Crypto exchanges are making a concerted effort: from initial indifference to now learning frame by frame.

A recent change in the crypto world is quite interesting.

Previously, many people in the crypto community looked down on the US stock market. They thought it was slow, its price increases weren't exciting enough, it had to open and close at the market, and it wasn't like on-chain assets that could be traded 24/7.

Back then, people were more interested in discussing public chains, DeFi, NFTs, Memes, and the next 100x narrative. The US stock market was once seen as backward in the crypto world; many considered it part of the old world of traditional finance—too rigid and too boring.

But things are different now. More and more crypto traders are starting to focus on names like Nvidia, Microsoft, Apple, Tesla, and OpenAI. Entrepreneurs are looking at AI, investors and speculators are looking at Nasdaq, and exchanges are starting to incorporate traditional financial assets like US stocks, ETFs, gold, and forex into their crypto account systems.

It's somewhat a case of "from initial indifference to now learning frame by frame." Crypto enthusiasts didn't suddenly fall in love with value investing; the reality is that the crypto market's own narratives have diminished, and liquidity isn't as abundant as before. After the Bitcoin ETF, mainstream assets are increasingly priced by macro funds and traditional financial products; the continued appeal of altcoins, memes, and pure on-chain stories has declined; and the AI ​​wave has pulled the world's hottest money, strongest entrepreneurs, and best storytelling companies back to traditional markets. With attention, liquidity, and user trading desires all flowing towards AI stocks and traditional assets, crypto exchanges certainly won't just stand still waiting for the next wave of new coin narratives. Therefore, the recent resurgence of on-chain US stocks is not just a rehash of RWA, but rather a learning experience for crypto exchanges: if users are no longer satisfied with simply buying coins, then platforms need to integrate the assets users want to trade. Attention has shifted to US stocks. The impact of AI on the crypto industry is not just about whether the "AI + Crypto" track has succeeded. A more direct impact is that it has changed the direction of market attention. In the past, the crypto market was best at creating new asset symbols. A new public chain, a new protocol, or a new economic model could attract capital. But this round of AI is different. It has real companies, revenue growth, computing power investment, cloud service orders, chip supply and demand, and listed company financial reports in the traditional market. Investors may not understand the details of large-scale model training, but they can understand how much Nvidia has risen, how much Microsoft has invested, whether Apple will integrate AI, and whether Meta will continue to pour money into acquiring computing power. This puts real pressure on the crypto market. Previously, many entrepreneurs, investors, and speculators naturally focused their attention on new on-chain assets. Now, the same group will spend their time on AI companies, traditional US stocks, options, stock indices, gold, and macro trading. The crypto world's strongest ability used to be creating the imagination of "the next big thing"; but when a truly bigger event occurs in the external world, the industry's internal narrative is clearly not exciting enough. Exchanges are the first institutions to feel this change. If users don't trade, the platform doesn't collect fees; if users only want to trade BTC and ETH, the platform's growth is limited; if users' funds and attention flow to US stocks, AI stocks, ETFs, and gold, the platform must find ways to bring these assets back into its account system. This is why various exchanges have recently been vigorously promoting the tokenization of assets such as US stocks. Exchanges are starting to learn. On-chain US stocks sound like "putting stocks on the blockchain," but the real difficulty lies not in the words "on-chain." The difficulty lies in the entire set of traditional financial rules behind stocks. Who holds the underlying stocks? Which custodian institution holds the assets? Are users buying stocks, certificates, derivatives, or platform-internal price exposure? How are dividends, stock splits, mergers, suspensions, and delistings handled? After a platform goes bankrupt, do users have rights to the underlying assets? Which regions' users are prohibited from buying? How are identity verification and suitability measures implemented? These were questions many in the early days of the cryptocurrency community didn't like. People preferred to talk about decentralization, permissionless trading, and free liquidity. However, once the underlying assets become Apple, Nvidia, Tesla, and S&P ETFs, exchanges can no longer solve all problems with a single "on-chain freedom" rhetoric. They must learn from traditional finance frame by frame: how brokerages handle custody, how funds disclose information, how exchanges handle corporate actions, and why regulators are so concerned about investor protection. Taking on-chain US stocks as an example, mainstream exchanges currently have several different development models: On-chain US stocks: exchanges are learning different lessons. These products may look similar on the front end: users see stock codes, real-time prices, price changes, buy and sell buttons, and settlement is done using stablecoins like USDT and USDC. However, the legal relationships behind the scenes are completely different. The models are different. The first type is asset-backed paths like xStocks under Backed. The core logic of xStocks is to turn publicly listed stocks or ETFs into on-chain transferable tracking certificates. The Kraken page shows that xStocks is open to some non-US users and can be traded 24/5 on Kraken. After being withdrawn to a self-custodied wallet, it can be transferred on-chain 24/7. Kraken also clearly states that xStocks is not open to the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, etc., and holders obtain price exposure, not voting rights like traditional stocks. Bybit's xStocks FAQ also states the issue directly: investing in xStocks is not equivalent to directly investing in the underlying stocks or company; holders do not acquire voting rights, dividend rights, or legal claims to the underlying shares in the event of company liquidation. Bybit also separates xStocks spot trading and stock CFDs (Contracts for Difference) into two different entry points. This distinction is crucial because even when viewing the prices of Apple and Nvidia, the underlying rights relationships of spot tokens and contract products are completely different. The second type is the issuance network plus distribution network model, such as Ondo Global Markets. On May 11, 2026, Ondo disclosed that the total value locked in Ondo Global Markets exceeded $1 billion, covering more than 260 US stocks and ETFs, and reaching users through networks such as Solana, Ethereum, and BNB Chain, as well as wallets, exchanges, and protocols such as Binance, Bitget, and MetaMask. It emphasizes that each token is backed by underlying securities held by US-registered broker-dealers and tracks total returns including dividends. The key to this model is that the issuer, custodian, on-chain contracts, wallets, and exchanges together form a distribution network. Exchanges primarily act as gateways and liquidity providers, while users access traditional financial assets through familiar crypto interfaces. The third category is a more platform-based approach, like Bitget. In 2026, Bitget divided US stock trading into two main categories: tokenized stocks and USDT-margined perpetual stocks. Its strategy is clear: to allow users to trade crypto assets, stock-related products, ETFs, gold, and other assets within a single, so-called Universal Exchange account, without leaving their crypto accounts to open brokerage accounts. In March 2026, Bitget introduced Ondo Global Markets' tokenized stocks and ETFs to the spot market, covering names like Tesla, Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, and AMD. In May 2026, it launched Reality, focusing on rTokens, on-chain credentials pegged 1:1 to US stocks or ETFs. Public information shows that Reality is attempting to integrate functions such as underlying asset custody, proof of reserves, dividend distribution, stock split and consolidation mapping, unified account margin, grid trading, copy trading, and staking lending. This step is representative. It illustrates that exchanges are not satisfied with simply "listing a stock token trading pair," but rather want to turn US stock exposure into a financial component within the platform. Users are not just buying a price symbol; they may also use it as margin, for strategy building, or for lending. Convenience is indeed improved, but risks also accumulate: securities risk, platform risk, stablecoin risk, leverage risk, and liquidity risk can overlap within the same account. The fourth type is the path taken by platforms like Robinhood and Coinbase, which are more focused on derivatives or compliant market entry points. Robinhood launched Stock Tokens in the EU in 2025. Its official page now displays over 2,000 stock tokens related to US stocks and ETPs (Exchange Traded Products). However, it clearly states that Stock Tokens are derivative contracts between users and Robinhood, reflecting the price of underlying securities but not granting them rights, and are subject to risks such as liquidity, exchange rates, and service provider bankruptcy. Coinbase takes a slightly different approach. In March 2026, it launched perpetual stock contracts, providing qualified users outside the US with 24/7 leveraged synthetic exposure to US-listed stocks, settled in USDC, and integrated with Coinbase International Exchange's derivatives system. This approach doesn't allow users to directly hold on-chain stocks; instead, it uses the perpetual contract engine, already familiar to crypto exchanges, to handle users' trading demands for US stock prices. Looking at these categories together, you'll find that exchanges focusing on on-chain US stocks doesn't mean they're all doing the same thing. Some platforms are developing security tokens, some are focusing on distribution, some are creating multi-asset accounts, and some are working on synthetic derivatives. They all learn from the traffic and trading demands of traditional financial assets, but their chosen legal structures and risk-bearing methods differ. The opportunity lies in the background. For entrepreneurs, on-chain US stocks certainly present opportunities, but not in "helping retail investors find a roundabout way to buy US stocks." If a team promotes on-chain US stocks to domestic users, teaching them how to register, deposit funds, generate referrals through commissions, provide Chinese customer service, organize community investment advisors, and process trading orders, or provides trading software, website operation, customer service, and marketing support for overseas platforms in China, changing the entry point from a brokerage app to a wallet, and the settlement currency from USD to stablecoins, the nature of the risk will not automatically change. A more realistic opportunity may lie in the background. Issuers need proof of underlying asset custody and reserves, independent audits, KYC, AML (Anti-Money Laundering), and KYT (Know Your Customer) on-chain transaction risk monitoring. Trading platforms need address risk scoring, sanctions list screening, user regional restrictions, accredited investor assessment, suspicious transaction monitoring, risk disclosure, and transaction behavior tracking. Wallets and protocols need oracles, price deviation alerts, liquidation modules, transfer restrictions, smart contract audits, corporate action handling, and tax reconciliation tools. These tasks may not sound as exciting as "buying Nvidia on-chain," but they are closer to a long-term, profitable infrastructure business. Especially for Chinese Web3 teams, if you serve compliant overseas issuers, licensed brokers, asset management institutions, custodians, wallets, or exchanges, and have a clear business structure that doesn't handle user funds, facilitate transactions with domestic users, market to the domestic public, or promise returns, the compliance space is much larger than directly operating a C-end trading channel. However, "I'm just doing technical work" isn't a foolproof excuse. Startup teams need to examine their revenue and system integration points: Who are the clients? What data does the system process? Does it transmit trading instructions? Does it handle user funds? Does it charge based on trading volume or commissions? Are they aware of any illegal customer acquisition practices within China? Does it actually use content and community to help the platform achieve domestic sales? A compliance risk control tool and a system that helps overseas platforms acquire customers, open accounts, deposit funds, and trade within China are completely different in legal nature. Individual users should note: For individual users, the most important thing to remember about on-chain US stocks is not to mistake a "trading page resembling stocks" for "I already own stocks." First, you need to understand exactly what you're buying. Is it a certificate backed by underlying stocks, a structured product, a platform derivative contract, or a perpetual stock contract? Is there a redemption mechanism? Does it include voting rights? How are dividends handled? Do users have any claim to the underlying assets if the platform or issuer goes bankrupt? These questions aren't addressed in price charts, but in legal documents, risk disclosures, and product terms. Secondly, consider your own identity as a buyer. Many products claim to be for non-US users, but "non-US" doesn't mean "anyone in the world can buy," nor does it mean mainland Chinese residents can bypass platform restrictions to buy directly. If a user enters the platform using a VPN, overseas phone number, nominee identity, or a false identity, they may seem successful in the short term, but once risk control, freezing, liquidation, or disputes are triggered, the difficulty of protecting their rights will significantly increase. Thirdly, pay attention to the compliance of the source of funds. There are inherent boundaries between domestic personal foreign exchange purchases and overseas securities investment. If someone couldn't legally use their personal foreign exchange quota to buy overseas stocks before, and now tries to convert it to stablecoins before buying on-chain US stocks, simply adding an extra wallet step won't make the use of funds compliant. On February 6, 2026, eight departments, including the People's Bank of China and the China Securities Regulatory Commission, issued the "Notice on Further Preventing and Handling Risks Related to Virtual Currencies" (Yinfa [2026] No. 42), which reiterated that virtual currencies do not have the same legal status as legal tender and included activities such as the exchange of legal tender and virtual currencies, the exchange between virtual currencies, token issuance financing, and trading of virtual currency-related financial products in the scope of strictly prohibited and legally banned illegal financial activities. The document also incorporated the tokenization of real-world assets into the regulatory framework. In the context of on-chain US stocks, if domestic users use stablecoins to access overseas stock tokens, the risks may simultaneously overlap with those related to securities investment, foreign exchange use, virtual currency trading, anti-money laundering, taxation, and cross-border disputes. US regulators also do not treat "on-chain" as magic. A US staff statement in January 2026 regarding tokenized securities stated that if a financial instrument is a security, even if it is represented as a crypto asset or its ownership is recorded on one or more crypto networks, it does not change the applicability of US federal securities laws. After frame-by-frame learning, the issue of on-chain US stocks isn't just about the excitement of "the crypto world can finally buy US stocks," but rather the crypto industry acknowledging its need to learn from traditional finance. Previously, traditional finance was perceived as slow, cumbersome, conservative, and cumbersome. Looking back now, many of those tedious aspects are precisely the foundation for the long-term operation of financial products. Custody, auditing, suitability, investor protection, corporate action, taxation, and dispute resolution—each seemingly unappealing on its own—are essential; without any one of these, putting real assets on-chain becomes a beautiful but risky trading page. Therefore, I don't believe on-chain US stocks are just a short-term trend. It reflects a shift in the identity of crypto exchanges: exchanges are no longer just places to trade crypto assets, but are becoming comprehensive financial gateways. In the future, users may be able to view BTC, ETH, Nvidia, S&P ETFs, gold, forex, and stablecoin yield products in the same account. If this direction proves successful, crypto accounts will increasingly resemble a global financial operating system. However, this process won't automatically become simpler just because blockchain is used. On the contrary, the closer it gets to real financial assets, the more it will have to confront real financial rules. For entrepreneurs, the opportunity lies in infrastructure and compliance services, not in finding regulatory loopholes for users. For individual users, the value lies in understanding new asset forms, not in using them as new avenues to circumvent securities, foreign exchange, and cryptocurrency regulations. In the past, the crypto market liked to claim it would change traditional finance. Now it's starting to learn from traditional finance frame by frame. This is the lesson the crypto market must learn as it transitions from a narrative-driven market to a financial market. This shift may not be romantic, but it's very realistic.