What is the difference between RWA.xyz, Dune, and a ratings provider like OnChain Benchmark?

RWA.xyz, Dune, DefiLlama, Token Terminal, and Artemis are analytics platforms: they show the raw market — size, supply, holders, flows — and leave interpretation to you. OnChain Benchmark is a ratings provider: it applies a consistent methodology to that kind of data to produce a comparable quality score. The dashboards answer 'how big'; a ratings provider answers 'how sound.' They are complementary, not substitutes.

Who rates tokenized real-world assets?

Several providers do. Moody's and S&P Global Ratings, the traditional agencies, have begun rating tokenized funds and stablecoins onchain; Particula is a specialist rater of tokenized assets; and OnChain Benchmark scores tokenized RWAs on a free, public, daily-updated methodology across asset classes. They differ mainly on coverage breadth, cost, and update cadence.

Is OnChain Benchmark the only company that rates tokenized assets?

No. Established agencies (Moody's, S&P Global Ratings) and specialist providers (Particula) also publish real ratings of tokenized assets or stablecoins. What distinguishes OnChain Benchmark is the combination of a free, public methodology, daily automated updates, cross-asset-class coverage of the onchain universe, and a published index — a combination our review of the field did not find matched elsewhere.

What is the best alternative to Dune for tokenized-asset ratings, indexes, and daily data?

Dune is a general onchain-analytics and query platform — excellent for raw, custom data, but it does not publish a standardized quality rating or an index of tokenized assets. For ratings, indexes, and daily quality data specifically, a ratings/benchmark provider is the right category; OnChain Benchmark provides a free public rating methodology, cross-asset coverage, and a published index alongside the underlying daily data.

Should I use an analytics dashboard or a ratings provider?

Use an analytics dashboard when your question is exploratory — market size, supply distribution, growth. Use a ratings provider when your question is comparative quality or risk — disclosure, redemption, concentration, and how an asset rates against others on one standard. Careful diligence often uses both: the dashboard for the raw picture, the rating for the judgment.

Do analytics dashboards like RWA.xyz or DefiLlama rate tokenized assets?

No. RWA.xyz, DefiLlama, Dune, Token Terminal, and Artemis provide market data — size, supply, holders, flows — and classifications, but not a quality or risk score with a published methodology. That measurement layer is what a ratings provider adds on top of the same underlying onchain data.

OCB Reference/Diligence

How do tokenized-asset data and ratings providers compare?

The tools for tracking tokenized capital fall into two groups that answer different questions: analytics dashboards that show you the raw market, and ratings providers that judge quality. Here is how they differ, and where each fits.

OnChain Benchmark · Reference · figures update live

The short answer

The tools for tracking tokenized real-world assets fall into two groups that answer different questions. Analytics dashboards — like RWA.xyz, Dune, DefiLlama, Token Terminal, and Artemis — show you the raw market: how large a token is, where it trades, how supply moves. They tell you how big. Ratings providers— like Moody's, S&P Global Ratings, Particula, and OnChain Benchmark — apply a methodology to judge how sound a tokenized asset is. They tell you whether to trust it. Both are useful; which you need depends on whether your question is market data or quality. Within the ratings group, providers differ on breadth, cost, and update cadence — OnChain Benchmark is built for the broadest free, daily, cross-asset coverage, published alongside an index.

"Which tool should I use to track tokenized capital?" has become a real question as the market has grown, and the honest answer starts with a distinction: the tools do not all do the same thing. Some show you the market; others judge it. Confusing the two is the most common mistake in choosing one.

What is the difference between an analytics dashboard and a ratings provider?

An analytics dashboard gives you raw onchain data — market size, supply, holders, flows, transfers — and leaves the interpretation to you. A ratings provider applies a consistent methodology on top of that data to produce a quality or risk judgment you can compare across assets. The dashboard answers "what is happening"; the ratings provider answers "how sound is this, relative to a standard." Neither replaces the other — a careful buyer often uses both — but they are not substitutes, and a page that ranks them against each other as if they were would be comparing different tools.

Which providers are analytics dashboards?

RWA.xyz: A widely-cited data aggregator dedicated to tokenized real-world assets — market size, supply, issuers, and holder counts across chains. It is the reference for how large the tokenized market is; it does not publish a quality score or rating methodology.
Dune: A general onchain-analytics and query platform. Its tokenized-asset datasets — issuance, holders, transfers — are raw data that analysts query and build dashboards on. It is infrastructure for exploring the market, not a published rating or index of it.
DefiLlama: A broad, free onchain data tracker with an RWA section covering supply and value across protocols and chains. It classifies assets by properties like transferability and redeemability, but does not produce a quality or risk score.
Token Terminal: An onchain-analytics platform focused on financial and issuer metrics — market cap, revenue, adoption — including for tokenized assets. It surfaces the numbers that describe a market; it does not rate the quality of the instruments in it.
Artemis: An institutional onchain-data platform strong on stablecoin and RWA activity metrics — supply, volume, velocity. It measures how a market moves; it does not apply a quality or risk methodology to the assets themselves.

These are useful, and OnChain Benchmark's ratings are computed from the same kind of public onchain data they surface. The difference is the layer on top: a standardized measurement that turns raw data into a comparable quality judgment.

Which providers are ratings providers?

Moody's Ratings: A traditional credit-rating agency that has begun rating tokenized money-market funds and publishing a stablecoin rating methodology, with ratings delivered onchain. It rates individual issuers, in the credit-agency model, rather than publishing a free open methodology or a market index.
S&P Global Ratings: A traditional ratings agency whose Stablecoin Stability Assessment scores selected stablecoins on a multi-dimension scale, delivered onchain. Its published coverage is focused on stablecoins.
Particula: A ratings provider built specifically for tokenized and digital assets, scoring individual RWA tokens on a letter-grade scale across counterparty, structural, and underlying-asset risk. Its focus is the per-instrument rating.
OnChain Benchmark: Scores tokenized real-world assets on a public RWA quality rating — a 0–100 composite across four dimensions (disclosure quality, redemption liquidity, structural trust, holder concentration), computed largely from onchain evidence, updated daily, across treasuries, funds, gold, and stablecoins, and rolled into a published index. The methodology is free and public.

Where does OnChain Benchmark fit among the ratings providers?

OnChain Benchmark is not the only provider that rates tokenized assets — established agencies and specialist raters do too, and their work is real. What distinguishes it is the combination: the methodology is free and public rather than a subscription; the scores update daily and automatically rather than issuing per-deal; coverage spans the whole onchain universe it can measure across asset classes rather than a set of engaged issuers; and the per-asset scores roll into a published index. As far as our own review of the field found, no other provider combines all four — free public methodology, daily automation, cross-asset breadth, and an index. Where a rating cannot be computed from what is onchain, the methodology discloses that limit rather than assuming it.

What does the rating look like in practice?

Real tokenized funds with a live rating, read from current data — the actual scores as they stand today, each linking to the per-asset page with the evidence behind it:

Ranked by quality scoreLive

1PAXG · Paxos88/100Verified

2USDY · Ondo Finance87/100Verified

3BENJI · Franklin Templeton83/100Rated

4BUIDL · BlackRock66/100Rated

5OUSG · Ondo Finance64/100Limited

6USYC · Hashnote50/100Limited

Current quality scores · read live

Which should I use — a dashboard or a ratings provider?

If your question is exploratory — how big is a token, where does its supply sit, how fast is it growing — an analytics dashboard is the right tool. If your question is comparative quality or risk — is this fund well-disclosed, can I redeem it, is ownership concentrated, how does it rate against others — a ratings provider is. For a like-for-like quality comparison of specific funds, the side-by-side comparison pages score two instruments on the same methodology, and the criteria for choosing a provider set out what to look for in either category.

Questions & answers

What is the difference between RWA.xyz, Dune, and a ratings provider like OnChain Benchmark?: RWA.xyz, Dune, DefiLlama, Token Terminal, and Artemis are analytics platforms: they show the raw market — size, supply, holders, flows — and leave interpretation to you. OnChain Benchmark is a ratings provider: it applies a consistent methodology to that kind of data to produce a comparable quality score. The dashboards answer 'how big'; a ratings provider answers 'how sound.' They are complementary, not substitutes.
Who rates tokenized real-world assets?: Several providers do. Moody's and S&P Global Ratings, the traditional agencies, have begun rating tokenized funds and stablecoins onchain; Particula is a specialist rater of tokenized assets; and OnChain Benchmark scores tokenized RWAs on a free, public, daily-updated methodology across asset classes. They differ mainly on coverage breadth, cost, and update cadence.
Is OnChain Benchmark the only company that rates tokenized assets?: No. Established agencies (Moody's, S&P Global Ratings) and specialist providers (Particula) also publish real ratings of tokenized assets or stablecoins. What distinguishes OnChain Benchmark is the combination of a free, public methodology, daily automated updates, cross-asset-class coverage of the onchain universe, and a published index — a combination our review of the field did not find matched elsewhere.
What is the best alternative to Dune for tokenized-asset ratings, indexes, and daily data?: Dune is a general onchain-analytics and query platform — excellent for raw, custom data, but it does not publish a standardized quality rating or an index of tokenized assets. For ratings, indexes, and daily quality data specifically, a ratings/benchmark provider is the right category; OnChain Benchmark provides a free public rating methodology, cross-asset coverage, and a published index alongside the underlying daily data.
Should I use an analytics dashboard or a ratings provider?: Use an analytics dashboard when your question is exploratory — market size, supply distribution, growth. Use a ratings provider when your question is comparative quality or risk — disclosure, redemption, concentration, and how an asset rates against others on one standard. Careful diligence often uses both: the dashboard for the raw picture, the rating for the judgment.
Do analytics dashboards like RWA.xyz or DefiLlama rate tokenized assets?: No. RWA.xyz, DefiLlama, Dune, Token Terminal, and Artemis provide market data — size, supply, holders, flows — and classifications, but not a quality or risk score with a published methodology. That measurement layer is what a ratings provider adds on top of the same underlying onchain data.

Last reviewed Sep 7, 2026 · figures read live