How the tokenization of US stocks will create a huge bubble in the future

Author: US Stock Beta Brother, X@ChainTrust0103

You start with $1 million USDC, which is a compliant stablecoin, which is used to buy tokenized TSLA on a regulated platform on the chain, that is, a digital asset (such as TSLA-T) that represents real Tesla shares 1:1. This token is kept by a securities custodian for the corresponding shares and is issued on a compliant chain through Coinbase or a similar platform. At this point, your $1 million has become an "on-chain mirror of real equity." Next, you cross-chain bridge TSLA-T to a high-freedom, non-custodial DeFi chain (such as Arbitrum or Blast), lock the original token with a bridge contract, and release a mapped asset, such as wTSLA, on the target chain. At this point, you hold an on-chain financial asset "backed by real equity", which is accepted as a high-grade collateral by the DeFi protocol.

Then, you pledge wTSLA to a lending protocol (such as Morpho, Silo, Gearbox, etc.) and lend $900,000 in USDT or DAI, which are stablecoins that can be arbitrarily mobilized and exchanged in the DeFi system. You exchange the borrowed funds for USDC or USDP through Curve or OTC channels, and then withdraw them to your bank account through centralized withdrawal paths (such as Coinbase, Kraken, Silvergate), turning them into real-world US dollar fiat currency. At this point, you have used the tokenized TSLA, the "on-chain shell" of the real asset, to withdraw $900,000 in off-chain cash, which is freely usable, consumable, and investable in economic terms. You can use it to buy Tesla shares again at the brokerage and enter the off-chain securities system.

After completing the off-chain purchase, you go through the same process again: tokenize the real stock, generate TSLA-T, bridge it to wTSLA again, and cycle through mortgage, lending, currency exchange, and withdrawal. This series of operations essentially packages the originally static equity assets into an on-chain system that can release "stablecoin debt", and the released debt is turned into real-world available cash through the bridging and liquidation mechanism. No new funds are required for each cycle, and the actual assets (Tesla stocks) are just "shifted" in your hands, while new cash available quotas are continuously released on the chain. This is what you said in your picture: "As long as Tesla does not fluctuate much, my stocks are pledged on the chain, and there will be an extra 900,000 USD fiat currency outside" - to be precise, you convert static assets into off-chain cash liquidity through a high-frequency, low-friction tokenization → lending → cash-out cycle, release nearly equivalent loan funds in each round, and finally achieve asset outflow and credit layer amplification.

In this structure, tokenized stocks do not need to be high-circulation, high-profile big tickets like TSLA. On the contrary, it is a rational choice to choose a small-cap stock with poor liquidity and easy control (such as OTC market stocks, Penny Stocks, or non-mainstream targets under the custody of certain compliant securities firms). You can use millions of dollars to control 10%-30% of its circulating market, quietly raise the price off the chain, and then tokenize this stock into a mapped asset on the chain, bridge it to the DeFi chain, and then use this wSTOCK that you have raised the price as collateral to borrow a large number of stablecoins. Since most on-chain protocols only recognize oracle prices and surface volatility, as long as you increase the off-chain market value and transaction depth - even for just a few trading days - the chain will consider this to be a "high-quality, high-value" compliant asset, thereby releasing a very high loan amount. TVL continues to grow in this process, because the stablecoins released by each loan are injected into new liquidity pools (LP, market making, re-staking), and you can even artificially create a liquidity growth curve, so that the protocol, community, and even the on-chain data analysis platform believe that this is the "blueprint for the next generation of on-chain asset financialization." You can completely make a "growth narrative": saying that this type of asset can connect TradFi and DeFi, and saying that this is part of the RWA wave. Once the market and the protocol believe this story, your cash-out channel will be opened. After you have completed several rounds of cashing out and a large number of stocks held off-chain have been successfully sold at high prices, you only need to stop supporting the price at a certain point - such as withdrawing LP or letting liquidation - the on-chain price of this stock will collapse, the protocol liquidation system will take over, and you have already completed the fiat currency escape. SBF uses FTT as collateral assets, repeatedly pledging, borrowing, repurchasing, and re-pulling between FTX and Alameda, forming a completely closed-loop, seemingly risk-free nesting cycle. It's just that he uses centralized ledgers and his own platform, without the transparency and decentralization illusion on the chain. What you are talking about now is essentially copying this structure to the chain, using the shell of real securities and the anchoring of regulatory stablecoins to give it "legitimacy", but its core is still collateral value manipulation + debt cashing out + liquidity transfer + directional collapse. This is a high-level version of the FTT explosion script.

About supervision:

Cross-chain is essentially a technical "regulatory escape route". When users hold regulated assets (such as USDC or tokenized TSLA) on a compliant chain (such as Base, Ethereum mainnet), these assets are subject to clear identity binding, source of funds audit and compliance obligations. However, once users bridge these assets to the target chain (such as Arbitrum, Solana, Blast or any L2 chain) through a cross-chain bridge, the original assets are usually frozen in the lock contract of the bridge, and then a "mapped asset" (wrapped token) is generated on the target chain. This wrapped asset is a new native asset on the chain both legally and technically, and is no longer directly controlled by custodians such as Circle or Coinbase, and is no longer directly in the compliance domain. At this point, no matter how compliant the address on the regulatory chain is, as long as the target chain does not conduct KYC, the user immediately enters a free system with identity decoupling. More importantly, the regulatory framework itself is not based on "asset path", but on "territory" and "person". In other words, US regulation can only govern Americans or companies registered in the United States, but cannot govern you operating an anonymous wallet address in the Blast chain, zkSync, or even a DeFi protocol without entity endorsement. Regulation cannot prevent you from using cross-chain protocols such as LayerZero, Wormhole, and Celer, because most of these protocols themselves are decentralized deployments and non-shutdownable contract sets. They only execute oracles and Merkle proofs, without identifying users and without checking the purpose of the bridge. If you further cross-chain through privacy-enhancing technologies (such as Tornado Router and zk-rollup privacy bridges), on-chain behavior will become highly untraceable. Even if the regulator has your source KYC identity, it cannot reconstruct your asset trajectory on the target chain. Therefore, in the entire on-chain financial system, the cross-chain bridge actually assumes the role of an "asset liberalization hub": it does not issue additional funds or provide leverage, but it allows compliant assets to be converted into non-compliant forms, thereby entering an unlimited on-chain liquidity cycle. This is not a simple data transmission, but a process of stripping away compliance constraints. This also explains why even though USDC is a regulated asset with 100% reserve, after being bridged, the wrapped USDC (or any mapped asset) can still participate in a series of non-compliant activities such as leverage, lending, staking, liquidity mining, and indirectly release the demand for USDC itself and liquidity utilization. At present, the regulator can only freeze the entrance or original custody assets on the bridge side, but cannot recover the mapped coins on the other side of the bridge, which constitutes an arbitrage path of real finance → on-chain credit → off-chain redeemable, and the regulator has no technical sovereignty, no judicial coercion, and no legislative definition of the regulatory closed loop.

Government intention:

My guess first.

First, the US government is well aware that under the irreversible trend of global digital financial development, if the US dollar is not "put on the chain", the reserve anchoring of on-chain assets in the future may turn to Bitcoin, Ethereum, or even RMB digital assets. This is already evident from Tether's global dominance: the vast majority of USDT circulation is not in the United States, but in the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and South America. It is the most typical unofficial version of the offshore dollar. If the dominance of the dollar stablecoin is controlled by an offshore black box system, rather than issued by companies such as Circle and Paxos that are subject to U.S. legal system, the United States will lose its voice in future global finance. Therefore, the legalization of companies such as Circle and Coinbase through the "2025 Stablecoin Act" is not a regulatory concession, but a "recruitment" - through compliant stablecoins to create a "chain version of the Federal Reserve banknotes", so that global users will unknowingly choose the U.S. dollar as an on-chain reserve asset.

Secondly, the U.S. capital market is proud of its huge equity and bond underlying asset pools, and its main export is not products, but assets and institutional trust. Today, with the rapid expansion of on-chain finance, the United States allows real financial assets such as tokenized TSLA and tokenized T-bill to be legally mapped to the blockchain. In essence, it is to ensure that global funds can only "mint, borrow, and clear around US assets" so as to maintain dominance over financial data and risk pricing systems. The regulators certainly know that there are DeFi leveraged nesting dolls and cross-chain regulatory loopholes on the chain, but they allow all this to exist because the US dollar is still the entry point for all bridges, the end point of all clearing pairs, and the center of all valuation anchors. Under this structure, even if the United States does not directly control each chain, it controls the "value language" of all chains.

In short, the US government does this not because they believe that the chain is safe, nor do they want DeFi to prosper freely, but because this is their only realistic choice to ensure that the US dollar dominates the on-chain world: only by sending the US dollar and US stocks to the chain and making Circle and Coinbase the "Citibank of the DeFi world" can they be qualified to sit at the main table of the future financial order. This is a high-dimensional financial strategic arrangement that allows you to be crazy and gamble, but all gambling tables must use US dollar chips, bet on US assets, and settle accounts through the Federal Reserve.