Lately, the more I look at RWA on the chain, the more uncomfortable I feel. They say it's "on-chain liquidity," but often it's more like a liquidity illusion: you see the pool looks deep, but when you actually want to redeem, you find a bunch of terms—T+N, limits, windows, and even small print like "redeem suspension"... For someone like me who loves calculating costs, I can only treat the redemption rules as the main line, with returns taking a backseat.

The new L1/L2 projects that try to boost TVL with incentives are pretty much the same. Old users complain that "mining, selling, and dumping" isn't without reason; liquidity comes quickly and leaves just as fast. Thinking about it later, it's quite funny—everyone's chasing "exitability" on-chain, but exiting often isn't on the chain.

Anyway, when I deal with these kinds of projects now, I first break down the tasks: try with the minimum position, diversify across multiple addresses, see if the redemption terms are understandable, and check if there's a historical record of fulfillment—much more straightforward than those grand narratives in whitepapers.