Tokenized TradFi credit retains 68% of buyers vs 28% for crypto-native
In brief
- TradFi-backed credit funds retained 68% of buyers after one year versus 28% for crypto-native products
- Arrakis Finance analyzed $91.3 billion in gross acquisitions across ten tokenized yield products
- DAO and protocol treasuries accounted for 66% of demand; traditional institutions showed zero participation
- RWA sector grew 179% year-over-year, reaching $33.8 billion by July 2026
The Retention Gap
Arrakis Finance published an onchain analysis on July 23 examining the behavior of 71,697 buyers across ten tokenized dollar-yield products with total gross acquisitions of $91.3 billion. The data tells a clear story: stability wins. Tokenized TradFi credit funds retained 68% of their buyers after one year, while treasury products held onto 60%. By contrast, crypto-native credit and carry products managed a paltry 28%.
The gap reflects investor appetite for yield backed by real collateral rather than protocol mechanics alone. TradFi-linked tokenized products offer exposure to loans, bonds, and receivables with predictable cash flows. Crypto-native alternatives rely on leverage, liquidation mechanics, and protocol incentives—models that collapse when market conditions shift.
Where the Demand Came From
Demand came almost entirely from onchain entities. Of the $12.4 billion in recorded demand that Arrakis tracked, 66% came from decentralized protocol and DAO treasuries. Notably, traditional institutions like pension funds, asset managers, and banks showed zero participation in these acquisitions.
That absence is telling. Institutional capital hasn't yet entered tokenized yield markets at scale, despite regulatory clarity in some jurisdictions. The buyers remain crypto-native treasuries and protocols seeking yield on idle assets. This concentration creates a structural dependency: if protocol treasuries rotate out of tokenized yields, volumes could crater.
Market Structure and Scale
The median check size for Centrifuge's JAAA product clocked in at roughly $29 million—approximately three times larger than the next-biggest product in the category. Large tickets suggest institutional-grade buyers, even if they're DAOs rather than traditional firms.
Settlement patterns show USDC dominance. Around 80% of all acquisitions settled in USDC, accounting for approximately $17.4 billion in volume. Secondary-market liquidity remains underdeveloped. Secondary-market purchases accounted for less than 6% of overall volume.
Sector Growth and Leverage Constraints
The RWA sector itself is expanding rapidly. The RWA sector grew 179% year over year, surpassing $33.8 billion by July 2026. Most of that growth reflects new capital inflows rather than existing buyers rotating between products.
Leverage remains minimal across the ecosystem. Leverage usage across these products remains low and largely restricted, confined to select offerings like mF-ONE and AA_FalconXUSDC. This conservative structure suggests builders prioritize stability over yield amplification—a design choice that likely contributes to higher retention.
