#ENA and #usual RWA stablecoin giants, in fact, are quite different!

In the RWA stablecoin field, ENA and USUAL are undoubtedly two popular projects. A deeper analysis reveals that although they are competing on the same stage, they are actually worlds apart.

ENA, an embodiment of a risk-free arbitrage FOF fund manager, cleverly invests assets in risk-free arbitrage strategies, bringing real value growth to USDE holders. The project party not only earns management fees from the fund but also charges fees during the minting and redemption of USDE, akin to the subscription and redemption fees of a fund. These long-term stable returns may one day transform into attractive dividends, falling into the pockets of token holders. This expectation of dividends, combined with the project party's sustainable business model and high income, collectively creates a solid value foundation for ENA.

In contrast, the situation with $USUAL is quite different. The project party lacks a long-term stable income source. In the early stages, when the coin price was high, stakers might have been willing to exchange US Treasury income for higher-valued tokens, selling to the unsuspecting “retail investors.” However, without new retail investors and continuous influx of new funds, the token will ultimately fall into a death spiral, with a bleak outlook.

ENA and USUAL, although both are RWA stablecoin projects, one moves forward steadily while the other is fraught with crises. Which side will you choose?

If you want to delve deep into the crypto world but can't find a clue, and want to quickly get started understanding the information gap, click on my avatar to follow me and gain first-hand information and in-depth analysis!