Recently looking at a bunch of RWA on-chain projects, that "liquidity" curve on the page looks pretty good, but I always feel like it's a bit of an illusion... Basically, whether you can redeem at any time depends on how strict the redemption terms are written. T+几, window periods, limits, if there's a risk control pause, these aren't accounted for in advance; even if the chain is lively, it’s only "tradeable," not necessarily "cashable." I now treat the worst-case redemption scenario as a cost and record it, otherwise my expectations are all over the place.

By the way, recently everyone has been complaining that miners/validators are eating too much MEV and that ordering is unfair. I can empathize: you think you're queuing on the chain, but someone is cutting in line. If the underlying layer of RWA also adds an uncertainty of "who goes first or second," then liquidity becomes more like a performance. Anyway, I’ll start with a "backup" mindset: don’t bet on a single provider for the same type of task, diversify if possible, so even if it crashes, the entire note set isn’t invalidated.