How can Hong Kong seize the initiative in the global wave of asset tokenization?

Recently, asset tokenization has become a hot topic in the global financial sector. As the tokenization of real-world assets (RWA) accelerates into the mainstream, Hong Kong is building a new generation of financial infrastructure with a clear regulatory framework, open market strategies, and proactive policy innovations. However, in the second half of this competition, the key will no longer just be policy orientation, but whether the products truly align with market demand.

When a senior executive of a large asset management company stated that "every kind of asset can be tokenized," he was not describing a distant future, but rather a transformation that is happening right now. This evolution is reshaping the way capital is formed, the mechanism of asset distribution, and the pathways to accessing financial opportunities.

Currently, over $24 billion of RWA is circulating on public chains, covering yield-generating US Treasury bonds, private credit pools, tokenized commodities, and real estate, among others. This attempt, once regarded as a "crypto curiosity experiment", is becoming part of the global financial infrastructure, and the underlying pipeline of capital markets is quietly being restructured.

On June 26, Hong Kong released the "Digital Asset Development Policy Statement 2.0", which clearly expressed its intention to lead this transformation. The statement introduced the "Leap" regulatory framework, expanding the regulatory scope to include stablecoin issuers, custodians, and RWA platforms. More importantly, it sends a clear signal: Hong Kong is not just allowing tokenization, but is actively advocating for tokenization.

The "Leap" framework promotes the formation of a broader vision by establishing a stablecoin licensing system, clarifying the regulatory framework for tokenized ETFs, and continuing previous pilot projects in digital bonds and green finance, encouraging the tokenization of various assets ranging from precious metals to renewable energy infrastructure.

The approach in Hong Kong stands in stark contrast to other markets. In comparison, Singapore has adopted a more cautious approach, focusing on institutional participation and restricting retail investors; whereas Hong Kong has chosen a broader and more inclusive path. It allows retail users to participate while establishing clear suitability rules, thereby expanding the potential market space.

Compared to the European Union's regulatory framework for the cryptocurrency market and the fragmented regulatory environment in the United States, Hong Kong offers a more unified, principle-based system that provides the clarity needed by innovators and investors.

However, simply laying the tracks does not mean that the train can run on time. Issuing a tokenized asset is easy; the challenge lies in whether there are people willing to hold, trade, and trust it. Too many tokenized projects have come to understand this point through pitfalls: the technology is fine, but the market does not buy in. Lacking distribution channels, market demand, or actual relevance, many products ultimately end up being shelved.

The bottleneck is not in technology, nor in regulation, but in whether the commercial value truly exists. The real test is: Does a certain tokenized asset really solve a problem for a clearly defined user group?

Of course, there are also projects that have passed this test and successfully expanded. For example, tokenized US Treasury products have gained widespread adoption among global savers due to their stable and transparent yields, especially in emerging markets that lack secure income channels. Additionally, certain protocols have opened new paths in the private credit sector by matching institutional borrowers with crypto-native lenders, achieving on-chain transparent risk control and making products bidirectionally available.

These successes do not stem from novel technologies, but from the perfect match of assets, users, and packaging.

The local ecosystem in Hong Kong is also evolving in this direction. The Hong Kong Monetary Authority's "Project Ensemble" is experimenting with tokenization scenarios for bonds, funds, carbon credits, charging infrastructure, and supply chain finance. These projects hold significant potential, but a blockbuster project that can truly connect the three elements of assets, audience, and use cases on a large scale has yet to emerge.

All elements are in place, and what is needed next is "market traction". Hong Kong has laid a solid foundation: clear regulations, institutional recognition, and credible projects driven by public-private collaboration are continuously advancing. Hong Kong is increasingly seen as a safe and well-structured experimental environment for digital assets, coupled with its potential as a "stronghold" of China’s digital asset strategy, which makes its significance extend far beyond the local market itself.

But the most challenging part is just beginning. The next phase of competition will be determined by "product-market fit," rather than more policies. Can Hong Kong attract Southeast Asian savers to invest in truly profitable stablecoin products? Can it connect China's industrial assets to global capital through compliant digital packaging? Can it incubate a new generation of RWA products that are not only legal and compliant, but also genuinely in demand in the market?

These issues will determine whether RWA is just a temporary trend or can become a lasting transformation; it will also determine whether Hong Kong can become the global capital of tokenization in this new era. If successful, Hong Kong will not only be a leader but also one of the definers of future financial forms.