Chain RWA Footprint Index · Sep 1, 2026
33.0% of tracked tokenized capital clears the institutional bar.
$8.88B institutional-grade · across 14chains · methodology v1.0-chain-rwa-footprint
The OCB Chain RWA Footprint Index ranks blockchains not by how much tokenized value sits on them, but by how much of it is any good. For every chain, the Index sums the tokenized real-world-asset fund capital that clears our institutional-grade bar — a composite trust score of 70 or higher — and reports it against the chain’s total tracked RWA supply. It is the difference between “where is the money” and “where is the money that a treasury desk could actually hold.”
That distinction matters more every quarter. Tokenized treasuries and other real-world-asset funds are no longer an Ethereum monoculture — they are spreading across a dozen settlement layers, each courting issuers with its own pitch. A TVL leaderboard rewards whichever chain attracts the most supply. This index rewards the chains attracting the most institutional-quality supply, which is not the same list.
Where quality capital lives
One chain still anchors the market.
Ethereum holds $6.06B of institutional-grade tokenized capital — the deep majority of everything we measure. The interesting question is not who leads; it is what the ranking looks like below the anchor, and how thin the institutional layer gets as you move down it. A chain can host billions in supply and almost none of it clear the bar.
Institutional-grade capital by chain
Sep 1, 2026
132 instruments · $13.81B total tracked
Tracked · no institutional-grade capital
Kinesis (KAU) ($585.21M tracked) · XRP Ledger ($216.13M tracked) · Robinhood Chain ($32.56M tracked) · Optimism ($26.40M tracked) · Flare ($14.89M tracked) · Ink ($11.12M tracked) · Hedera ($4.61M tracked) · Plume ($2.18M tracked) · Algorand ($135.62K tracked) — we track supply on these chains, but none of it clears the ≥70 institutional bar.
How it’s moving
Institutional share over time: 33.0% today.
The line tracks the share of tracked tokenized capital that clears the ≥70 institutional bar, recomputed daily. It rises when institutional-grade capital grows faster than the market around it — the tokenized market maturing, not just enlarging — and falls when the reverse holds.
OCB Index
Chain RWA Footprint Index
The full ranking
Every covered chain, ranked.
Institutional-grade capital is the sum of supply on each chain belonging to instruments scoring 70 or higher. Total tracked is all supply we measure on that chain. The gap between them is the chain’s quality discount — supply we see but would not call institutional. Coverage marks whether we walk the chain’s holders and transfers, or read supply only.
| Chain | Institutional-grade (USD) | Total tracked (USD) | Inst. share | Instruments | Holders | Transfers |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EthereumETH | $6.06B | $13.81B | 44% | 132 | Partial | Partial |
| StellarXLM | $1.46B | $1.55B | 94% | 7 | Complete |
Structural facts you should know
How to read this index correctly.
This is a quality-weighted ranking, not a TVL board and not a chain endorsement. Each item below is a structural fact about what the index captures and, just as important, what it does not.
Quality, not volume
A chain ranks on institutional-grade capital, not total supply.
The headline for each chain is the sum of supply belonging to instruments scoring ≥70 on our composite. A chain can host billions in low-scoring supply and rank low; a chain hosting one deeply-diligenced fund can rank above it. This is deliberate — the index answers "where is the quality," which a TVL leaderboard cannot.
Coverage is reported per dimension
Supply is complete everywhere; holders and transfers are shown honestly per chain.
Every chain's dollar figure is complete onchain supply. Two further dimensions are reported separately and only where we actually have them: the holder set and the transfer history. Transfer coverage is still being built on some chains — Ethereum, Stellar, Arbitrum, Sei, Avalanche, Solana, Polygon, Base, BNB Chain, Noble, Etherlink among them — while their holder data may already be complete. Each chain shows its own holder and transfer state, so a partially-walked chain is never presented as a fully-walked one.
Instrument-level quality
A chain inherits the score of the instruments it hosts.
Quality is a property of the instrument — its disclosure, reserves, redemption, structure — not of the chain it settles on. A chain earns institutional-grade capital by attracting institutional-grade instruments. The same fund contributes the same quality wherever it deploys; this index simply sums that quality by settlement layer.
How it’s computed
The formula is published and reproducible.
For every active deployment we take its latest outstanding supply in USD and the latest composite trust score of its instrument. Supply is grouped by settlement chain; the institutional-grade figure per chain is the sum of supply for instruments scoring ≥70. The published index level is the market-wide institutional share — institutional-grade capital over total tracked capital — rebased to 100 at inception. The ≥70 institutional and ≥85 verified bars are the same thresholds used across every OCB index; the freshness SLA is 36 hours with a 72-hour per-chain grace. Any analyst applying the same formula to the same onchain evidence arrives at the same number.
Core formula
raw_index = (Σ institutional_supply / Σ total_supply) × 100
where institutional_supply = supply of instruments scoring ≥ 70; grouped and ranked per settlement chain.
Published: index_level = (raw_index / inception_raw_index) × 100, rebased to 100 at inception.
Cite: OnChain Benchmark (OCB). OCB Chain RWA Footprint Index, methodology v1.0-chain-rwa-footprint. Published daily. Retrieved from onchainbenchmark.com/index/chain-rwa-footprint.
Read the methodology →