<div id="readability-page-1" class="page"><div><p><strong> In a world saturated with corporate blockchains, many public blockchain crypto projects will face significant value devaluation if they cannot prove their revenue-generating use cases. Since the beginning of 2025, major cryptocurrencies such as ETH and SOL have fallen by -32% and -57% respectively, while a crypto stock index has risen by +48%. This divergence reflects a deeper shift: enterprises are seizing the settlement economic value that was originally flowing to public blockchain tokens. Even in the more relaxed regulatory environment brought about by the &#34;Bitcoin President,&#34; value is flowing from protocol tokens to the stocks of companies building corporate blockchains and infrastructure providers. 2. Since the beginning of 2025, L1 tokens have fallen by 49%; crypto stocks have risen by 48%. Crypto stocks have outperformed L1 tokens by nearly 100 percentage points. Three driving forces are jointly propelling this shift: the economic incentives of rapid on-chain settlement, the standardization of compliant stablecoin issuance under the GENIUS Act, and the direct connection to the Federal Reserve's payment system through new banking licenses. These forces enable companies to operate regulated blockchain settlement systems while bypassing traditional deposit layers. We will analyze each of these in detail below. A key reason is that stablecoins and the tokenization of real-world assets have gained a degree of clarity at the regulatory level. At the same time, many public blockchain tokens are caught in an awkward legal gray area—unable to achieve strong value accumulation or provide crucial investor protection through effective disclosure systems. The competitive landscape has also expanded significantly, with banks, fintech companies, financial institutions, and newly listed infrastructure providers all entering the market. Some of these companies even possess significant advantages such as special purpose banking licenses. The blockchain revolution has arrived, but value is being captured by companies, while many tokens are being left behind. </strong></p><p><strong>Company Chain:</strong></p><p><strong><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://img.jinse.com.cn/7462067_watermarknone.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" width="600" height="299" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://img.jinse.com.cn/7462067_watermarknone.png"/></strong></p><p>While public blockchains excel in innovation, they still have shortcomings in governance models, compliance, and the service guarantees required by regulated financial institutions. Most importantly, value primarily accumulates in the hands of on-chain traders and token holders. These &#34;company chains,&#34; built by existing institutions, will handle regulated value carriers (cash, collateral, securities) with controlled sets of validator nodes, privacy protection, and fee capture mechanisms.</p><h2><strong>3、</strong><strong>Why is the Corporate Chain Rising Now: The Convergence of Three Forces</strong></h2><h3><strong>(</strong><strong>1</strong><strong>) Economic Incentives: Faster Settlement Releases Idle Capital</strong></h3><p>When ownership transfers are completed in seconds instead of days, the velocity of capital flows will increase dramatically. This allows for higher turnover rates of existing securities and fosters new trading venues and financial markets. For example, market makers can build deeper liquidity for prediction markets. As of the end of 2025, clearinghouses hold an estimated $1 trillion in initial margin. Shortening the settlement cycle from T+2 days to T+12 seconds (or less) will allow working capital to circulate more efficiently across trading venues. In addition, trillions of dollars worth of assets and commodities are tied up in systems that cannot be used as collateral.</p> (2) The GENIUS Act Regulates the Issuance of Stablecoins as &#34;Narrow Banks&#34; The GENIUS Act created a legal framework for stablecoins, classifying them as &#34;narrow banks&#34; or &#34;lean&#34; entities—holding only safe, highly liquid reserve assets and not issuing loans (except to the U.S. Treasury). This formally established stablecoins as a regulated, more flexible, and transferable form of demand deposit. The result was a federal-level framework for stablecoin payments, requiring 100% reserve backing, mandatory disclosure and auditing, and full compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering regulations. Predictably, banks are attempting to restrict stablecoins by seeking regulations that prohibit performance incentives and characterize stablecoins as a &#34;systemic risk.&#34; However, banks themselves are rapidly adopting stablecoins and integrating them into their existing business systems. Looking ahead, stablecoins, as an important payment tool and a more dynamic form of collateral, will bring greater freedom to consumers and institutions. Visa has processed an annualized stablecoin transaction volume of $3.5 billion, and Fiserv's FIUSD stablecoin has been opened to over 10,000 financial institutions, with a current total stablecoin supply of $310 billion. (3) Direct integration with the Federal Reserve's payment system is achieving a major milestone for crypto entities, connecting blockchain financial systems to a bank payment network directly linked to the Federal Reserve. Banking licenses enable crypto-related businesses to connect crypto assets to global settlement and payment systems and potentially allow blockchain finance to access Federal Reserve liquidity. Since 2020, more than 21 crypto entities have applied for state and national banking licenses, the approval of which could lead to direct connections with the Federal Reserve. To date, nine national-level banking licenses have been approved, four of which are already in effect. Additionally, four crypto entities have obtained state-level banking licenses in Wyoming. Kraken's owner, Payward, has obtained a limited-purpose Federal Reserve master account through the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. These banking licenses are key enabling tools for companies' blockchains. If cash-side settlements can be completed through regulated stablecoin issuers or limited-purpose licensed entities with special Federal Reserve access, businesses can operate blockchain settlement systems without relying on traditional deposit tiers or correspondent banking systems. Private networks can manage identity, permissions, privacy, and governance while still settling in compliant US dollars—dollars that flow faster and are closer to the Federal Reserve's core infrastructure. The end result will be: businesses adopting blockchain for settlements + regulated reserve institutions (GENIUS Act regulations) + direct integration with the Federal Reserve's payment system. We believe that by 2030, the company's blockchains are expected to collectively generate over $60 billion in revenue. 4. Company Blockchain Valuation Overview Quantitative Overview: Current economic value of each blockchain, existing annualized fee revenue, and estimated market capitalization by the operators. <p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://img.jinse.com.cn/7462068_watermarknone.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" width="600" height="302" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://img.jinse.com.cn/7462068_watermarknone.png"/></p><h2><strong>5. Why Don't Companies Embrace Public Blockchains</strong></h2><p>Even if regulatory enforcement becomes more relaxed, the so-called &#34;wild west&#34; problem in the crypto space will not disappear if the market structure remains unclear. Public blockchains pose real risks to regulated users: service disruptions, potential interactions with prohibited parties, and drastic fluctuations in blockchain prices. Therefore, it is more difficult for publicly listed companies to justify relying on open networks to process regulated value. The lack of clear market structure legislation, the uncertainty surrounding the legal definitions of various activities and the accounting treatment of different crypto tokens further exacerbates the problem.</p> ... Therefore, many companies have not adopted open-source public blockchains (thus &#34;giving up the right to charge fees&#34;), but instead have chosen to build their own corporate blockchains to achieve the following goals: Controlling the participation of verification nodes and counterparties; Preventing asset loss; Providing privacy, compliance, and auditability; Capturing value; Ensuring predictable performance and cost. The result is that corporate blockchains offer highly attractive value propositions to regulated enterprise clients while also generating significant profit growth for their builders. This doesn't mean public blockchains have no place, but it indicates they must clearly define their contribution to the emerging, regulated digital asset system or face elimination. The high valuations of public blockchains like Ethereum and Solana are based on the expectation that significant future financial activity will take place on these chains. If corporate blockchains absorb most of this anticipated financial activity, the valuations of public blockchains may need to be significantly revised downwards. 6. Qualitative Scorecard for Corporate Blockchains Qualitative Scorecard: Institutional adoption, core use cases, regulatory clarity, revenue model, and overall position of each chain. <p><img src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://img.jinse.com.cn/7462069_watermarknone.png?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/interlace,1/resize,w_1440,h_1440/quality,q_95/format,jpg" width="600" height="306" original-src="https://imageproxy.pbkrs.com/https://img.jinse.com.cn/7462069_watermarknone.png"/></p><h2><strong>7、</strong><strong>Potential Impacts of the Clarity Act</strong></h2><p><strong>Altcoin prices may experience a mean-reverting rise, but if investors realize that most of the value will not accumulate in the crypto projects themselves, this surge may be short-lived. Conversely, stocks of companies using blockchain technology may see a significant revaluation. If the Clarity Act opens up space for compliant financial products, some economic activities may return to open networks based on economic considerations.</strong></p><h3><strong>How does the GENIUS Act affect stablecoins?</strong></h3><p>The GENIUS Act establishes a federal regulatory framework for payment stablecoins, requiring 100% reserve backing, mandatory information disclosure and audit verification, and full compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering regulations. This act essentially classifies regulated stablecoin issuers as &#34;narrowly defined bank&#34; entities, only permitted to hold safe, highly liquid reserve assets.</p> ... As of early 2026, the total supply of stablecoins was approximately $310 billion, with Visa processing $3.5 billion in USDC payments annualized. Fiserv's FIUSD stablecoin has been distributed through over 10,000 financial institutions. Why do financial institutions choose to build their own blockchains instead of using Ethereum or Solana? Financial institutions build their own blockchains to control verification nodes, prevent asset loss, ensure privacy and compliance, capture the economic value of fees, and guarantee deterministic system performance. Public blockchains have shortcomings in governance mechanisms, service guarantees, blockchain volatility, and potential risks of illegal transactions, making it difficult to meet the requirements of regulated value transfer. Since 2020, over 21 crypto entities have applied for state or national banking licenses, further reinforcing the trend towards compliant, institution-led infrastructure.</div></div>

COIN

BITF

BTDR

<p>The article discusses the rise of corporate blockchains as traditional deposit systems are being replaced by blockchain infrastructure. Tokenization is speeding up settlement times, while stablecoins under the GENIUS Act create compliant crypto channels. Enterprises are developing their own blockchains to avoid costs associated with public blockchains. Since early 2025, major cryptocurrencies have seen significant declines, while crypto stocks have risen, indicating a shift in value towards companies building blockchain infrastructure. The convergence of economic incentives, regulatory clarity for stablecoins, and integration with the Federal Reserve's payment system are driving this trend.</p>

- The article discusses the decline in public blockchain token values as companies shift towards corporate blockchains, with cryptocurrencies like ETH and SOL plummeting by -32% and -57%, respectively, while crypto stocks rise by +48%.  
- This trend is driven by economic incentives for rapid settlement, regulation under the GENIUS Act, and direct integration with the Federal Reserve's payment system, allowing for efficient capital flow and a safer operational framework.  
- Consequently, institutional adoption and the increasing establishment of corporate blockchains threaten the future value of public tokens, which must define their role in a regulated digital asset landscape to avoid significant devaluation.

VanEck: The Rise of Corporate Chains