After spending a long time in the crypto space, you'll notice an interesting phenomenon: whenever a certain model gains popularity, dozens of copycats rush in to follow. But the projects that truly thrive are often those that first deeply understand their niche.
The name Dusk may not be as loud as Ethereum, but its path is particularly interesting—since the beginning, it hasn't aimed to compete in general-purpose chains doing what everyone else does. Instead, it focuses on tackling a seemingly dirty and exhausting task: moving traditional institutional assets onto the blockchain. That sounds a bit counterintuitive, right? But precisely this "counterintuitive" approach has become the moat that's hardest for others to imitate.
Why is that? Because integrating compliance, privacy, and institutional-grade requirements into the protocol layer simultaneously is a feat only a few teams can achieve. This isn't just about coding; it's a matter of cognition—some things simply can't be copied.
While most chains are busy optimizing virtual machines, the Dusk team spent three years studying the compliance processes of the Dutch Financial Markets Authority. They even broke down the stock issuance rules of the NPEX exchange and translated these rules into on-chain logic. Such deep understanding of traditional finance isn't something you can learn just by reading a white paper.
Last year, Morgan Stanley's Digital Asset division explicitly pointed out in a report that the biggest bottleneck preventing traditional assets from truly going on-chain isn't technology but "regulatory understanding and translation capabilities." To put it plainly—this is exactly what Dusk has been accumulating over time.
So, when we discuss Dusk's value, we're essentially talking about the pricing power of a scarce niche. As the US SEC's regulatory framework for crypto becomes clearer, projects that have invested early in compliance infrastructure are gaining a significant first-mover advantage. The core tokens circulating in this ecosystem are valued not only through transaction fee sharing but also through the premium brought by their role as an "entry point for compliant assets."
In the highly competitive crypto world, sometimes choosing the right niche and direction is far more important than blindly pursuing scale and user numbers. Dusk's story may be confirming this—sometimes, the most unassuming track hides the deepest value.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
12 Likes
Reward
12
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ForkInTheRoad
· 6h ago
Wow, this is the real moat, not the kind built by throwing money at it through fundraising.
View OriginalReply0
TokenomicsDetective
· 6h ago
Damn, three years of research on the Dutch Financial Authority... This guy is really not playing around, much better than those who just boast about their scale all day long.
View OriginalReply0
SneakyFlashloan
· 6h ago
Yeah, basically it's about securing a good position; no one wants to bite the bullet on compliance.
Is this really not a typical pump-and-dump scheme? It seems like institutional assets on the chain still need to wait a bit longer.
Three years of studying compliance processes... actually just betting that the SEC will eventually approve it. It has a bit of a gambler's feel.
A strong moat is deep, but I'm worried that a policy change could make all the effort go to waste.
To put it nicely, Dusk is still quite niche right now. Is there enough liquidity, buddy?
Why does this tone feel a bit like looking for a sucker to take over some chips at a certain position?
The compliance asset entry... sounds good, but the real question is when the money will actually come.
I think, instead of studying Dusk, it’s better to see what those decision-makers are thinking.
An hour ago, someone told me stablecoins are the future, and now we're talking about compliant assets. The cycle is really fast.
View OriginalReply0
FantasyGuardian
· 6h ago
Hey, this is the right path. While others are competing over TPS, I'm studying how to make the big guys feel secure to go on the chain.
Traditional finance is hard to crack, but it's precisely because it's difficult that no one is copying it. That's what we call a moat.
Compliance translation ability really can't be copied. Spending three years honing this skill will eventually pay off.
Once the SEC framework is fully established, these types of projects should take off.
The seemingly boring track might actually be a gold mine... I get it.
View OriginalReply0
MEV_Whisperer
· 6h ago
Oh my, spending three years studying the Dutch compliance process must be incredibly boring, but it does have some value.
This is what differentiation in competition looks like. Instead of fighting over Tps with L2s, we’re tackling the hard bone of traditional finance. I respect that.
Speaking of which, truly understanding "regulatory translation" is rare, and Morgan Stanley is right about that.
Moats are moats; anyone can copy code, but this kind of compliance awareness... hmm, it’s really not copyable.
Once the SEC framework is fully implemented, these kinds of projects will be the real winners. For now, they just seem unremarkable.
After spending a long time in the crypto space, you'll notice an interesting phenomenon: whenever a certain model gains popularity, dozens of copycats rush in to follow. But the projects that truly thrive are often those that first deeply understand their niche.
The name Dusk may not be as loud as Ethereum, but its path is particularly interesting—since the beginning, it hasn't aimed to compete in general-purpose chains doing what everyone else does. Instead, it focuses on tackling a seemingly dirty and exhausting task: moving traditional institutional assets onto the blockchain. That sounds a bit counterintuitive, right? But precisely this "counterintuitive" approach has become the moat that's hardest for others to imitate.
Why is that? Because integrating compliance, privacy, and institutional-grade requirements into the protocol layer simultaneously is a feat only a few teams can achieve. This isn't just about coding; it's a matter of cognition—some things simply can't be copied.
While most chains are busy optimizing virtual machines, the Dusk team spent three years studying the compliance processes of the Dutch Financial Markets Authority. They even broke down the stock issuance rules of the NPEX exchange and translated these rules into on-chain logic. Such deep understanding of traditional finance isn't something you can learn just by reading a white paper.
Last year, Morgan Stanley's Digital Asset division explicitly pointed out in a report that the biggest bottleneck preventing traditional assets from truly going on-chain isn't technology but "regulatory understanding and translation capabilities." To put it plainly—this is exactly what Dusk has been accumulating over time.
So, when we discuss Dusk's value, we're essentially talking about the pricing power of a scarce niche. As the US SEC's regulatory framework for crypto becomes clearer, projects that have invested early in compliance infrastructure are gaining a significant first-mover advantage. The core tokens circulating in this ecosystem are valued not only through transaction fee sharing but also through the premium brought by their role as an "entry point for compliant assets."
In the highly competitive crypto world, sometimes choosing the right niche and direction is far more important than blindly pursuing scale and user numbers. Dusk's story may be confirming this—sometimes, the most unassuming track hides the deepest value.