#稳定币 When I saw these two messages, the shadow of the 2017 ICO wave flashed through my mind. Back then, all kinds of grand predictions were flying around—stablecoins, RWA, sovereign funds... Today’s narratives have turned these into growth engines.

But let me sort out the timeline. Since 2014, I’ve watched various stablecoin schemes emerge on paper and then die out; USDT survived thanks to credit backing, which already indicates the core issue—stability coins are not about technology, but trust. Now, talking about the stablecoin market reaching 500 billion by 2026? That’s not a pipe dream; in 2023, it’s already close to 150 billion. But whether the growth rate can be maintained depends on whether real economic activities can truly go on-chain, not just arbitrage games.

RWA is even more interesting. Tokenized assets sound very sexy, but looking back at past failures—from Tezos’ real estate on-chain to various "revolutionary" asset tokenization schemes—the problems are often not technical but legal and liquidity issues. A tenfold growth sounds aggressive, but from today’s base, it might just be a return to rational price discovery.

The assessment that Ethereum and Solana each play their roles is quite accurate. Ethereum has already accumulated network effects in stablecoins and mainstream economic activities; its $183.7 billion scale is not empty talk. Solana’s advantage lies in transaction efficiency, but that also means it’s more easily replaced—once technological evolution occurs, this advantage will vanish.

In plain terms, the fundamental difference between the current hype and 2017 is: back then, dreamers drove the market; now, real capital—sovereign funds, institutional investors—are driving it. This makes me think this round might really be different. But I’ve heard "really different" too many times in this circle.

The key still depends on the actual economic activity data in 2026. Predictions are cheap; real user activity and transaction volume are the hard currency.