Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Create P2E Games Strategically That Can Actually Make Money

Published

on

Crypto exchange software

Play-to-earn or P2E game development has moved past the hype cycle. What once looked like a fast-money opportunity has evolved into something far more serious. It has matured into a serious digital business model where games operate as revenue ecosystems, community platforms, and asset economies. 

Most P2E games don’t fail because the idea is bad. They fail because the business model is weak. Enterprises planning to create P2E games today are not chasing hype, they are looking for:

  • New revenue channels
  • Digital asset economies
  • Community ownership models
  • Long-term user engagement
  • Monetizable ecosystems

The opportunity is real. However, profitability in the P2E model is engineered, not assumed. Some P2E games become thriving ecosystems, whereas others collapse within months. The difference is not luck. It is strategy, architecture, and execution.

If your goal is to create a P2E game that actually makes money, the approach must be strategic from day one. For enterprises considering P2E game development, understanding what actually drives profitability is the first step toward building a platform that lasts.

The Reality Check: Why Most Early P2E Games Failed

The early P2E wave taught the market expensive lessons. Projects focused on:

Advertisement
  • Aggressive token rewards
  • Fast user acquisition
  • Speculative demand

Although these worked for a short time, they failed in the long run since they ignored the fundamentals:

  • Gameplay quality
  • Long-term economy modeling
  • LiveOps planning 
  • Anti-cheat systems
  • Retention mechanics
  • Deflationary token supply
  • Security safeguards
  • Sustainable monetization

The result?

Short growth spikes followed by:

  • Token crashes
  • User churn
  • Broken economies
  • Damaged brand trust

For enterprises, these failures are not just technical, they are reputational and financial risks. Thus, the ones entering the P2E market today cannot afford to repeat these mistakes. They need to understand that the market is more mature. Players are more informed. Competition is far stronger. A profitable P2E ecosystem in 2026 must be engineered like a business platform, not a marketing experiment. 

What “Actually Making Money” Means in P2E

Profitability in P2E game development does not mean:

  • Paying players endlessly
  • Printing tokens
  • Relying on hype cycles

It means building a system where:

  • Players spend because they enjoy the experience
  • Assets hold perceived value
  • The economy is balanced
  • Monetization is diversified
  • Engagement drives revenue

A profitable P2E ecosystem behaves more like a SaaS platform with an in-game economy than just a reward faucet.

Massive Opportunities Still Exist in P2E

In spite of early failures, enterprise interest in P2E is increasing. Serious organizations understand that massive opportunities still exist in the field and when designed correctly, P2E ecosystems unlock:

1. Community-Driven Growth

Players become stakeholders. Ownership increases emotional investment and retention.

Advertisement
2. Long-Term Monetization

NFTs, premium features, and marketplaces create recurring revenue streams.

3. Stronger User Loyalty

Ownership models keep users engaged beyond traditional game cycles.

4. New Business Models

P2E enables creator economies, branded ecosystems, and digital asset markets.

5. Data-Driven Engagement

On-chain data enables precise user behavior insights.

Advertisement

For enterprises, P2E game development is not just gaming. It is a hybrid of product, platform, and community economy.

Want to Build Revenue-Generating P2E Games?

The Foundations of a Profitable P2E Game

Successful P2E platforms share structural similarities. They are not built around rewards. They are built around retention and sustainability.

1) Gameplay is the Core Product

A P2E game that is not fun is a short-term campaign, not a business. Enterprises building profitable ecosystems invest heavily in:

  • Core gameplay loops
  • Skill-based mechanics
  • Progression systems
  • Competitive elements
  • Social interaction layers

When players stay for gameplay, earnings become an enhancer rather than the sole driver. This, in turn, plays a significant role in stabilizing user behavior and protects the economy from volatility.

2) Tokenomics is Treated as Financial Architecture

Tokenomics is not a whitepaper exercise. It is economic engineering. A profitable model requires:

Advertisement
  • Controlled emissions
  • Utility-driven demand
  • Multiple token sinks
  • Governance logic
  • Long-term value design

Poor token design is one of the fastest ways to destroy a P2E ecosystem. Enterprises that invest in proper modeling build economies that survive market cycles.

3) Monetization is Multi-Layered

Relying only on token rewards is a risky affair. High-performing P2E ecosystems diversify revenue through the following to create stability and predictable revenue.

  • NFT asset ownership
  • Cosmetic upgrades
  • Battle passes
  • Subscription access
  • Marketplace fees
  • Brand collaborations
  • Licensing opportunities
4) Infrastructure is Built for Scale

Viral success can break weak systems. Enterprise-grade P2E platforms require the following, without which user growth becomes a liability instead of an asset.

  • Hybrid on-chain/off-chain architecture
  • Low-latency backend systems
  • Secure wallet integrations
  • High-throughput transaction handling
  • Cloud-native scaling pipelines
5) LiveOps is Treated as a Business Function

P2E ecosystems are not “launch and forget” products. They require:

  • Seasonal updates
  • Reward tuning
  • Economy balancing
  • Event-driven engagement
  • Real-time analytics
  • Continuous content rollout

This keeps engagement high and helps prevent economic stagnation.

The Hidden Risks Enterprises Must Consider

Many organizations underestimate the complexity of P2E game development. The hidden risks include:

  • Token inflation destroying value
  • Bot farming draining rewards
  • Security vulnerabilities in smart contracts
  • Regulatory uncertainty
  • Player churn from poor balance
  • Infrastructure overload during growth spikes

These risks do not appear in pitch decks. However, they determine success or failure. Enterprises that address these early gain a major advantage.

The Ideal Framework to Create Profitable P2E Games in 2026

Step 1: Start with Economic Modeling

Before development begins, simulate:

  • Token flows
  • Reward velocity
  • User growth scenarios
  • Sink mechanisms

This prevents structural weaknesses.

Step 2: Prioritize Retention Design

Design loops that encourage daily, weekly, and long-term engagement. Retention drives lifetime value more than rewards.

Advertisement
Step 3: Use Hybrid Blockchain Architecture

Keep high-frequency actions off-chain for speed and cost efficiency while maintaining on-chain ownership.

Step 4: Invest in Security Early

Security is not optional. Audits, anti-cheat systems, and wallet safeguards protect both users and brand reputation.

Step 5: Plan LiveOps Before Launch

A profitable ecosystem is continuously managed, not static.

Why Professional P2E Game Development Matters

Building a profitable P2E ecosystem requires multidisciplinary expertise:

Advertisement
  • Game design
  • Blockchain engineering
  • Tokenomics modeling
  • Security architecture
  • LiveOps strategy
  • Compliance awareness

It is exactly the reason why enterprises increasingly work with experienced P2E game development partners. A professional partner helps avoid costly missteps and accelerates time-to-market with scalable architecture.

Final Thoughts: Profitability is Engineered, Not Promised

The era of speculative P2E hype is over. The next generation of winners will be enterprises that treat P2E game development as a serious business model, backed by strong design, technical depth, and long-term planning.

Well-built ecosystems generate:

  • Sustainable revenue
  • Loyal communities
  • Scalable digital economies

Antier works with enterprises & studios to design and create P2E games engineered for sustainability, security, and profitability, not short-term hype. It is because in 2026, successful P2E games are not the ones that promise the most. They are the ones that are built to last and not fade away with the trend.

Frequently Asked Questions

01. What is the main reason most play-to-earn (P2E) games fail?

Most P2E games fail due to weak business models rather than bad ideas, often resulting from a lack of strategic planning and execution.

02. What should enterprises focus on when developing P2E games today?

Enterprises should focus on creating new revenue channels, digital asset economies, community ownership models, long-term user engagement, and monetizable ecosystems.

Advertisement
03. How does profitability in P2E game development differ from early P2E models?

Profitability in P2E game development today requires a strategic approach that prioritizes gameplay quality, long-term economy modeling, and sustainable monetization, rather than relying on aggressive token rewards or hype.

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

SBI Ripple Asia Receives Japanese Regulatory Green Light for XRPL Token Platform

Published

on

Brian Armstrong's Bold Prediction: AI Agents Will Soon Dominate Global Financial

Key Highlights

  • Japanese regulators authorize SBI Ripple Asia’s XRPL Token Platform
  • Platform facilitates regulated token creation under Japanese financial legislation
  • Businesses gain blockchain access through streamlined API connectivity
  • System operates within Japan’s prepaid payment regulatory structure
  • Strategic focus includes real-world applications and international payment corridors

Following regulatory authorization from Japanese financial authorities, SBI Ripple Asia has officially introduced its XRPL Token Platform. This blockchain-based infrastructure enables organizations to issue digital tokens while maintaining full compliance with Japan’s financial regulatory framework. The development represents a significant milestone in merging distributed ledger technology with traditional payment ecosystems.

Blockchain Platform Debuts with Enterprise API Capabilities

SBI Ripple Asia has finalized its XRPL Token Platform utilizing the XRP Ledger as its foundational technology. This infrastructure provides organizations with capabilities to create and administer digital tokens through on-chain mechanisms. Enterprise clients can integrate blockchain functionality into their existing systems via application programming interfaces without disrupting end-user experiences.

The platform architecture facilitates smooth incorporation with established digital services and customer-facing applications. End users gain access to tokenized financial instruments while maintaining familiar interaction patterns. Proprietary wallet management technology embedded in the system delivers robust security protocols for digital asset custody.

Compliance with Japan’s Payment Services Act forms a core component of the XRPL Token Platform’s operational framework. Organizations can launch tokenized prepaid financial products within established regulatory boundaries. The infrastructure supports enterprise-grade scalability across diverse operational contexts.

Official Registration Unlocks Compliant Digital Payment Products

On March 26, 2026, SBI Ripple Asia obtained official registration as an authorized issuer of third-party prepaid payment instruments. This regulatory milestone empowers the XRPL Token Platform to launch compliant digital financial offerings. The company now operates as a legitimate bridge connecting blockchain innovation with supervised financial services.

Advertisement

This official status reinforces the legal infrastructure supporting the XRPL Token Platform within Japan’s financial sector. The authorization permits issuance of prepaid payment products underpinned by blockchain tokens. Regulatory oversight mechanisms remain fully integrated throughout the operational framework.

Through this positioning, SBI Ripple Asia establishes itself within Japan’s regulated digital asset landscape. The platform supports expanded utilization of blockchain-powered payment solutions. This framework demonstrates increasing institutional commitment toward compliant tokenization strategies.

Strategic Roadmap Emphasizes Practical Implementation and Regional Payment Networks

SBI Ripple Asia intends to implement the XRPL Token Platform across geographically focused economic areas including tourism-intensive regions. The infrastructure will connect consumer transactions with digital reward mechanisms and payment processing systems. Novel approaches to customer loyalty initiatives and transaction-based incentives become feasible through this framework.

The platform aims to enhance operational scalability and reduce transaction costs throughout collaborative business networks. Strategic partnerships with regional businesses and municipal organizations form a central component of the expansion strategy. These alliances will accelerate implementation in tangible commercial settings.

Advertisement

SBI Ripple Asia maintains active research initiatives focused on XRPL applications within Asian payment channels. Collaborative investigation with South Korea’s DSRV targets improvements in international money transfer systems. The XRPL Token Platform holds potential to optimize transaction speed and cost-effectiveness for Japan-South Korea payment flows.

 

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Quantum threat to Bitcoin is real, but manageable, according to Wall Street broker Bernstein

Published

on

Quantum computing could break Bitcoin sooner, says Google

Wall Street broker Bernstein said the rise of quantum computing poses a credible but manageable threat to Bitcoin and the broader crypto ecosystem, as recent breakthroughs compress timelines for potential attacks on modern cryptography.

Advances such as Google Quantum AI’s reported reduction in qubit requirements suggest the risk is no longer a distant, decade-long concern, the broker noted. Still, the firm cautioned that scaling quantum systems to the level needed to break widely used encryption remains a complex, multi-step challenge.

“Quantum should be seen as a medium to long term system upgrade cycle rather than a risk,” analysts led by Gautam Chhugani said in the Wednesday report.

Quantum computing uses the principles of quantum mechanics rather than classical physics. Instead of binary bits, it relies on qubits that can exist in multiple states at once, a property known as superposition, allowing many possibilities to be processed simultaneously.

Advertisement

Combined with entanglement, this enables quantum systems to solve certain problems, such as breaking encryption, far more efficiently than classical computers.

Quantum computers could eventually weaken cryptographic systems like elliptic curve encryption, which underpin crypto wallets, by solving problems beyond the reach of classical machines. However, the report said the threat spans industries from finance to defense and should be viewed as a manageable, long-term risk rather than an existential one for Bitcoin.

Exposure is concentrated in roughly 1.7 million BTC held in older, “legacy” wallets, while newer practices and protocols reduce vulnerability. Bitcoin mining, which relies on SHA-based hashing, remains effectively secure even in advanced quantum scenarios, the broker said.

Bernstein expects the crypto industry to have sufficient time, around three to five years, to transition toward post-quantum cryptography, with upgrades such as new wallet standards, reduced address reuse and key rotation already under discussion.

Advertisement

One recent academic paper said that attacking the Bitcoin blockchain through quantum mining would demand the energy output of a star.

Read more: Attacking bitcoin mining with a quantum computer would require the energy of a star, academics say

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

Bitget Boss Gracy Chen Calls Hyperliquid a Fake DEX And Crypto Twitter Explodes

Published

on

🛡

Bitget CEO Gracy Chen posted on X on April 7, calling Hyperliquid ‘immature, unethical, and unprofessional’ – and branded the platform an overmarketed fake crypto DEX that poses ‘FTX 2.0’ risks to users. The post landed like a grenade on Crypto Twitter, igniting one of the sharpest CEX vs DEX exchanges the industry has seen in years.

This isn’t background noise. Hyperliquid has been pulling serious volume – consistently above $1B in daily perp trades, directly cannibalising the perpetuals business of mid-tier and top-tier centralised exchanges, including Bitget.

Key Takeaways:
  • The accusation: Gracy Chen, Bitget CEO, publicly called Hyperliquid an ‘overmarketed’ fake DEX on April 7, warning of systemic risks comparable to FTX and describing it as an ‘offshore CEX with no KYC/AML.’
  • The trigger: Hyperliquid’s small validator set unanimously delisted the JELLY memecoin perp market on March 26 and force-settled positions at $0.0095 after an attacker used a $6M short to exploit the HLP vault – exposing the platform’s centralized emergency override capability.
  • The structural critique: Chen argued that Hyperliquid’s mixed vaults expose all users to collective risk from individual manipulators, and that foundation-level intervention in open markets sets a ‘dangerous precedent.’
  • The volume context: Hyperliquid’s HYPE token and platform growth represent a direct threat to CEX perp revenue – making Chen’s critique land somewhere between principled concern and competitive self-interest.
  • Industry split: BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes echoed decentralization concerns but downplayed long-term damage; Hyperliquid’s community pushed back hard, accusing Chen of conflating valid critique with CEX protectionism.
  • What’s next: Hyperliquid has flagged validator expansions and HLP upgrades post-JELLY; Bitget’s Q2 2026 volume numbers will tell whether the controversy moved any market share.

Discover: The Best Crypto Exchanges for Active Traders

What Chen Actually Said and Why It Hit a Nerve With Hyperliquid

Advertisement

Chen’s post was direct: Hyperliquid operates like an ‘offshore CEX with no KYC/AML’ dressed in DeFi branding, and the JELLY incident proved it. Her core charge – that the decision to close the JELLY market and force-settle positions ‘sets a dangerous precedent’ – targeted the exact mechanism Hyperliquid uses to separate itself from traditional finance: on-chain, non-custodial execution with validator consensus.

The JELLY incident on March 26 gave Chen’s critique its teeth. An attacker opened a $6M short on the newly listed JELLY memecoin perp – a token launched in January 2025 by Venmo co-founder Iqram Magdon-Ismail – then pumped the token’s on-chain price to trigger self-liquidation, threatening over $10M in losses for the HLP vault.

Hyperliquid’s validators responded by unanimously delisting the market and forcing settlement at $0.0095, shielding the vault but overriding open user positions in the process.

That intervention is the live evidence Chen is working with. Hyperliquid has built its brand – and its HYPE token valuation on the decentralization claim. Force-settling user positions via coordinated validator action isn’t what decentralized looks like. And Chen said so, loudly, with FTX in the headline.

Advertisement

Explore: The best pre-launch token sales with asymmetric upside potential

Why Bitget Is Really Swinging – and What Hyperliquid Crypto Has to Lose

The real story isn’t just executive-level beef. It’s volume. Hyperliquid has been consistently running $1B+ in daily perpetual volume – the core product category that CEXs, such as Bitget, depend on for fee revenue.

As centralized exchange dynamics shift and traders grow more comfortable with on-chain execution, every dollar that moves to Hyperliquid is a dollar not clearing through a CEX order book.

Advertisement
Source: Hyperliquid DEX Volume / DefiLlama

Chen’s timing matters. Her post came roughly two weeks after the JELLY incident gave her a concrete structural failure to point at.

That isn’t a coincidence, it’s the competitive calculus of a CEO watching market share migrate on-chain and identifying the moment the migration narrative cracks.

AP Collective founder Abhi had already detailed the $6M short self-liquidation tactic publicly; Chen amplified the structural critique to a broader audience with FTX-level stakes framing attached.

The HYPE token is also part of this. Hyperliquid’s native token had become a proxy bet on the platform’s continued volume growth and its positioning in the expanding DeFi infrastructure landscape. Attacking the platform’s decentralization credentials directly attacks the thesis behind HYPE’s valuation – and every holder in the community knows it.

Is Hyperliquid Actually Decentralized?

Advertisement

Hyperliquid runs on a purpose-built L1 using HyperBFT consensus, with on-chain order matching and a non-custodial settlement model via its HyperLiquidity Provider vault.

On paper, that’s meaningfully different from a CEX, no withdrawal risk, no opaque internal matching. But the validator set is small, permissioned, and operated by a tight group – and the Hyper Foundation retains emergency intervention capability that it exercised in the JELLY case without a community governance vote.

BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes stated the community should ‘stop pretending Hyperliquid is decentralized’ – echoing Chen’s framing from a less commercially conflicted position.

Advertisement

Hayes walked back the severity, later arguing that initial reactions overestimated the reputational damage and urged focus on the platform’s resilience.

But the structural question didn’t go away with his reassessment.

Discover: The Best Crypto Presales Live Right Now

The post Bitget Boss Gracy Chen Calls Hyperliquid a Fake DEX And Crypto Twitter Explodes appeared first on Cryptonews.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Crypto inflows slowed sharply in first quarter as investor demand weakened, says JPMorgan

Published

on

Crypto inflows slowed sharply in first quarter as investor demand weakened, says JPMorgan

Wall Street investment bank JPMorgan (JPM) said the pace of capital flowing into digital assets slowed markedly in the first quarter of 2026, with total inflows estimated at around $11 billion.

That implies an annualized run rate of roughly $44 billion, about one-third of the pace seen in 2025, according to the report published last week.

“Investor flows, either retail or institutional, have been small or even negative YTD with the bulk of the digital asset flow in Q1’26 stemming from Strategy’s (MSTR) bitcoin purchases and concentrated crypto VC funding,” wrote analysts led by Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou.

Crypto markets had a volatile and broadly negative first quarter, with prices and market value retreating sharply amid a risk-off backdrop. Total crypto market capitalization fell roughly 20% over the period, while bitcoin dropped around 23% and ether (ETH) declined more than 30%, marking one of the weakest first-quarter performances in years.

Advertisement

The selloff was driven by macroeconomic and geopolitical pressures, triggering liquidations and a broad pullback in risk assets, with altcoins hit even harder.

Despite the downturn, prices stabilized toward the end of the quarter, with bitcoin consolidating near the $70,000 level as ETF demand improved and some pockets of the market, such as select altcoins and onchain activity, showed resilience.

The bank’s estimate aggregates crypto fund flows, Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) futures positioning, venture capital fundraising and corporate treasury activity, including bitcoin purchases by firms such as Strategy.

The analysts said investor-driven flows were notably weak. Positioning in bitcoin and ether CME futures softened versus 2024 and 2025, suggesting institutional demand may have turned slightly negative year-to-date. Spot bitcoin and ether exchange-traded funds (ETFs) also saw net outflows during the quarter, concentrated in January, before a modest rebound in bitcoin ETF inflows in March.

Advertisement

The bank’s analysts attributed most of the quarter’s inflows to corporate treasury activity and venture funding. Strategy remained a dominant buyer, funding bitcoin purchases largely through equity issuance, while signaling continued reliance on stock and preferred issuance to finance accumulation. Other corporate holders were more defensive, with some selling bitcoin to fund buybacks.

Bitcoin miners were net sellers during the quarter, the report said, as firms sold holdings or used them as collateral to shore up liquidity, fund capital expenditures or manage liabilities. The analysts characterized the selling as driven by tighter financing conditions and balance sheet discipline rather than distress.

Crypto venture capital was a relative bright spot. Funding tracked an annualized pace above the prior two years, though activity was increasingly concentrated in fewer, larger deals led by established firms. Capital continued to rotate toward infrastructure, stablecoins, payments and tokenization, with less interest in gaming, non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and exchange-related projects, the report added.

Read more: Bitcoin holds ground as gold, silver slide on ETF outflows and liquidity strains: JPMorgan

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

Diplomatic Signals Revive Cheer in the Market

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

Diplomatic Signals Revive Cheer in the Market

Authorities on both sides, as well as regional mediators, are still negotiating conditions of a temporary truce. In addition, the suggested ceasefire would open significant trade routes and take the strain off world markets. These news items favored returns in risk assets, such as cryptocurrencies and US stock futures. The US President Donald Trump spoke about the situation at a regular press conference, pointing to continuing negotiations. Moreover, he also prolonged a deadline concerning possible military intervention, which indicated the possibility of further negotiations. There was a response by market participants to these updates as de-escalation expectations rose.

The decrease in oil prices was caused by the expectation of a ceasefire, which reduced worries about supply disruption. Prices were on a downward swing, with energy markets showing improved mood. Therefore, the fall in oil prices helped the recovery of Bitcoin and the subsequent rise of the market. The surge in the value of Bitcoin to over 70,000 caused a run-up in the values of other leading digital currencies such as Ethereum, XRP, Solana and Cardano. Also, the wider crypto market saw high buying behaviour with prices rising accordingly. This collaborative action emphasised the impact of Bitcoin on the general market trend.

Due to the price explosion, there was a dramatic short sale in the derivatives market within a short time. Additionally, the volume of trading was high, indicating that more traders were involved. Statistics also revealed that there was an increase in futures open interest, meaning that more people are taking leveraged positions. The Strait of Hormuz remains a focal point of developments in the markets because of its significance in the oil supply in the world market. Also, any advancement in the negotiations can affect the energy market and financial market in the short term. This relationship continues to bind geopolitical events to crypto price changes.

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto World

South Korea Eyes FX Oversight for Stablecoins in Draft Bill

Published

on

South Korea Tax Office Eyes Private Custody After Seized Crypto Loss

South Korea’s ruling Democratic Party is reportedly preparing a draft bill that would classify stablecoins as foreign exchange payment instruments and require tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) to be backed by assets held in trust. 

Citing an integrated draft of the proposed Digital Asset Basic Act, the Seoul Economic Daily reported on Wednesday that stablecoins used in cross-border transactions would be treated as “means of payment” under the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act, placing related businesses under oversight even without separate registration.

The draft bill would also require issuers of tokenized RWAs to place underlying assets in managed trusts under the Capital Markets Act. 

If implemented, the changes would bring stablecoins and tokenized RWAs under existing financial rules, tightening oversight of cross-border flows and setting custody requirements for underlying assets.

Advertisement

Cointelegraph could not independently verify the draft provisions through a public National Assembly filing as of Wednesday. 

Stablecoin draft targets cross-border use, bans interest

The Seoul Economic Daily also reported that the draft would exempt certain stablecoin payments for goods and services from foreign exchange reporting requirements within a defined scope.  

The draft also reportedly bars issuers from paying interest to holders of value-stable digital assets, regardless of how the incentive is labeled. It would also require the Financial Services Commission to establish technical standards aimed at ensuring interoperability across digital asset networks, the report said.

Advertisement

Related: Crypto exchange Bithumb to delay IPO until after 2028: Report

The reported approach aligns with earlier concerns raised by South Korea’s central bank.

On Jan. 27, Bank of Korea Governor Lee Chang-yong warned that Korean won-denominated stablecoins could complicate capital-flow management and foreign exchange stability, adding to the debate over how domestic stablecoins should be regulated.

New draft would move tokenization into existing structures

On the RWA side, the draft would reportedly require issuers to place linked assets in managed trusts under the Capital Markets Act. The requirement would tie tokenized asset issuance to existing custody frameworks, according to the report. 

Advertisement

According to the report, key issues like exchange ownership limits and bank-related requirements for stablecoin issuers were not included in the draft.

The omissions come amid broader disagreements over how the bill should regulate stablecoins. On Dec. 31, disagreements over stablecoin oversight and issuer requirements had delayed the Digital Asset Basic Act.

Magazine: ‘Phantom Bitcoin’ checks, Drift hack linked to North Korea: Asia Express