an asset perspective, I believe two factors are paramount in determining value: on one hand, the cost of the asset (for example, each Bitcoin halving increases mining costs, which in turn drives up Bitcoin’s price); on the other hand, its circulation efficiency.

RWA can significantly enhance the liquidity efficiency of nearly all on-chain assets. This means that as liquidity efficiency improves, the value of these assets will also increase substantially.

The emergence of Real-World Assets (RWA) will bring about three major transformations:

1. As asset liquidity increases, the total asset scale of society will expand.

2. Lowering the barriers to asset digitization will usher in a comprehensive era of “self-financing.”

3. RWA can effectively eliminate unfair trading practices caused by information asymmetry in traditional financial markets.

CMTO Eric: Thank you, Kevin, for your valuable insights! Now, we’ll move on to the community Q&A session.

Please post your questions directly in the chat. I will select several high-quality questions most relevant to today’s topic for Kevin to answer. You now have 5 minutes to submit your questions. Each selected question will receive a 250 MAN reward.

Over to the community now.

Sercan : Let me start…

Question: Today, the most commonly tokenized assets are government bonds, real estate, and funds. In your view, which RWA category will grow the fastest over the next three years? Which category should MATRIX focus on? Thank you.

Kevin: In my view, equities will be the fastest-moving offline assets to undergo RWA tokenization over the next three years. This is evident from recent business shifts at many exchanges, including Nasdaq for example, Nasdaq’s upcoming launch of 24-hour trading is a clear signal of crypto’s integration with traditional stock markets.

As for MATRIX, if I recall correctly, its foundation is in Hong Kong. I suggest MATRIX explore RWA initiatives actively promoted by the Hong Kong government. To my knowledge, numerous new energy companies in Hong Kong are developing RWAs, which aligns well with MATRIX’s AI technology focus. I believe these companies will have substantial AI technology needs beyond their RWA requirements.

Question (Enrique): When RWA tokenization merges with the DeFi world, could it truly become the foundation of a new global financial system, or will it remain a “digital version of the old system” under the control of existing financial giants?

Kevin: As I mentioned in a previous response, I believe RWA will effectively expand the total asset base of the entire world. Within this newly added market segment, new rules will also emerge. Just as the giants of traditional finance have far less influence over crypto than they do in conventional financial markets, new power centers will inevitably rise as new markets and regulations gradually take shape. However, I believe that in Web3 financial markets, these new giants will not emerge as individual entities but rather as collective groups. This aligns perfectly with the nature of the Web3 world.

CMTO Eric: Thank you Kevin. Thank you for sharing your valuable knowledge with us. We're glad to have you here.