全球外滙市場每日交易額高達7.5萬億美元，相當於全球GDP的60倍，較2001年增長506%，據國際結算銀行2022年三年期調查指出。然而，這龐大的交易量背後，卻存在基本效率問題：接近三分之一的可交付外滙交易依然暴露於結算風險之下，而跨境支付則受制於多天延誤、高昂成本及透明度不足。
穩定幣作為數碼解決方案應運而生，市場市值預計至2025年突破2,500億美元，但其零收益結構及監管不確定性，限制了機構採納。而代幣化貨幣市場基金（tMMFs）現時為業界呈現一個具吸引力的選擇，結合了傳統市場基金的收益及監管明確性，以及區塊鏈的高效結算優勢。
於本文中，我們會探討代幣化貨幣市場基金能否成為數碼支付及跨境結算的最佳方案。透過對兩種技術、其市場影響及採納潛力的全方位評估，本文說明tMMFs如何從根本上重塑機構級現金管理，同時解決穩定幣的主要局限。區塊鏈技術與傳統金融監管的融合，為金融機構帶來前所未有的機會，尋求同時具備安全、收益、及機構級合規標準的數碼資產。
利益不言而喻。麥肯錫預計，至2030年，代幣化資產市場規模可達2萬億美元，機構投資者計劃於2026年前將5.6%資產組合配置於此。理解推動這場變革的技術、監管、及市場動力，對於加密愛好者、機構投資者、金融科技專業人士及政策制定者等，有決定性意義，尤其在這個快速演變的格局中。
7.5萬億美元的難題：現有支付系統效率低下
現代全球金融系統通過日益複雜的網絡處理前所未有的交易量，但結構性問題每年帶來以十億美元計的損失。7.5萬億美元的日均外滙市場，以美元為主導（佔88%），透過代理銀行鏈運作，導致多個失誤、成本與延誤點。
結算風險為最嚴重的系統性脆弱點。原始Herstatt風險場景——一方付款，對手方倒閉前未能交付——於1974年 Herstatt Bank 倒閉時慘痛上演，當時資金轉移減少了60%。近年同類事件仍常見：KfW銀行集團於2008年雷曼倒閉時損失3億歐元，巴克萊2020年與一間小型匯兌對手方交易損失1.3億美元。
CLS銀行為18種主要貨幣提供付款對付款結算服務，每日處理6.5萬億美元交易，覆蓋範圍內交易成功消除了Herstatt風險。但重大缺口仍存在，CLS僅涵蓋成熟市場貨幣，留底新興市場貨幣面臨暴露，結算時段只於歐洲中部時間早上7時至中午12時運作，時區不協調對亞太貨幣尤其不利。最關鍵是，日均約2.5萬億美元外滙交易仍在CLS覆蓋範圍外，持續完全暴露於結算風險。
傳統跨境支付受困於「Nostro-Vostro困局」——銀行須維持代理行關係並持有大量外幣準備金以撮合國際轉賬。這種資本密集的模式需多重中介參與，每環都增加費用及拖延。金融穩定委員會於2020年G20路線圖，確定了四大關鍵效率短板：多中介收費導致高成本、1-3日慢速結算、需廣泛銀行關係始能進入，以及透明度不足未能追蹤支付狀況。
結算週期進一步惡化此問題。目前T+2標準結算（證券業正轉向T+1）令對手方暴露期拉長。DTCC估計，由T+2轉至T+1能減少41%波動性抵押品要求，Swift研究則指T+1能透過時區協調減少八成處理時間。但即使如此，與數碼原子結算比較，仍遺下大量風險窗口。
合規複雜性令成本爆升。各地監管要求不一，銀行須為各地維護專門合規架構。營運時間限制令非辦公時段支付積壓，人手制裁篩查及反洗錢流程增加風險及營運成本。代理銀行模式需大量盡職審查，令小型機構無法參與，加重國際大型銀行集中風險。
量化效率數據揭示問題規模。DTCC研究顯示全球結算失敗率約達2%，每年損失及成本高達30億美元。組織的結算淨額系統已示範潛在提升——2020年3月3日，3.5萬億美元毛額交易經結算後淨額僅為800億美元，降低98%；但這效率只存於中央結算系統，未解決跨境、多貨幣或即時結算挑戰。
流動性管理效率低下為體系添上額外負擔。銀行須維持大量準備金以應對結算風險，佔用大筆本可更高效運用的資本。結算體系碎片化，令資金無法跨結算網絡、時區及貨幣高效流動，製造人為短缺並推升整個金融體系的資金成本。
加密貨幣市場在市場壓力時期展示了數碼替代方案的潛力與侷限。2022年5月Terra Luna/UST崩盤，數天間6百億美元市值灰飛煙滅，反映數碼資產若設計不善可迅速失敗。然而，此事亦展現了數碼系統能於短時間內處理龐大交易量——LUNA總供應量數天間由3.42億增至6.5萬億枚，傳統系統可能須數周甚至數月方可處理。
系統性低效率舉證了推動數碼替代方案的必要性。重點正是：穩定幣與代幣化貨幣市場基金，邊一種更能解決這些基本難題，同時維持穩定性及機構合規要求？
穩定幣市場概況：創新與局限
穩定幣市場經歷爆發性增長，截至2025年6月，總市值突破2,500億美元，較年初增長17%。最初僅屬可編程貨幣的試驗品，發展至今已成為重要金融基建，2023年1月至2025年2月期間，於現實支付場景支援了942億美元交易，包括每年360億美元企業對企業支付、以及130億美元連結卡類支付。
市場高度集中於兩大主角。Tether（USDT）以1460-1540億美元市值稱霸，市場佔有率58.93%，雖然比2025年2月的64%稍有下跌。USD Coin（USDC）則步步追上，市值增至560-643億美元，佔24.5%，按年由19.5%顯著提升。二者合共控制整體市值的86-90%，其中USDC自美國大選後增長250億美元，活躍地址由380萬激增至680萬。
現有三種技術架構，各有優劣。法幣抵押穩定幣（如USDT、USDC）憑傳統銀行1:1背書提供直觀穩定性及合規，但集權發行與託管帶來風險。加密資產抵押穩定幣（如DAI）透過通常超過200%抵押比例確保透明度與去中心化，但資本效率低且受加密市場波動影響。算法穩定幣則嘗試以供應調節達致穩定，無需明示抵押，但Terra Luna事件證明其於壓力市況下易墮入「死亡螺旋」。
Terra Luna/UST崩盤為迄今最嚴重穩定幣失敗例子，帶來系統性風險深刻教訓。高峰時UST是第三大穩定幣，市值達180億美元，於2022年5月7日至16日由1.00美元跌至接近零。一連串崩潰通過Luna鑄銷機制推高Luna總供應由3.42億倍增至6.5萬億，而價格由80美元跌至毫無價值。總損失超過600億美元，對更廣泛加密市場造成超過4,000億美元影響。根本原因是Anchor Protocol的19.5%年化收益率雖高但不可持續，每日燃燒600萬美元補貼，加上高達70% UST供應集中於單一應用。
即使法幣支持的穩定幣風險同樣顯著，2023年3月矽谷銀行危機期間為例，USDC有33億美元（佔儲備8%）被困於倒閉銀行，令價格暫時脫鈎…… Here is the translation following your instructions. Markdown links are left untranslated (if any), and the rest of the content is rendered in zh-Hant-HK:
$0.87，跌幅達13%，觸發八小時內達14億美元的淨贖回。脫鈎的連鎖反應蔓延至DAI、FRAX和其他穩定幣，突顯整個數碼資產生態系統內的互聯風險。雖然FDIC最終保證令USDC恢復掛鈎水平，是次事件亦揭示了集中式儲備管理的漏洞及銀行業敞口所帶來的風險。
零收益問題是穩定幣在機構採納方面最根本的限制。雖說設計上力求維持$1.00的價值穩定，大型穩定幣卻未有為持有者提供直接收益，於利率向上的環境下產生巨大的機會成本。當2025年10年美國國債孳息接近4.4%，機構現金管理人即時面對「穩定幣效率較傳統現金管理工具是否優勝」的疑問。這種限制對於需要管理大量現金，既要流動性、又講求本金安全同時追求收益的企業財資部門尤其明顯。
監管不明朗亦造成了額外的機構障礙。儘管2025年7月《GENIUS法案》為美國支付型穩定幣提供了聯邦監管框架，分類問題在不同司法區依然複雜。歐盟《加密資產市場規例》（MiCA）於2024年12月實施，引致主要幣種下架——Tether（USDT）被踢出歐盟交易所，USDC亦要應對27個成員國不同層面的合規挑戰。這種監管分裂為跨國企業與機構投資者帶來營運複雜性，因為他們需要跨境一致的監管待遇。
技術整合問題限制機構採納。雖然於高交易量時段展示過交易能力，穩定幣大多運作於獨立的區塊鏈網絡，難以與傳統銀行基礎設施互通。實時結算能力與傳統銀行作業時間和合規系統產生矛盾，形成營運斷層。KYC/AML合規要求有機會與區塊鏈透明度衝突，而機構級託管標準需配合專用基礎設施，不同穩定幣項目無法統一提供。
市場集中度為系統性風險帶來憂慮，遠超個別穩定幣出現故障。USDT/USDC雙寡頭壟斷市場86-90%，一旦Circle或Tether發生營運、監管或技術事故，全球數字支付體系都會受到嚴重衝擊。這種集中化情況尤其令監管機構關注，因為穩定幣逐步擴展到與傳統金融體系同等重要時，系統性風險的可能性大增。
帶息型穩定幣的興起正針對零收益問題，截至2025年5月總市值突破110億美元（佔穩定幣市場4.5%）。然而，這類產品往往犧牲了傳統穩定幣簡單明確的監管優勢，令機構用戶卻步。
儘管有上述限制，推動採納的因素依然強勁。DeFi協議賦予編程式貨幣的新功能，傳統體系無法做到。匯款應用相對傳統方式具備成本優勢。企業財資應用雖受收益條件所限，卻能提供全年無休的可用性以及跨境結算效率。支援實體支付的卡連結服務亦展示出普及應用潛力。
穩定幣市場正進入成熟，但核心設計選擇帶來重大掣肘。零收益架構、監管不確定性以及市場集中度風險，共同為業界創造填補空白的機遇——即兼容數碼支付效率又能符合機構對收益、合規和風險管理要求的替代方案。這正是貨幣市場基金代幣化產品（tokenized MMF）希望切入的市場缺口。
傳統貨幣市場基金：72,600億美元的基石
貨幣市場基金是全球金融體系中最重要且最穩定的投資工具之一，2025年9月管理資產規模達72,600億美元，較2024年的68,500億有所增長。這一龐大規模反映出機構和零售投資者對貨幣市場基金數十年來的高度信心—作為首屈一指的現金管理方案，既可提供每日流動性、本金穩健及適度收益，亦能維持健全的監管與投資者保護。
機構對貨幣市場基金的壟斷地位，來自其在企業財務中的核心角色。72600億美元資產中，機構投資者佔42900億（59.3%），零售投資者則持有29600億（40.7%）。機構偏好源自貨幣基金特色組合：每日贖回能力、專業資產管理、多元化短期證券投資及《投資公司法》下的監管保障。企業財資部門、銀行、保險公司及退休基金均依靠貨幣基金進行營運現金管理、抵押品需求和短期投資。
基金組合反映出仔細的風險控制和合規策略。政府型貨幣基金以資產56400億美元（82.3%市佔）佔主導，只投資美國國債、政府機構債與政府支持回購協議。這種集中高質資產的行為反映多次壓力測試及為降低系統性風險而作的監管改變。主要型貨幣基金資產有10800億（15.7%），投資於商業票據、存款證、企業債券及銀行債務。免稅基金則僅有1360億（2.0%），主攻提供聯邦稅務優惠的市政債券。
歷史壓力時期反映貨幣基金的脆弱與韌力。2008年金融危機時，Reserve Primary Fund因雷曼兄弟債權，「破底」至$0.97，成為經典案例。主要型機構貨幣基金出現逾5000億美元急速贖回，政府需透過財政部擔保計劃、AMLF（提供2170億美元支持）、MMLF（580億美元）介入共覆蓋2.7萬億美元資產。
2020年新冠疫情則證明2014年改革未足以防止機構贖回潮。主要型基金在2020年3月兩星期內流失超過三成（2000億美元），聯儲局重啟MMLF以穩定市場。同時，資金出現品質追逐，「政府型」基金資產暴增8000億，反映投資者在壓力時更信賴政府擔保體系。上述事件令2023年推動新規例，取消強制性費用與贖回閘口，同時把每週流動資產最低比例提升至25%。
2022年高息環境突顯貨幣基金於緊縮週期的吸引力。息口上漲推高基金與銀行存款及其他現金替代品的吸引力，2024年錄得7030億美元資金淨流入。政府型貨幣基金尤其受惠，機構資金維持低風險取態同時賺取國債高息。這一時期展示出貨幣基金的逆向周期特性——即在加息時提供穩穩的息口回報，又確保本金安全及每日流動性。
現有監管框架（SEC Rule 2a-7）為投資者提供全面保護，涵蓋投資組合限制、多元化要求及流動性管理。規則訂明組合10%需具每日流動能力，30%達到每週流動性。證券信貸評級要求須屬兩大短期級別，並有集中風險上限。自2020年市況動盪後增設壓力測試，確保基金有韌力應對各種不利情景。
結構轉型趨向政府基金體現了風險管理教訓。由2008年至2025年，政府基金資產由1萬億增至56400億，主要型則由逾2萬億跌至10800億。這一變化反映機構意識到政府擔保於金融壓力時更穩定，即使收益略低。2014年改革要求主要型基金採用浮動淨值，使其於現金管理層面吸引力下跌，進一步推動結構性轉移。
貨幣市場基金除個別資產管理外，還執行關鍵金融系統功能。它們是主要機構現金停泊機制，於市況波動和政策轉變時吸收資金流量。巨額國債持倉使其成為政府短債市場重要買家，2020年疫情時更協助穩定政府融資市場。
長年投資的營運效率與基建成就深厚護城河。過戶代理網絡令同日結算及自動現金調撥成為可能，與託管、財資管理平台及銀行系統深度整合，為機構用戶帶來絲滑現金管理體驗。此架構需長期大量投資，對替代產品形成重大門檻。
風險管理的持續演化證明了其自我調整能力。每次壓力測試後，監管改革及業界實踐都會相應升級，以——address identified weaknesses. The 2010 reforms introduced stable NAV limitations and enhanced liquidity requirements. The 2014 reforms added floating NAVs, fees, and gates for prime funds. The 2023 reforms focused on liquidity and sponsor support obligations. This iterative improvement process reflects the regulatory and industry commitment to maintaining MMF stability.
→ 解決已識別的弱點。2010 年的改革引入了穩定資產淨值（NAV）限制，並加強了流動性要求。2014 年的改革為優質基金引入了浮動資產淨值、費用及贖回閘門。2023 年的改革則集中於流動性要求及贊助商支持責任。這種循環改進的過程反映出監管機構及行業對維持貨幣市場基金（MMF）穩定的承諾。
Performance characteristics balance yield, safety, and liquidity. During the current rate environment, government MMFs provide yields near 4.4% while maintaining daily liquidity and principal stability. Prime funds offer modest yield premiums (typically 10-30 basis points) in exchange for additional credit risk exposure. Tax-exempt funds provide after-tax advantages for high-tax-bracket investors in municipal securities. These differentiated offerings allow investors to optimize risk-return trade-offs based on specific requirements.
→ 表現特點在回報、安全性及流動性之間取得平衡。在現時利率環境下，政府貨幣市場基金提供約 4.4% 的回報，同時保持每日流動性及本金穩定。優質基金則以額外信貸風險作交換，提供少量回報溢價（一般為 10-30 個基點）。免稅基金為處於高稅階的投資者在市政證券中帶來稅後優勢。這些多元化產品讓投資者可根據具體需要優化風險與回報取捨。
The regulatory infrastructure supporting MMFs creates significant advantages over alternative cash management solutions. SIPC protection, regulatory oversight, daily valuation, and professional management provide institutional-grade protections. The Investment Company Act framework ensures board oversight, independent directors, and fiduciary standards. This comprehensive regulatory structure explains institutional confidence in MMFs despite periodic stress episodes.
→ 支持貨幣市場基金的監管架構，相比其他現金管理方案具明顯優勢。SIPC 保障、監管監察、每日估值及專業管理，為機構投資者提供高級別保障。投資公司法的框架確保董事會監管、獨立董事及受託人標準。正是這套全面的監管結構，即使面對週期性壓力時，機構對貨幣市場基金仍然充滿信心。
The $7.26 trillion MMF market represents the accumulated result of decades of product development, regulatory evolution, and institutional adoption. This foundation provides the stability and credibility that tokenization aims to enhance through blockchain settlement efficiency while maintaining the essential characteristics that made MMFs successful. Understanding this foundation becomes critical for evaluating whether tokenization represents evolution or disruption to institutional cash management.
→ 7.26 萬億美元的貨幣市場基金市場，是多年產品發展、監管演化及機構採納的累積成果。這個基礎為代幣化通過區塊鏈結算效能提升時，提供原有的穩定性及可信度，同時保留令 MMF 成功的核心特質。要評估代幣化究竟是機構現金管理的演變還是顛覆，理解這個基礎至為關鍵。
Tokenization Technology: Bridging Traditional Finance and Digital Assets
Tokenization represents the technological bridge between traditional money market fund stability and blockchain settlement efficiency, creating programmable assets that maintain regulatory compliance while enabling 24/7 trading, atomic settlement, and smart contract integration. The technical architecture underlying tokenized money market funds combines established fund management practices with distributed ledger technology to create novel financial instruments that preserve institutional-grade characteristics while capturing digital asset benefits.
→ 代幣化是連繫傳統貨幣市場基金穩定性與區塊鏈結算效率的技術橋樑，打造可編程資產，既符合監管要求，同時支援 24/7 買賣、原子結算及智能合約整合。這類代幣化貨幣市場基金的技術架構，結合傳統基金管理經驗與分布式帳本技術，創造既具備機構級特質又能享受數碼資產優勢的新型金融工具。
Blockchain platform selection reflects institutional requirements rather than cryptocurrency community preferences. Ethereum dominates current deployments due to ERC-20 token standards and established DeFi ecosystem integration, but institutional applications increasingly favor permissioned networks. Hyperledger Fabric and R3 Corda provide privacy controls and governance mechanisms preferred by regulated financial institutions, while public networks like Polygon, Avalanche, and Arbitrum offer cost efficiency and scalability benefits. Multi-chain deployment strategies enable institutions to optimize for different use cases - using Ethereum for DeFi integration while maintaining private networks for internal operations.
→ 區塊鏈平台的選擇反映機構需求，而非加密貨幣社群偏好。以太坊因 ERC-20 代幣標準和成熟的 DeFi 生態系統整合，在現有部署中佔主導地位，但機構級應用日益傾向於使用受管制的授權網絡。Hyperledger Fabric 及 R3 Corda 能提供金融機構青睞的私隱控制及管治機制，而像 Polygon、Avalanche 和 Arbitrum 這類公有鏈則能帶來更高效益及擴展能力。多鏈部署策略讓機構根據各種應用場景作優化——例如用以太坊與 DeFi 生態系統整合，同時透過私有網絡處理內部操作。
Smart contract architecture enables programmable fund management through automated share issuance, redemption, and dividend distribution mechanisms. ERC-20 provides the basic fungible token standard, while ERC-3643 embeds compliance requirements directly into tokens, enabling automatic KYC/AML enforcement and regulatory restrictions. Governance mechanisms facilitate on-chain voting for fund parameter adjustments and upgrade procedures, though institutional applications typically maintain traditional board oversight structures. Multi-signature wallets, time-locked transactions, and emergency pause functions provide security layers protecting against operational errors and malicious attacks.
→ 智能合約架構通過自動化股份發行、贖回及分派股息，實現可編程基金管理。ERC-20 提供基本的可替換代幣標準，而 ERC-3643 則直接將合規要求嵌入代幣，讓 KYC/AML 執行及監管限制自動落實。管治機制支援鏈上投票，調整基金參數及升級程序，不過機構應用通常保留傳統的董事會監督結構。多重簽名錢包、限時交易及應急暫停等功能，為操作失誤和惡意攻擊築起多重安全防線。
Oracle integration solves the critical price discovery challenge for tokenized funds requiring real-time net asset value calculations. Chainlink and competing oracle networks provide multiple data source aggregation to prevent manipulation while delivering daily NAV updates consistent with traditional MMF operations. The potential for more frequent NAV updates - hourly or even real-time - creates opportunities for enhanced liquidity management but requires careful consideration of underlying asset pricing mechanics. Compliance data integration through oracles enables automated verification of investor eligibility, regulatory status, and sanction screening requirements.
→ Oracle 整合協助解決代幣化基金在實時計算資產淨值（NAV）時的價格發現難題。Chainlink 及其他競爭 oracle 網絡會彙整多個資料來源，以防價格被操縱，同時提供每日 NAV 更新，與傳統 MMF 操作一致。如果頻率變高至每小時，甚至實時更新 NAV，將為流動性管理提供更多可能性，但也必須審慎評估基礎資產定價機制。通過 oracle 整合合規資料，能自動驗證投資者資格、監管狀態及制裁篩查要求。
Current implementations demonstrate diverse approaches to balancing innovation with institutional requirements. Franklin Templeton's FOBXX fund, launched in 2021 as the first US registered mutual fund on public blockchain, now manages $580+ million across Stellar, Ethereum, Polygon, Solana, and Avalanche networks. The BENJI token structure provides daily yield distribution through token airdrops while maintaining traditional fund regulation compliance. BlackRock's BUIDL fund represents the market leader with $513.47 million AUM (22% market share), deploying across Ethereum, Arbitrum, Avalanche, Polygon, Optimism, and Aptos networks through partnership with Securitize for institutional tokenization infrastructure.
→ 現有落地實踐展示了創新與機構要求之間不同的平衡方式。富蘭克林騰普頓的 FOBXX 基金於 2021 年成為美國首個註冊於公鏈上的互惠基金，目前已在 Stellar、Ethereum、Polygon、Solana 及 Avalanche 等網絡管理超過 5.8 億美元。BENJI 代幣結構透過代幣空投每日派息，並維持對傳統基金監管的合規。貝萊德（BlackRock）的 BUIDL 基金則以 5.13 億美元規模（市佔率 22%）居於市場領導地位，並通過與 Securitize 合作，跨 Ethereum、Arbitrum、Avalanche、Polygon、Optimism 及 Aptos 等網絡部署機構級代幣化基建。
The Goldman Sachs and BNY Mellon partnership, launched July 2025, pioneered "mirrored tokenization" where traditional fund ownership records are simultaneously maintained on Goldman's DAP® blockchain platform. This approach enables blockchain-based transfers without abandoning traditional custody arrangements, providing a bridge model for institutions hesitant to fully commit to blockchain-native structures. Participating fund managers include BlackRock, Fidelity, Federated Hermes, and Goldman Sachs Asset Management, representing significant institutional validation of tokenization concepts.
→ 高盛與紐約梅隆銀行於 2025 年 7 月啓動合作，開創「鏡像代幣化」方案，將傳統基金持有人紀錄同時記錄於高盛的 DAP® 區塊鏈平台。這種做法讓基金單位可在區塊鏈上流轉，同時保留傳統託管安排，為未必願全面遷移至區塊鏈原生結構的機構，提供過渡橋樑。參與基金經理包括貝萊德、富達、Federated Hermes 及高盛資產管理，顯示代幣化理念獲得主要機構認可。
Scalability represents the primary technical challenge for institutional adoption. Ethereum's approximately 15 transactions per second capacity cannot support the thousands of transactions required for institutional-scale operations without Layer-2 scaling solutions. Polygon, Arbitrum, and other Layer-2 networks provide dramatically improved throughput and cost efficiency, though they introduce additional complexity and potential security risks. Alternative Layer-1 networks like Avalanche and Solana offer higher base-layer performance but with smaller ecosystems and less established security track records.
→ 可擴展性是機構大規模採用的主要技術挑戰。以太坊每秒約 15 筆交易，未採用第二層（Layer-2）擴展技術時，無法應付機構級的交易量需求。Polygon、Arbitrum 及其他 L2 網絡大幅提升交易效率及成本效益，但同時亦增加了系統複雜度及潛在安全風險。其他 L1 網絡如 Avalanche 和 Solana 雖然基礎層表現較好，但生態系統規模較小，且安全記錄未如老牌鏈完整。
Cross-chain interoperability creates both opportunities and risks for institutional applications. Chainlink Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP), Wormhole, and custom bridge solutions enable asset transfer between different blockchain ecosystems, providing unified liquidity pools and arbitrage opportunities. However, bridge vulnerabilities represent over $2.5 billion in historical losses, creating legitimate institutional concerns about cross-chain asset mobility. The development of more secure bridge technologies and insurance mechanisms remains critical for institutional adoption.
→ 跨鏈互通為機構應用同時帶來機遇與風險。Chainlink 的跨鏈協議（CCIP）、Wormhole 及自訂橋接方案，令資產得以跨不同區塊鏈生態串流，從而整合流動性池和創造套利空間。然而，各類橋接漏洞曾造成超過 25 億美元的歷史損失，令機構對跨鏈資產流動持合理憂慮。發展更安全的橋接技術及保險機制，仍是推動機構採納的關鍵。
Atomic settlement mechanisms enable simultaneous delivery versus payment (DvP) transactions that eliminate counterparty risk during settlement. Smart contracts can ensure that asset transfers and payments occur simultaneously or not at all, addressing the fundamental settlement risk problems in traditional payment systems. Hash-Link Concepts and similar technologies enable secure DvP across different distributed ledgers, though practical implementation requires coordination between counterparties and compatible technical infrastructure.
→ 原子結算機制可實現「付款即交收」（DvP）式同步交易，杜絕結算過程中的對手方風險。智能合約保證資產轉移與付款必須同時發生，否則全部作廢，徹底解決傳統支付系統的基本結算風險。Hash-Link 概念等技術，則讓不同分布式帳本之間也可安全進行 DvP 結算，但實際落地需雙方協作並配合兼容的技術架構。
Integration with traditional banking systems requires specialized middleware to translate between blockchain protocols and existing financial infrastructure. API integrations enable real-time connectivity with core banking systems, treasury management platforms, and custody providers. Settlement network interoperability with ACH, wire transfer systems, and SWIFT messaging provides familiar interfaces for institutional users while capturing blockchain efficiency benefits. Regulatory reporting automation generates compliance and audit trails automatically rather than requiring manual processes.
→ 要與傳統銀行系統整合，需專用中介軟件將區塊鏈協議與既有金融基建打通。API 集成讓核心銀行系統、財資管理平台及託管服務可實時連接。結算網絡與自動結算中心（ACH）、電匯及 SWIFT 訊息互通，為機構用戶提供熟悉介面，同時享受區塊鏈帶來的效益。監管報告自動化，無須人手處理即可自動生成合規及審計紀錄。
Key management represents a critical operational challenge for institutional implementations. Private key security requires institutional-grade custody solutions, multi-signature schemes, and hardware security modules to prevent irreversible asset losses. The emergence of regulated digital asset custody providers like BitGo, Anchorage, and major bank custody divisions addresses institutional requirements for insured, audited, and regulated key management services. However, this infrastructure remains less mature than traditional securities custody systems.
→ 密鑰管理是機構推動代幣化過程中一項極關鍵的營運挑戰。私鑰安全需要機構級託管方案、多重簽名結構，以及硬件安全模組，避免資產不可逆損失。BitGo、Anchorage 與大型銀行的託管業務等受規管數碼資產託管商的興起，回應了機構對受保、審核及監管密鑰管理的需求。不過，有關基建尚未如傳統證券託管般成熟。
Regulatory compliance embedding within smart contracts creates opportunities for automated oversight and enforcement. ERC-3643 and similar standards enable tokens to embed investor restrictions, jurisdiction limitations, and compliance requirements at the protocol level. Automated sanctions screening, accredited investor verification, and regulatory reporting can occur through smart contract logic rather than manual processes. However, this approach requires coordination between regulators, technology providers, and fund managers to ensure appropriate implementation.
→ 將合規要求嵌入智能合約，為自動監管和執法帶來新契機。ERC-3643 及類似標準讓代幣在協議層面嵌入投資者限制、司法管轄條件及合規要求，自動制裁篩查、認可投資者驗證及監管報告均可通過智能合約邏輯運作，而毋須人手處理。但這種方式必須監管機構、技術供應商及基金經理之間通力協作，方能有效落實。
Technical risk management encompasses both traditional financial risks and novel blockchain-specific vulnerabilities. Smart contract code auditing, formal verification methods, and insurance mechanisms protect against implementation errors. Oracle manipulation attacks require time-weighted average prices and decentralized data source aggregation. Network congestion and gas fee spikes need contingency planning and alternative execution pathways. The integration of these risk management practices into institutional-grade operations
→ 技術風險管理需兼顧傳統金融風險及新興的區塊鏈特有漏洞。智能合約代碼審計、形式驗證方法及保險安排有助防範部署錯誤。針對 oracle 操縱攻擊要用時間加權平均價與去中心化數據源整合。網絡擁塞及 gas 費飆升時，需要備有應變計劃及替代執行路線。將以上風險管理措施融入機構級營運流程，是未來穩妥落地的必要條件。requires significant expertise and ongoing monitoring.
需要豐富專業知識及持續監控。
Performance optimization focuses on cost efficiency and transaction speed while maintaining security and compliance requirements. Gas optimization techniques, batch processing, and Layer-2 deployment reduce transaction costs from dollars to pennies for typical operations. State channel implementations and similar scaling solutions enable high-frequency operations with periodic settlement to main networks. However, these optimizations must balance cost savings against security guarantees and regulatory requirements.
效能優化著重於成本效益和交易速度，同時維持安全性及合規要求。透過 gas 優化技術、批量處理和 Layer-2 部署，可將一般操作的交易成本由數美元降至幾毫，而 State channel 等擴容方案則能實現高頻操作並定期結算至主網。不過，這些優化措施必須在節省成本與確保安全性及符合法規之間取得平衡。
The technical infrastructure underlying tokenized money market funds demonstrates the maturation of blockchain technology for institutional financial applications. While challenges remain around scalability, interoperability, and integration with traditional systems, current implementations prove the feasibility of maintaining traditional investment characteristics while capturing digital asset benefits. The convergence of institutional expertise with blockchain innovation creates opportunities for financial products that optimize both stability and efficiency in ways previously impossible through purely traditional or purely digital approaches.
代幣化貨幣市場基金背後的技術基礎建設，展示了區塊鏈技術在機構級金融應用上的成熟。雖然在可擴展性、互操作性，以及與傳統系統的整合方面仍有挑戰，但現有的實踐已證明：在保持傳統投資特性的同時，也能獲得數字資產的優勢。機構專業知識與區塊鏈創新結合，為金融產品帶來前所未有的穩定性和效率雙重優化機會，是以往純傳統或數碼方式難以做到的。
Comparative Analysis: Tokenized MMFs Versus Stablecoins
比較分析：代幣化貨幣市場基金（tMMF）與穩定幣
The fundamental distinction between tokenized money market funds and stablecoins lies in their design philosophy: tMMFs optimize for institutional cash management requirements while stablecoins prioritize payment efficiency and price stability. This philosophical difference creates measurable trade-offs across yield generation, risk profiles, regulatory clarity, and operational characteristics that determine suitability for specific use cases in digital finance applications.
代幣化貨幣市場基金（tMMF）與穩定幣的根本分別，體現在設計理念：tMMF 著重於機構現金管理需求，而穩定幣則側重支付效率和價格穩定。這種理念的差異，令兩者在收益產生、風險特性、監管明確性及營運特色等多方面出現明顯取捨，最終決定各自在數字金融應用中的合適用例。
Yield generation represents the most significant comparative advantage for tMMFs. While major stablecoins maintain zero yield to preserve $1.00 parity, tokenized money market funds actively generate yield through professional management of short-term securities portfolios. Current yields approximate 4.4% annually for Treasury-backed tMMFs, creating substantial opportunity cost advantages over stablecoins in positive interest rate environments. For institutional treasury management, this yield differential translates to millions in additional income on large cash positions - a $100 million corporate cash position generates $4.4 million additional annual income in tMMFs versus zero in traditional stablecoins.
收益產生是 tMMF 最具競爭力的比較優勢。大型穩定幣為保持一美元平價，不會產生任何收益；但代幣化貨幣市場基金透過專業管理短期證券組合，能夠主動產生收益。目前以美國國債支援的 tMMF 年化收益大約為 4.4%，在正利率環境下，相比穩定幣具明顯機會成本優勢。對於機構財資管理而言，這些收益差異意味著巨額額外收入——例如 1 億美元現金部位，每年可為 tMMF 帶來 440 萬美元的額外收益，而傳統穩定幣則完全無。
Risk profile analysis reveals nuanced differences despite structural similarities. Both tMMFs and stablecoins invest primarily in short-term, high-quality securities including US Treasuries and commercial paper. However, tMMFs maintain regulatory diversification requirements under Investment Company Act oversight, while stablecoin reserve composition varies by issuer with less standardized disclosure. The March 2023 USDC depegging, triggered by $3.3 billion Silicon Valley Bank exposure, demonstrated concentration risks in stablecoin reserve management. Conversely, MMF regulations limit single issuer exposure and require enhanced liquidity management, though the 2008 Reserve Primary Fund failure and 2020 COVID-19 stress periods showed tMMFs face similar redemption pressure risks during market stress.
雖然兩者架構相似，但風險特性分析顯示出細緻差異。tMMF 及穩定幣都主要投資於短期、高質素證券如美國國債及商業票據；但 tMMF 在《投資公司法》監管下需保持分散投資，穩定幣則由發行人自行決定儲備組成，披露程度不一。2023 年 3 月，USDC 因矽谷銀行 33 億美元敞口曾經脫鉤，反映穩定幣儲備管理的集中風險。相反，MMF 規例則限制單一發行人風險，要求加強流動性管理。當然，2008 年 Reserve Primary Fund 失敗和 2020 年新冠疫情時期的壓力同樣證明，tMMF 在市場壓力下也可能面對贖回壓力風險。
Settlement efficiency creates complexity trade-offs between the two approaches. Stablecoins offer immediate settlement finality within 3-5 seconds on most blockchain networks, providing clear advantages for payment transactions and trading applications. Tokenized MMFs can achieve similar settlement speeds through blockchain deployment while maintaining daily NAV calculations consistent with traditional fund operations. However, the requirement for real-time NAV accuracy creates oracle dependencies and potential delays that pure payment-focused stablecoins avoid. For cross-border payments requiring immediate finality, stablecoins maintain advantages, while tMMFs excel in applications requiring yield generation with reasonable settlement speed.
兩種方案在結算效率上的取捨亦有其複雜之處。穩定幣於大部分區塊鏈網絡上可以於 3-5 秒內完成即時結算，無論支付抑或交易用途都具明顯優勢。tMMF 亦可透過區塊鏈部署達到類似結算速度，同時照顧到傳統基金每日日終資產淨值（NAV）計算。不過，實時 NAV 準確需要依賴預言機，或會存在延遲，這正是純支付型穩定幣無需顧慮的。對於需要即時結算的跨境支付，穩定幣仍然較有優勢；但如應用需兼顧收益和合理結算速度，tMMF 則為較佳。
Regulatory status provides tMMFs with significant institutional advantages. Under US securities law, tokenized money market funds remain subject to established Investment Company Act oversight, providing familiar compliance frameworks for institutional investors. The July 2025 GENIUS Act explicitly excludes tMMFs from payment stablecoin regulation, confirming their securities treatment. This regulatory clarity contrasts with ongoing stablecoin classification uncertainty across jurisdictions. European MiCA implementation has forced major stablecoin delistings, while tMMFs can operate under existing UCITS and AIFMD frameworks with additional DLT-specific requirements.
監管地位令 tMMF 於機構應用上更具優勢。於美國證券法下，tMMF 仍然受《投資公司法》監管，機構投資者可沿用熟悉的合規程序。2025 年 7 月實施的 GENIUS 法案更明確將 tMMF 排除於支付型穩定幣監管之外，確認其證券的定位。這種監管清晰度，與穩定幣在不同司法管轄區分類未明的狀況形成強烈對比。歐洲 MiCA 法案實施更導致多隻主要穩定幣下架，但 tMMF 則可根據 UCITS 和 AIFMD 現有監管架構，加設 DLT 特定要求繼續運作。
Market infrastructure requirements reveal different maturity levels between the technologies. Stablecoins benefit from established cryptocurrency exchange integration, DeFi protocol compatibility, and payment system adoption, creating extensive liquidity and utility networks. The combined $250+ billion stablecoin market provides deep liquidity across multiple blockchain networks and applications. Tokenized MMFs require specialized infrastructure for institutional custody, compliance integration, and traditional finance system connectivity. While current tMMF market capitalization exceeds $1 billion with strong growth trajectories, the ecosystem remains less developed than stablecoin infrastructure.
市場基礎建設方面反映兩種技術成熟度各異。穩定幣已經與主流加密貨幣交易所整合，兼容 DeFi 協議與支付系統，形成大量資金流及應用網絡。整個穩定幣市場總額超過 2,500 億美元，於多條區塊鏈均有深厚流動性。tMMF 則需配合機構級託管、合規及連結傳統金融系統之專門基礎設施。雖現時 tMMF 市值已超過 10 億美元而且增長迅速，但整個生態系統仍未及穩定幣成熟。
Scalability analysis shows different bottlenecks for each approach. Stablecoins face blockchain network limitations - Ethereum's 15 TPS constraint requires Layer-2 scaling solutions for institutional volume. However, their simple price stability mechanism enables straightforward scaling across multiple networks. Tokenized MMFs face additional complexity from daily NAV calculations, oracle dependencies, and regulatory compliance requirements that create operational scaling challenges beyond pure blockchain throughput limitations. Multi-chain deployment strategies help address these issues but introduce interoperability risks and operational complexity.
擴展性方面，兩類產品面臨的瓶頸亦不同。穩定幣受制於區塊鏈網絡效能，例如以太坊每秒 15 筆交易上限，因此機構級應用需 Layer-2 等擴容方案。但其價格穩定機制簡單，便於多條鏈同步擴展。tMMF 則因需每日計算 NAV、倚賴預言機及合規要求，營運擴展比單靠區塊鏈效能更複雜。多鏈部署雖可舒緩問題，卻亦帶來互通風險及營運複雜性。
Counterparty risk structures differ significantly despite similar underlying assets. Stablecoins concentrate risk through centralized issuers (Circle, Tether) controlling reserve asset management and operational infrastructure. Recent regulatory actions and transparency investigations create ongoing issuer-specific risks. Tokenized MMFs distribute risk through traditional fund governance structures with independent directors, regulated investment advisors, and established oversight mechanisms. However, they introduce new risks through smart contract vulnerabilities, oracle manipulation, and blockchain network dependencies that traditional MMFs avoid.
即使基礎資產類似，兩者的對手風險結構差異極大。穩定幣的風險集中於中心化發行人（如 Circle、Tether）負責儲備資產管理及營運。近年監管行動及透明度調查令發行人風險持續。tMMF 風險則分散於傳統基金治理架構，包括獨立董事、持牌投資顧問及既有監察機制。不過，tMMF 亦會引入智能合約漏洞、預言機操控及依賴區塊鏈網絡等新風險，而傳統 MMF 則可免受這些風險影響。
Operational efficiency comparisons reveal different optimization targets. Stablecoins excel in payment applications with minimal transaction friction, immediate settlement, and broad ecosystem integration. Cost structures remain low due to simple operational requirements and high transaction volumes. Tokenized MMFs provide superior operational efficiency for treasury management applications through automated yield distribution, collateral optimization, and programmable cash management features. However, they require more complex operational infrastructure including professional management, compliance systems, and institutional-grade custody arrangements.
營運效率方面，各自針對的優化目標亦不相同。穩定幣於支付應用最為突出，交易摩擦低、可即時結算且已融入廣泛生態系統。成本結構低廉，得益於運作要求簡單及高交易量。tMMF 則透過自動化收益分配、抵押品優化及可編程資金管理功能，大大提升財資管理的操作效率，但對專業管理、合規及機構級託管基建要求更高。
Liquidity characteristics create use case differentiation. Stablecoins provide continuous liquidity through trading market availability and immediate convertibility to fiat currencies through multiple on-ramps and off-ramps. Daily trading volumes exceed billions for major stablecoins, ensuring consistent liquidity access. Tokenized MMFs maintain daily redemption capability consistent with traditional funds while enabling continuous trading through blockchain networks. However, NAV-based pricing creates potential discounts or premiums to net asset value during periods of supply-demand imbalance.
流動性特性令產品適用場景有所區分。穩定幣全天候流通，可於交易市場即時買賣，並能經多個入金及出金渠道轉換為法定貨幣；主流穩定幣每日成交額以十億計，保證流動性充足。tMMF 傳承傳統基金每日贖回機制，並通過區塊鏈網絡進行持續交易。但受 NAV 定價機制影響，供求失衡時可能出現貼水或溢價。
Integration complexity with existing financial systems shows maturity differences. Stablecoins integrate relatively easily with digital asset infrastructure but face challenges connecting to traditional banking, compliance, and reporting systems. Regulatory uncertainty compounds these integration challenges for institutional applications. Tokenized MMFs maintain compatibility with existing investment management infrastructure, custody systems, and compliance frameworks while adding blockchain settlement capabilities. This hybrid approach reduces implementation risk but requires parallel system operation during transition periods.
與傳統金融體系整合的複雜度，亦突顯兩者成熟度落差。穩定幣較易與數字資產基建整合，但對接傳統銀行、合規及報告系統存在障礙，監管不確定性亦加劇機構應用難度。tMMF 則可沿用現有投資管理、託管及合規體系，同時引進區塊鏈結算功能。這種混合式方式降低實施風險，但於過渡時期需雙軌系統同步運作。
Cross-border payment efficiency reveals different strengths. Stablecoins excel in retail and SME cross-border payments with cost reductions exceeding 95% versus traditional correspondent banking. Their payment-optimized design enables immediate settlement and transparent fee structures. Tokenized MMFs provide better solutions for institutional cross-border treasury management, offering yield generation during settlement delays and regulatory compliance for larger transaction values. The ability to earn yield while maintaining liquidity creates compelling value propositions for corporate cash management applications.
跨境支付效率亦見分野。穩定幣在零售和中小企跨境支付上表現出色，成本可較傳統銀行減少 95% 以上，並可即時結算、收費透明。tMMF 則為機構財資跨境管理提供更理想方案，不但可於結算期間產生收益，還能滿足大額交易的監管要求。在維持流動性同時賺取收益，對企業現金管理甚具吸引力。
Risk management framework requirements differ substantially. Stablecoins require monitoring of issuer operations, reserve asset quality, and regulatory compliance across multiple jurisdictions. Concentration risk management focuses on issuer diversification and reserve transparency. Tokenized MMFs benefit from established investment company risk management frameworks including portfolio diversification, credit analysis, and liquidity management, but must add blockchain-specific risk controls including smart contract security, oracle reliability, and network operational risk management.
風險管理框架要求有顯著不同。穩定幣需密切監察發行人營運、儲備資產品質以及多地合規情況，對手風險管理着重發行人多元及資產透明。tMMF 則可依賴投資公司既有風險管理體系，如組合分散、信貸評估及流動性管理，但亦需額外應對區塊鏈相關風險，包括智能合約安全、預言機可靠度及網絡運作風險。
The comparative analysis reveals complementary rather than competing technologies. Stablecoins optimize for
比較分析顯示，兩者屬互補多於互相競爭的技術。穩定幣優化於…Here is the translation as requested (skipping markdown links):
payment velocity, ecosystem integration, and operational simplicity, making them superior for transaction-focused applications. Tokenized money market funds optimize for institutional cash management, yield generation, and regulatory compliance, creating advantages for treasury management and collateral applications. The choice between technologies depends primarily on whether yield generation or payment efficiency takes priority, with many institutional applications likely requiring both capabilities through integrated solutions.
支付速度、生態系統整合及操作簡便，使其在以交易為重心的應用中更具優勢。代幣化貨幣市場基金專為機構現金管理、收益產生及符合法規優化，於財資管理及抵押品應用中帶來優勢。兩種技術的選擇主要取決於收益產生還是支付效率為優先，而大量機構級應用很大機會需要透過整合方案同時具備這兩項功能。
The maturation of both technologies creates opportunities for hybrid approaches combining stablecoin payment efficiency with tMMF yield generation, potentially through automated portfolio management systems that optimize between different digital asset types based on operational requirements and market conditions.
兩項技術成熟化為混合方案創造機會，結合穩定幣的支付效率及代幣化貨幣市場基金所帶來的收益增長，有可能透過自動化投資組合管理系統，根據營運需求及市場狀況，優化不同類型數碼資產之間的配置。
Institutional Perspective: Treasury Management Revolution
機構觀點：財資管理革命
Corporate treasuries managing billions in cash seek optimization across three primary dimensions: yield generation, liquidity management, and operational efficiency. Tokenized money market funds address fundamental pain points in traditional cash management while providing measurable improvements in capital efficiency, cross-border operations, and collateral management that create compelling value propositions for institutional adoption.
管理數以十億計現金的企業財資部門，致力於在三大範疇追求最佳化：收益產生、流動性管理及操作效率。代幣化貨幣市場基金針對傳統現金管理的主要痛點，提供資本效率、跨境操作及抵押品管理上的顯著提升，為機構級採用帶來極具吸引力的價值主張。
Current corporate treasury pain points create substantial opportunity costs in traditional cash management systems. Settlement delays of 2-3 days for cross-border transactions tie up working capital and create FX exposure during settlement periods. Correspondent banking fees can reach 10% for remittances to emerging markets, while complex reconciliation processes require substantial operational overhead. Manual compliance and sanctions screening introduce both delay and operational risk, while limited payment transparency creates challenges for cash forecasting and liquidity management. Restricted cash mobility in emerging markets compounds these issues, forcing corporations to maintain substantial local currency deposits earning minimal returns.
目前企業財資部門面臨的痛點，在傳統現金管理系統中造成可觀的機會成本。跨境交易結算延遲達2-3日，令營運資金被困並且在交易結算期間產生外匯風險。代理銀行手續費於新興市場匯款甚至高達10%，而複雜的對賬流程亦帶來高昂營運成本。手動合規及制裁審查不但導致延誤，更增添操作風險；支付透明度有限則令現金預測及流動性管理變得困難。新興市場現金流通受限令這些問題惡化，令企業需保持大量低回報的本地貨幣存款。
Enhanced cash management represents the primary tMMF value proposition for corporate treasuries. Real-time liquidity management through 24/7 settlement and trading capabilities eliminates traditional banking hour constraints and weekend delays. Yield optimization provides competitive returns - UBS uMINT offers 4.4% annualized yields versus 0.1% for traditional savings accounts, creating millions in additional income for large corporate cash positions. Capital efficiency improves through instant collateral transfers that free up capital during clearing processes, reducing intraday banking fees and liquidity buffers. Automated cash flow management through smart contracts enables portfolio rebalancing and daily yield distribution without manual intervention.
加強現金管理正是代幣化貨幣市場基金對企業財資的主要價值主張。全天候24/7結算及交易能力，讓即時流動性管理成為可能，免受傳統銀行營業時間及周末延誤所限。收益優化提供具競爭力回報——瑞銀uMINT年息達4.4%，傳統儲蓄戶口僅0.1%，對大型企業現金部位可帶來每年數以百萬計的額外收入。資本效率提升，因即時抵押品轉讓能在清算時釋放資金，減低日內銀行手續費及流動性緩衝需求。智能合約實現現金流自動管理，可自動平衡組合及每日分派利息，無需人手介入。
Collateral management applications demonstrate transformational potential for institutional operations. The Investment Association recognizes tokenized MMFs as High-Quality Liquid Assets (HQLA) for non-centrally cleared derivatives margin calls, repo transactions, bilateral ISDA agreements, and General Collateral Repo arrangements. This recognition creates operational advantages unavailable with traditional collateral posting mechanisms - corporations can meet margin calls without redeeming MMF units, transfer ownership instantly rather than liquidating positions, reduce margin period of risk through faster settlement, and potentially lower Initial Margin requirements due to improved settlement timing.
抵押品管理應用展現對機構營運的變革潛力。投資協會認可代幣化貨幣市場基金為高質素流動資產（HQLA），可用於非中央清算衍生產品保證金追繳、回購交易、雙邊ISDA協議及一般抵押品回購安排。這項承認帶來傳統抵押品登記方式所沒有的操作優勢——企業可於毋須贖回貨幣市場基金單位下履行追繳責任、即時轉讓擁有權而非清算倉位，透過更快捷的結算縮短風險期間，並因改善結算時效而有望降低首期保證金要求。
Cross-border payment efficiency improvements provide quantified benefits for multinational corporations. Recent data shows 95% cost reduction for international payroll costs using cryptocurrency alternatives versus traditional banking systems. Tokenized MMFs extend these benefits to institutional-scale operations while maintaining regulatory compliance and yield generation capability. Elimination of correspondent banking intermediaries reduces both cost and settlement risk, while real-time payment visibility provides transparency unavailable in traditional systems. Programmable payment conditions and escrow services enable sophisticated transaction structures automated through smart contracts.
跨境支付效率提升為跨國企業帶來可量化效益。最新數據顯示，使用加密貨幣替代方案，相比傳統銀行系統，國際薪酬開支可減少95%。代幣化貨幣市場基金將這些優勢延展至機構級運作，同時保留合規及收益產生能力。取消代理銀行中介不單降低成本及結算風險，實時支付可視性亦帶來傳統系統前所未有的透明度。可編程支付條件及託管服務，讓複雜交易結構可由智能合約自動執行。
Major pilot programs validate institutional demand and demonstrate practical implementation pathways. The Goldman Sachs and BNY Mellon partnership, launched July 2025, enables institutional investors to purchase MMF shares recorded on Goldman's DAP® blockchain platform. Participants including BlackRock, Fidelity, Federated Hermes, and Goldman Sachs Asset Management represent significant institutional validation of tokenization concepts. The innovation enables tokenized MMFs to serve as transferable collateral without liquidation, unlocking utility unavailable in the traditional $7.1 trillion MMF market.
多個大型試點計劃驗證了機構需求並示範實際落地途徑。高盛與紐約梅隆銀行於2025年7月展開合作，讓機構投資者可於高盛DAP®區塊鏈平台購買記錄在內的貨幣市場基金單位。參與方包括貝萊德、富達、Federated Hermes、以及高盛資產管理，充分印證代幣化理念的機構級認受性。這項創新令代幣化貨幣市場基金可以無需清算情況下作為可轉讓抵押品使用，釋放傳統7.1萬億美元MMF市場未曾具備的效用。
The Citi and Fidelity International collaboration under Singapore's Project Guardian demonstrates sophisticated treasury management applications. The tokenized MMF with embedded digital FX swap enables real-time settlement of multi-asset positions across currencies, allowing corporate treasurers to invest non-USD working capital in USD MMFs while maintaining FX hedging and operational liquidity. This capability addresses the fundamental challenge of cross-currency cash management for multinational corporations, potentially expanding the addressable market to $400 billion by 2030.
花旗與富達國際於新加坡Project Guardian合作證明財資管理應用趨向成熟。內嵌數碼外匯掉期之代幣化貨幣市場基金，令多資產、跨貨幣持倉可即時結算。企業財資部可將非美元營運資金投資於美元MMF，同時保留外匯對沖及營運流動性。這項能力正面應對跨國企業跨幣種現金管理根本挑戰，預計到2030年可將可服務市場擴大至4,000億美元。
Capital efficiency gains for financial institutions extend beyond treasury management to core business operations. Current market data shows $255 trillion in marketable securities demand collateral usage, with only $28.6 trillion actively deployed. Even small percentage improvements in collateral mobility would transform trade settlement and risk management capabilities. Tokenized MMFs enable real-time collateral movement across jurisdictions and counterparties, reducing liquidity buffers and enabling more efficient capital allocation. Smart contracts automate margin calls, collateral valuation, and reporting processes, reducing operational overhead while eliminating reconciliation errors.
資本效率提升對金融機構不僅限於財資管理，更可延伸至核心業務運作。現時市場上，有255萬億美元可交易證券需要作抵押，但實際投入使用僅28.6萬億美元。即使抵押流動性僅提升少許，亦足以改變交易結算及風險管理能力。代幣化MMF允許抵押品即時穿越司法區和對手方流轉，減少流動性緩衝，令資本分配更有效率。自動化智能合約可自動處理追繳、抵押估值及報告流程，減少操作負擔，並杜絕對賬錯誤。
Settlement risk reduction provides measurable value for institutions processing large transaction volumes. Traditional 2-3 day settlement windows create counterparty exposure during volatile periods, requiring substantial credit facilities and risk management infrastructure. Atomic settlement through tokenized MMFs reduces counterparty, bankruptcy, and performance risks to near zero, enabling institutions to reduce credit facilities and deploy capital more efficiently. The potential for 24/7 settlement eliminates weekend and holiday exposure periods that create operational complexity in traditional systems.
減低結算風險為處理大量交易的機構帶來實質價值。傳統2-3日結算時間令交易期間出現對手方風險，於波動市況下需依賴龐大信貸額及風險管理架構。代幣化MMF實現即時結算，將對手方、破產及履約風險大致降至零，令機構可減少信貸額度，提升資本部署效率。全天候結算潛力亦徹底消除傳統系統周末及假期帶來的操作複雜性。
Early adopter case studies demonstrate practical benefits and implementation pathways. Franklin Templeton's FOBXX fund, managing $580+ million across multiple blockchain networks, provides real-time transparency through BENJI tokens while eliminating manual reconciliation processes typical of traditional fund operations. UBS Asset Management's tokenized Variable Capital Company fund represents institutional-grade cash management implementation, while the integration with UBS Tokenize service demonstrates scalable infrastructure development.
早期應用者案例展示了實際效益及落地路徑。富蘭克林鄧普頓FOBXX基金於多個區塊鏈生態下共管理逾5.8億美元，BENJI代幣提供實時透明度並消除傳統基金操作上需手動對賬的工序。瑞銀資產管理的代幣化可變資本公司基金體現機構級現金管理能力，結合UBS Tokenize服務展現可擴展基礎設施發展。
Adoption barriers remain significant but addressable through industry coordination and regulatory development. EY survey data shows 77% of institutional and high-net-worth investors actively exploring tokenized assets, with 55% planning allocation within 1-2 years. However, regulatory uncertainty represents the primary obstacle, with 49% of institutional investors identifying regulatory clarity as their top concern. Infrastructure limitations including interoperability challenges, cybersecurity concerns, and concentration risk in service providers require ongoing development and standardization efforts.
雖然推廣仍有不少障礙，但可透過行業協作及監管發展加以解決。安永調查顯示，77%機構及高淨值投資者正積極研究代幣化資產，其中55%計劃在1-2年內分配投資。然而，監管不明朗是最大障礙，49%機構投資者視監管清晰度為首要關注。基礎設施障礙包括跨系統互通、網絡安全憂慮及服務供應商過度集中之風險，均需持續改進及標準化。
Partnership models enable risk management during the transition to tokenized systems. Asset managers partnering with blockchain specialists preserve regulatory compliance while accessing digital asset benefits, demonstrated through relationships like Janus Henderson with Centrifuge and UBS with proprietary tokenization platforms. Multi-bank consortium networks like JPMorgan's Onyx and the Canton Network provide shared infrastructure development while distributing implementation costs and risks across multiple institutions.
夥伴模式有助於機構於過渡至代幣化系統期間管理風險。資產管理者與區塊鏈專才合作，既可維持合規，也享有數碼資產帶來的效益，例如Janus Henderson與Centrifuge，以及瑞銀與自家代幣化平台的合作。多銀行財團如摩根大通Onyx和Canton Network則共同開發基礎設施，實現資源共享，分散執行成本和風險。
Revenue model optimization creates incentives for institutional adoption beyond operational efficiency. Enhanced distribution reach through 24/7 accessibility expands addressable markets, while lower operational costs enable competitive pricing for end investors. Premium pricing for instant liquidity and settlement features creates new revenue opportunities, while programmable fund features enable sophisticated product development unavailable through traditional structures. These revenue enhancements help justify infrastructure investment and operational complexity associated with tokenization implementation.
收益模式優化為機構採用提供操作效率以外的新動力。全天候可用擴大銷售渠道，低營運成本可為終端投資者提供更具競爭力定價。即時流動性和結算功能可收取溢價，創造新利潤來源，而可編程結構亦能帶來傳統基金無法實現的產品創新。上述收益進一步合理化基礎設施投資及推行代幣化所需應付的操作複雜性。
Network effects and adoption thresholds suggest approaching inflection points for institutional adoption. McKinsey identifies the need for meaningful counterparty participation to achieve network effects, with multiple Minimum Viable Value Chains expected to emerge capturing different use cases within 2-3 years. The combination of institutional demand (5-8% portfolio allocation targets), infrastructure development, and regulatory clarity suggests conditions for accelerated adoption are developing.
網絡效應及用戶臨界點顯示機構採用正接近拐點。麥肯錫指出，要達成網絡效應需有足夠對手方參與，預期未來 2-3 年將出現多個最小可行價值鏈以應對不同應用場景。機構需求（目標組合分配5-8%）、基礎設施進展及監管清晰度，正集結形成加速採用的有利條件。
The institutional perspective on tokenized money market funds reveals transformational potential for corporate treasury management, collateral optimization, and cross-border payments. While adoption barriers remain, pilot programs and industry partnerships demonstrate practical pathways for implementation that preserve regulatory compliance while capturing
機構對代幣化貨幣市場基金的觀點，顯示其對企業財資管理、抵押品優化及跨境支付的顛覆潛力。雖然普及路上仍有障礙，但各大試驗計劃與行業合作夥伴已為合規落地鋪路，並成功……efficiency benefits unavailable through traditional or pure digital asset approaches.
傳統或純數碼資產方法無法實現的效率效益。
Regulatory Landscape: Clarity Versus Uncertainty
監管環境：明確與不確定
The regulatory treatment of tokenized money market funds versus stablecoins represents one of the most significant factors determining their relative adoption potential. Regulatory clarity provides institutional investors with compliance certainty, operational guidance, and legal protection essential for fiduciary responsibility, while uncertainty creates implementation barriers, compliance costs, and potential liability exposure that inhibit institutional adoption.
對於代幣化貨幣市場基金與穩定幣的監管取態，是左右它們相對採納潛力的最重要因素之一。明確的監管為機構投資者提供合規的確定性、操作指引及實施受信責任所需的法律保障；相反，監管不明確則帶來推行阻力、合規成本及潛在法律責任風險，從而阻礙機構採納。
The GENIUS Act transforms US stablecoin regulation through comprehensive federal framework implementation. Signed by President Trump on July 18, 2025, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins Act creates distinct regulatory categories for payment stablecoins under Office of the Comptroller of the Currency oversight for nonbank issuers and traditional bank regulators for bank-issued stablecoins. Critical provisions mandate 1:1 backing with USD cash, demand deposits, and Treasury bills with maximum 93-day maturity, while requiring monthly reserve reporting and prohibition of lending, pledging, or rehypothecating reserve assets.
《GENIUS法案》通過推行全面聯邦架構，徹底改變了美國對穩定幣的監管。該法案於2025年7月18日由特朗普總統簽署，透過《美國穩定幣創新指引及建立法案》劃分監管範疇：由貨幣監理署（OCC）監管非銀行發行人的支付型穩定幣，傳統銀行則由傳統銀行監管機構監管。關鍵條文包括要求美元現金、活期存款及最長93日到期的國庫券以1:1資產全數支持，並必須每月匯報儲備情況；同時禁止借出、承擔擔保或再質押儲備資產。
Tokenized money market funds receive explicit exclusion from payment stablecoin regulation under the GENIUS Act, confirming their treatment as traditional securities subject to Investment Company Act oversight. This exclusion provides regulatory clarity for institutional investors familiar with existing MMF compliance frameworks while avoiding uncertain classification issues affecting stablecoins. The Securities and Exchange Commission's "Project Crypto" initiative under Chairman Paul Atkins reinforces this approach, treating tokenization as a "technology-enabled process, not a new type of asset" subject to traditional securities regulation regardless of blockchain implementation.
在GENIUS法案下，代幣化貨幣市場基金被明確排除於支付型穩定幣監管之外，確認其被視為傳統證券，納入《投資公司法》的監管範圍。這一安排為熟悉現有 MMF（貨幣市場基金）合規框架的機構投資者帶來監管清晰性，亦避免困擾穩定幣的分類不明問題。證監會（SEC）主席Paul Atkins領導下的“Project Crypto”計劃亦進一步確立這一做法，把代幣化視為一種「以科技驅動的過程，而非全新資產類型」，無論有否應用區塊鏈，均按傳統證券監管。
European Union MiCA implementation creates divergent regulatory pathways. The Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation, fully implemented December 30, 2024, establishes mandatory authorization for asset-referenced tokens and e-money tokens with 100% liquid asset backing requirements and monthly transparency reporting. The €200 million daily transaction cap for payment use and reserve localization requirements within EU jurisdictions have forced major stablecoin delistings, with Tether (USDT) removed from EU exchanges and USDC facing compliance challenges across 27 member states. This regulatory fragmentation creates operational complexity for multinational institutions requiring consistent treatment across jurisdictions.
歐盟MiCA（加密資產市場監管規則）實施，帶來分歧的監管路徑。該規例自2024年12月30日全面實施，對資產參照型代幣和電子貨幣代幣設有強制授權，須100%以流動資產支持，並每月公開報表。支付用途每日交易上限2億歐元，以及儲備必須於歐盟境內，有關規定導致主要穩定幣下架，例如Tether（USDT）被移除歐盟交易所，USDC在27個成員國亦面對合規挑戰。這種監管分割令跨國機構於不同司法區須面對操作複雜性及一致性處理的難題。
Tokenized money market funds operate under existing AIFMD and UCITS frameworks in the European Union, providing established regulatory pathways with additional MiCA compliance requirements for crypto-asset service provision. Enhanced custody and operational resilience requirements under the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) create additional compliance obligations, but these build on familiar regulatory structures rather than creating entirely new frameworks. The European Central Bank's concern about dollar-denominated stablecoin adoption potentially weakening monetary control creates policy pressure favoring EU-regulated alternatives including tokenized euro-denominated funds.
歐盟內，代幣化貨幣市場基金繼續根據現有AIFMD（另類投資基金經理指令）及UCITS（可轉讓證券集體投資計劃指令）運作，為其提供現成監管渠道。若提供加密資產服務，則需額外遵從MiCA規定。數字營運復原力法（DORA）下加強了託管和營運韌性要求，雖增加合規負擔，但仍建基於熟悉的監管結構，毋須完全另起爐灶。歐洲央行憂慮美元計價穩定幣會削弱貨幣調控，推動政策傾向支持歐盟監管下的替代選項，包括代幣化歐元基金。
United Kingdom regulatory development follows comprehensive approach through Financial Services and Markets Act implementation. The draft order published April 29, 2025, creates new regulatory activities for "qualifying stablecoins" with fiat-referenced stable value maintenance under Financial Conduct Authority regulation. Bank of England oversight for systemic payment systems provides dual regulatory structure, while explicit distinction between stablecoins and tokenized deposits creates clear classification boundaries. The UK approach emphasizes territorial relief for cross-border firms dealing exclusively with institutional clients, potentially creating regulatory advantages for tokenized fund operations.
英國監管發展採取全面方法，通過《金融服務及市場法案》推進。2025年4月29日公佈之草案命令，針對“合資格穩定幣”新設監管活動，該等幣種須保持以法幣作參照價值，由金融行為監管局監管。英倫銀行則負責系統性支付系統監管，讓監管有雙重結構，又明確劃分穩定幣與代幣化存款的界線。英國方法強調對僅與機構客戶往來的跨境公司提供地理寬免，或有助代幣化基金營運取得監管優勢。
Singapore's regulatory framework demonstrates nuanced approach through the Monetary Authority of Singapore's Single-Currency Stablecoin framework effective August 2023. The framework applies to Singapore Dollar and G10 currency stablecoins with minimum $1 million base capital requirements, 100% reserve backing with monthly attestation, and annual audits with public reporting. Business restrictions prohibiting trading, staking, or lending activities focus issuance functions while maintaining regulatory clarity. This approach provides operational certainty while limiting scope to essential payment functions.
新加坡的監管框架則由新加坡金融管理局於2023年8月推行單一貨幣穩定幣框架，以細緻手法管理。該框架涵蓋新加坡元及G10貨幣穩定幣，設有最少100萬美元資本要求，100%儲備支持，每月認證、每年審計並公開報告。限制業務範圍，禁止進行交易、質押或借貸活動，專注於發行功能，同時確保監管明確性。這樣既提供營運確定性，又將範疇限定於最基本的支付功能。
Securities law applicability creates fundamental advantages for tokenized money market funds across major jurisdictions. Traditional Investment Company Act framework ensures board oversight, independent directors, and fiduciary standards familiar to institutional investors. Enhanced custody standards under evolving SEC rules and cybersecurity requirements provide investor protection while maintaining innovation capability. Disclosure requirements for blockchain-related risks ensure appropriate risk communication without prohibiting technological innovation.
在主要法域，證券法的適用為代幣化貨幣市場基金帶來根本性優勢。傳統《投資公司法》框架確保董事會監管、獨立董事參與及機構投資者熟悉的受信規範。隨著SEC（證監會）規則演進，提升託管及網絡安全要求，有助保障投資者之餘，亦兼顧創新。對區塊鏈相關風險的披露規定，確保適當風險溝通，同時不會妨礙科技革新。
Cross-border regulatory coordination remains challenging despite international cooperation efforts. The Financial Stability Board's Global Stablecoin framework provides high-level recommendations for international coordination, but implementation varies significantly across 48 surveyed jurisdictions. Different approaches to "global stablecoin" qualification create regulatory arbitrage opportunities while potentially fragmenting international markets. Resource constraints in emerging market economies limit implementation capability, creating uneven global regulatory development.
儘管國際間合作不斷，跨境監管協調仍然困難重重。金融穩定委員會（FSB）的全球性穩定幣框架提出高層次的國際協調建議，但於48個受訪國家/地區的實際執行情況卻高度參差。對“全球穩定幣”的認定方法不一，造成監管套利空間，分割國際市場。新興市場國家資源有限，落實監管能力受限，導致全球監管發展不均。
Central bank positions reflect monetary policy concerns about stablecoin adoption impacts. Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller's February 2025 support for properly regulated stablecoins maintains emphasis on 1:1 backing and redemption guarantees, while recognizing systemic importance requiring oversight. European Central Bank concerns about weakening euro area monetary control through dollar stablecoin adoption position the digital euro as competitive response to private sector alternatives. This creates policy tension between innovation support and monetary sovereignty protection across major jurisdictions.
各央行立場反映對穩定幣應用對貨幣政策影響的關注。美聯儲理事Christopher Waller於2025年2月支持經妥善監管的穩定幣，強調1:1資產支持及兌換保證，同時認同其系統重要性需接受監管。歐洲央行則擔心美元穩定幣會削弱歐元區貨幣控制，故以數碼歐元作出回應，以期與私人方案競爭。這導致各大法域在支持創新與維護貨幣主權之間出現政策張力。
Enforcement trends demonstrate regulatory prioritization across different approaches. US regulatory actions imposed $2.6 billion in cryptocurrency penalties during 2024, a 22% increase, while notable dismissals including SEC cases against Coinbase, OpenSea, and Robinhood in February 2025 suggest evolving enforcement strategies. The Ooki DAO precedent establishing decentralized autonomous organization legal personhood creates implications for blockchain governance structures, while increasing compliance costs drive significant industry restructuring expenses.
執法趨勢顯示，不同地區監管重點各異。美國在2024年針對加密貨幣實施的罰款高達26億美元，按年增幅達22%；而於2025年2月，SEC對Coinbase、OpenSea及Robinhood的案件遭駁回，反映有關執法策略出現變化。Ooki DAO的案例確立去中心化自治組織的法律主體地位，對區塊鏈治理結構產生深遠影響。與此同時，合規成本不斷升高，帶來行業大規模重組壓力。
Policy implications for financial stability create regulatory concerns about systemic risk development. Federal Reserve research showing stablecoin flows significantly affecting short-term Treasury yields raises questions about monetary policy transmission disruption. ECB analysis identifying deposit flight risk from traditional banking to interest-bearing stablecoins creates financial stability concerns requiring enhanced monitoring and possible reserve requirements. The interconnection between traditional and cryptocurrency markets creates new systemic risk channels requiring coordinated oversight.
金融穩定的政策啟示令監管機構對系統性風險產生憂慮。美聯儲研究發現穩定幣資金流已明顯影響短期國庫券孳息，引起有關貨幣政策傳導受阻的疑問。歐洲央行認為，傳統銀行的存款有外流至帶息穩定幣的風險，這構成金融穩定隱患，需要加強監察並或需實施儲備要求。傳統與加密資產市場的聯動，亦開闢了全新系統性風險渠道，必須有協調監管。
Implementation timelines vary significantly across major jurisdictions, creating operational planning challenges for multinational institutions. The GENIUS Act requires final rules within 18 months or 120 days after agency regulations, while EU Level-2 MiCA regulations continue throughout H2 2025. UK final cryptocurrency rules target Q2 2026 with application acceptance beginning late 2025. These different timelines create implementation sequencing challenges for institutions operating across multiple jurisdictions.
各大法域的落實時間進度懸殊，為跨國機構帶來營運規劃難度。GENIUS法案訂明最終規則需於18個月內或相關部門規例出後120日內生效；歐盟二級MiCA規則於2025年下半年繼續推出。英國的加密貨幣終極規則則以2026年第二季為目標，並於2025年底開始接受申請。這些不同的時間表令多地運作的機構面臨落實安排的先後次序難題。
The regulatory landscape reveals clear advantages for tokenized money market funds through established securities law treatment and explicit exclusion from uncertain stablecoin regulations. However, the fragmented international regulatory development creates ongoing challenges for cross-border operations requiring coordinated compliance strategies. The success of either approach depends on effective international coordination, consistent implementation, and adaptive regulatory frameworks that balance innovation support with financial stability protection.
總括而言，現有證券法規管及明確不適用於不確定穩定幣監管的安排，令代幣化貨幣市場基金於監管層面具明顯優勢。然而，國際監管發展碎片化，持續為跨境營運帶來挑戰，需制定協調一致的合規策略。要成功實現兩者，關鍵在於國際高效協調、一致落實及靈活的監管框架，在支持創新及保障金融穩定之間取得平衡。
Market Dynamics: Competition and Adoption Trajectories
市場動態：競爭與採納走勢
The tokenized money market fund market represents an early-stage opportunity within the broader $7.1 trillion traditional MMF industry, with current tokenized assets exceeding $1 billion and growth projections suggesting substantial expansion potential. Market dynamics reflect competition between traditional financial institutions adapting to blockchain technology and crypto-native firms building institutional-grade products, creating diverse adoption pathways and competitive strategies.
代幣化貨幣市場基金在現時總值達7.1萬億美元的傳統貨幣市場基金產業中，處於早期發展階段，現時代幣化資產規模已超過10億美元，預期增長潛力巨大。市場動態反映出傳統金融機構積極適應區塊鏈技術，與加密原生企業共同競爭機構級產品，帶來多元化採納路徑及差異化競爭策略。
Market opportunity sizing reveals substantial addressable potential. McKinsey projects tokenized asset market capitalization could reach $2 trillion by 2030, excluding stablecoins, while BCG estimates tokenized fund assets under management could achieve $600+ billion representing 1% of global mutual fund and ETF assets. EY survey data shows institutional investors planning 5.6% portfolio allocation to tokenized assets by 2026, with high-net-worth investors targeting 8.6% allocation. The convergence of institutional demand with infrastructure development suggests accelerating adoption curves beyond current linear growth patterns.
市場規模預測顯示可觸達潛力極大。麥肯錫預計，到了2030年，代幣化資產（不包括穩定幣）的市值可達2萬億美元；而波士頓諮詢估算，代幣化基金管理資產可超過6000億美元，相當於全球公募基金及ETF資產的1%。安永調查數據顯示，機構投資者計劃到2026年將組合中的5.6%分配給代幣化資產，高淨值投資者更志在分配8.6%。機構需求與基建發展的融合，預示採用曲線有望加速，突破目前線性增長格局。
Current market participants demonstrate diverse
（原文未完，請提供下文以供繼續翻譯。）strategic approaches.
策略性方向。像 BlackRock（貝萊德）、Franklin Templeton（富蘭克林鄧普頓）、Fidelity（富達）等老牌資產管理公司，善用其品牌聲譽及監管專長，同時與區塊鏈專家合作負責技術落地。BlackRock 的 BUIDL 基金橫跨多個區塊鏈網絡，以5.1347億美元資產規模（佔代幣化貨幣市場基金市佔率22%）領先市場。Franklin Templeton 的 FOBXX 則開創了受監管的區塊鏈基金操作模式，橫跨五個不同網絡，資產規模超過5.8億美元。這些傳統機構主要透過運作規模、監管合規性，以及與既有機構基建的整合去競爭。
Crypto-native competitors pursue differentiated strategies focusing on decentralized finance integration and yield optimization.
加密原生競爭者則走差異化路線，重點放在DeFi（去中心化金融）整合及收益優化。Ondo Finance 針對機構市場，推出與 DeFi 協議整合的代幣化國債產品。Superstate 和 Maple Finance 則專注於區塊鏈原生的基金管理，背靠傳統資產。這些公司競爭優勢聚焦於技術創新、提升收益，以及直接連接加密貨幣生態，而非依賴傳統金融基礎設施。
Geographic adoption patterns reflect regulatory and infrastructure development differences.
各地採納進度受監管及基建發展所影響。美國因 GENIUS Act 帶來監管清晰，加上已建立的數碼資產基建，當地註冊基金市佔率居多。新加坡憑藉 Project Guardian 監管沙盒，與 UBS、Citi 等大行試行創新，令增長迅速。歐洲則受 MiCA 監管實施複雜性拖慢進度，但英國監管發展有望令倫敦營運具競爭優勢。
Competitive differentiation occurs across multiple dimensions including yield optimization, blockchain network selection, regulatory compliance, and institutional service provision.
競爭差異化涵蓋多個範疇，包括收益最佳化、區塊鏈網絡選擇、合規監管、以及為機構客戶提供服務。Franklin Templeton 透過多鏈部署策略擴大市場渠道。高盛（Goldman Sachs）及 BNY Mellon 採用「鏡像代幣化」方式，降低保守機構採用風險。瑞銀（UBS）強調全面整合數碼資產服務平台，而加密原生公司聚焦於 DeFi 整合和傳統供應者無法提供的可編程貨幣功能。
Network effects create adoption momentum through minimum viable value chain development.
網絡效應推動最低可行價值鏈發展，帶來採用動力。麥肯錫（McKinsey）指出行業必須協作，包括共用區塊鏈網絡、足夠的對手方參與，以及可互通的基礎設施標準。Canton Network 已有15家資產管理人及13家銀行協調共建基礎設施；摩根大通（JPMorgan）Onyx 平台則透過夥伴關係集中交易量。這些網絡不但降低每家的實施成本，還透過擴闊對手方渠道提升網絡效益。
Partnership models enable risk-sharing and capability development across traditional and digital asset firms.
夥伴合作模式可分擔風險並提升傳統及數字資產公司的能力。資產管理公司與區塊鏈基建供應商合作，汲取技術專長同時符合監管要求，例如 Janus Henderson 與 Centrifuge 合作，以及多間公司用 Securitize 實現代幣化服務。銀行同盟模式可分擔開發成本與營運風險，同時產生共用流通性池和結算網絡。
Market concentration trends suggest consolidation potential as infrastructure development requires substantial investment and operational complexity.
行業集中化趨勢反映基建發展需龐大投資和營運複雜性，市場有望整合。現時如 BlackRock、Franklin Templeton、Goldman Sachs 等領頭羊受惠於先發優勢、機構關係及監管專業，設下進入門檻。不過，區塊鏈技術密集的本質，亦為技術專業供應商及具領先技術的加密原生公司帶來顛覆機會。
Revenue model evolution reflects competition for institutional adoption.
收入模式演變反映爭奪機構採用的競爭。傳統資產管理公司倚賴區塊鏈自動化降低營運成本，面臨減費壓力，卻可憑可編程功能及升級分銷能力拓展新收入來源。加密原生公司或會接受更低利潤率換取市佔及可信度，令全行業出現價格戰。部分公司為高流動性、結算速度及可編程功能收取溢價，加以區分。
Adoption catalysts include regulatory clarity, infrastructure development, and institutional demand convergence.
推動採用的催化劑包括監管明朗、基建發展和機構需求融合。GENIUS Act 帶來穩定幣監管確定性，SEC 指引亦清楚規範代幣化證券基金操作。Layer-2 擴容技術、機構級託管方案及跨鏈互通進步，減低落地門檻。預料 2026-2027 年機構配置目標達 5-8%，帶來行業增長動力，需要產能擴張。
Competitive threats from adjacent markets include central bank digital currency development and enhanced stablecoin offerings.
鄰近市場的競爭威脅包括央行數碼貨幣（CBDC）發展及進階穩定幣產品。CBDC 有機會成為私有代幣化資產的主權競爭方案；具收益功能的穩定幣則對代幣化貨幣市場基金的主要競爭優勢構成挑戰。傳統銀行推行即時支付系統和提升跨境功能，同樣會減低採用數碼資產的吸引力。
Market development stages suggest approaching inflection point as pilot programs transition to operational deployment.
市場發展進程正邁向關鍵拐點，當先導計劃開始落地營運。現有基建發展及監管釐清，已逐步解除主要採用障礙，而機構層面教育及營運能力提升，亦為擴大部署奠定基礎。需求趨勢、監管政策及技術能力的收斂，預示未來2-3年內增長速度或超越現有軌跡。
Success factors for market participants include regulatory compliance expertise, institutional relationship development, technical infrastructure capability, and strategic partnership execution.
市場參與者的成功因素，包括監管合規專業、機構關係、技術基建能力及策略性夥伴合作等。大型金融機構有監管公信力及客戶網絡作優勢，技術供應商則提供創新與運作效率。最有前景的模式，很可能是將傳統金融專業與區塊鏈創新透過策略合作結合，而非完全自給自足式開發。
Market dynamics indicate substantial opportunity for tokenized money market fund adoption through multiple competitive approaches and strategic pathways.
市場動態顯示，結合機構需求、監管明朗與基建完善，為代幣化貨幣市場基金帶來可觀增長空間。不過，成功落實須審慎平衡競爭定位、夥伴策略及跨法域監管合規。
Implementation Challenges: From Pilot to Scale
The transition from successful pilot programs to institutional-scale deployment faces substantial technical, operational, and regulatory challenges that determine whether tokenized money market funds achieve mainstream adoption or remain niche applications. Current implementations demonstrate feasibility while revealing specific barriers requiring systematic solutions before widespread institutional adoption becomes practical.
由試點到機構級規模部署的過渡階段，面對重大技術、營運及監管挑戰，將決定代幣化貨幣市場基金能否主流化，抑或只屬小眾應用。現時的落地反映整體可行性，但同時揭示多項具體障礙，需有系統解決後，機構大規模普及化方成可能。
Technical infrastructure scalability represents the primary implementation bottleneck.
技術基建的可擴展性是推行的首要瓶頸。現時不少主流區塊鏈網絡未能支援機構級交易量，除非有重大架構調整。以 Ethereum（以太坊）為例，每秒只可處理約15宗交易，需要 Polygon、Arbitrum、Optimism 等 Layer-2 擴容方案，但這增加了系統複雜度與安全風險。其他 Layer-1 網絡表現較佳，惟缺乏成熟生態及機構級安全記錄。多網絡、24/7 持續運作的需要，令基礎設施管理較傳統基金運作複雜得多。
Integration challenges with legacy financial systems require extensive middleware development and operational coordination.
與傳統金融系統整合亦需大量中間件開發及營運協調。傳統銀行系統、託管平台及資金管理方案，原本並無實時鏈上互動或分布式帳本紀錄設計。在過渡期間，API 開發、數據同步及對賬需雙軌操作，造成營運負擔及潛在出錯風險。監管報告系統需同時容納傳統和區塊鏈交易記錄，涉及合規系統及審計流程的改動。
Regulatory compliance implementation across multiple jurisdictions creates substantial operational complexity.
跨法域監管合規的落實帶來重大營運複雜性。要同時符合《投資公司法》及不同國家對區塊鏈的新法規，需高度法律與合規專業。跨境運作時，各地監管要求、申報標準及操作限制或會與區塊鏈設計原則相衝。即時監管監控、制裁篩查及投資者資格驗證等，需要自動化系統與鏈上運作高度整合。
Custody and key management solutions must meet institutional security and insurance requirements while maintaining operational efficiency.
資產託管及私鑰管理方案，既要達機構級安全及保險標準，亦要兼顧營運效率。私鑰安全需用多重簽章機制、硬件安全模組及完善備份程序，這些都會增加操作複雜性和…Here is your translated content in zh-Hant-HK, following your requested format and skipping Markdown links:
潛在失誤點。區塊鏈交易的不可逆性質，要求比傳統基金操作有更高層次的營運管控及錯誤預防程序，因為在傳統基金操作中，錯誤通常可以透過既定程序進行逆轉。
流動性發展的挑戰同時影響一級和二級市場操作。一級市場流動性需要熟悉區塊鏈操作及監管要求的莊家和授權參與者網絡。二級市場發展則需要有足夠的交易量和價格發現機制，以在不出現過度溢價或折讓的情況下，保持以資產淨值為基礎的有效定價。多個區塊鏈網絡的分散，削弱了流動性集中，亦可能製造套利空間，令基金操作更複雜。
營運風險管理需要有針對區塊鏈獨有漏洞、同時兼顧傳統投資風險的新框架。智能合約漏洞、oracle 操作攻擊，以及網絡操作失效，都屬於新的風險範疇，需要專門的監控及緩解措施。傳統資產與區塊鏈基建之間的互聯互通，亦產生出傳統風險管理系統難以應付的複雜風險互動。
市場教育及採用障礙，雖然技術可行性已經得到證明，仍然拖慢了機構層面的推行。機構投資者在投入大量資產之前，需要對區塊鏈操作、託管流程及監管影響有充分了解。內部操作能力的提升，包括員工培訓、系統整合及風險管理框架採納，都需要大量時間及資源投入。保守的機構文化，天然上會抗拒未經證實、缺乏操作實績的新技術。
隨著多種方案獨立發展，標準化及互通性需求變得極為重要。不同的區塊鏈網絡、智能合約標準和操作流程製造了割裂、削弱了網絡效應，亦令機構採用變得複雜。行業必須在共同標準、互通協議及共用基建發展上協作，而這需要競爭供應商間合作及跨區司法管轄權的監管協調。
現實的時間線評估顯示，採納進度將會是逐步而非革命性。目前包括 Franklin Templeton FOBXX、BlackRock BUIDL 和 Goldman Sachs DAP 合作的試點計劃，證明技術可行，但其市場規模只佔機構現金管理需求的一小部分。若要擴展到有意義的機構分配比例，仍需發展基建、明確監管及推動操作能力擴展，預計大規模落地需時三至五年。
識別關鍵里程碑有助於為實施路線圖提供指引。短期內的關鍵里程碑包括 Layer-2 擴容方案成熟，能應對機構級交易量，完成主要司法區的監管明確化，以及建立符合受託責任標準的機構託管設施。中期里程碑包括跨鏈互通標準落地、傳統銀行系統整合完結，以及莊家網絡發展以提供充足流動性。長遠來說，成功需要央行數字貨幣納入、國際監管協調，以及完善的風險管理框架發展。
觸發性事件有可能令採納進度超越線性預期。大型機構宣佈採用、監管明朗化或技術突破，都可帶來動能、加快推行進度。相反，如果出現營運失效、監管挫折或重大保安事故，都會大大延後實施時程，並需作大規模恢復工作。
成功實施所需資源，遠超一般技術採用項目，主因為涉及監管、營運及技術上的複雜性。機構採用者需進行專業人員培訓、合規系統調整及重寫操作程序，這些都需要龐大且持續投資。技術供應商則必須開發企業級基礎設施、符合監管的能力及機構級服務標準，這同樣需要不少資本及專業投入。
成功機會預測顯示，短期內會出現選擇性而非全面性的採納。有高端科技實力、監管專長及大量現金管理需求的機構，將最有可能率先參與。規模較小或技術採用保守的機構，則會等到基建更成熟、操作流程標準化後，才會考慮推行。
實施挑戰分析顯示，要令代幣化貨幣市場基金廣泛落地，仍有重大但可解決的障礙。要成功，必需技術基建、監管框架及機構運作能力三方協同發展，這超越任何單一組織的能力範疇。實質機構級採納預期需三至五年持續發展，不過某些高端機構隨著現有試點計劃顯示營運可行性及競爭優勢，有望更快採納。
最後想法
代幣化貨幣市場基金與穩定幣之間的路徑，很大程度上將決定未來十年數碼金融基建的基本架構。與其說二者必然是二選一，有跡象顯示它們會互補發展，各自針對不同應用場景優化，甚至有機會透過混合方案融合雙方優勢。
根據現有試點計劃的成功及機構投資模式，代幣化貨幣市場基金的採納趨勢，料將以穩步滲透機構市場為主，而非突發性顛覆。結合證券監管架構下的規管明確性、正利率環境下的收益能力、以及營運效率提升，為企業財資管理帶來具吸引力的價值主張。不過，採納情況將會持續具選擇性，主要集中於有大量現金管理需求及先進科技能力的大型機構。
監管環境越來越有利於代幣化貨幣市場基金，體現在明確承認其證券地位，並排除在穩定幣監管不明朗範圍之外。GENIUS 法案明確排除了代幣化貨幣市場基金不受支付型穩定幣監管，讓機構投資者可沿用熟悉的合規程序，而 SEC 管理指引亦逐漸視代幣化純屬技術增值而非資產性質轉變。相較之下，這種監管明晰有望成為風險較低的機構首選。
穩定幣如發展至帶收益結構，或可解決其缺乏收益的競爭劣勢，同時保留支付場景優勢。截至 2025 年 5 月，帶收益的穩定幣已達 110 億美元（佔整體穩定幣市值 4.5%），反映市場對傳統零收益產品的替代需求。不過，這類產品往往會放棄令傳統穩定幣吸引的簡單性及監管明確性，反而為代幣化貨幣市場基金爭取了部分機構市場份額。
基建發展路徑顯示，隨著雙方技術成熟，有望出現融合機會。區塊鏈擴容技術、跨鏈互通協議及機構級託管發展，對穩定幣和代幣化貨幣市場基金均有助益。潛在的共享基建，包括 oracle 網絡、合規系統及機構服務商平台，可降低實施成本，亦為混合式產品提供支付效率與收益能力帶來可能。
中央銀行數碼貨幣的發展，有可能會同時對兩種私營方案帶來重大影響。不同的央行政策路徑——美國反對發展 CBDC，而歐盟則積極推動數字歐元——將營造截然不同的競爭環境。美國不實行 CBDC 或有利私營代幣化選擇，歐洲則因推動數字歐元而對穩定幣及代幣化貨幣市場基金構成主權競爭。CBDC 在批發層面應用與私企零售/機構產品的互動，目前仍有不確定性。
市場機遇能否落實，很大程度上取決於透過行業協作及監管發展來克服採納障礙。技術擴容、舊系統整合及營運複雜性這些挑戰，都需要超越單一企業能力的系統性方案。成功往往需要行業聯盟方式、跨司法區監管協調，以及共用基建發展，讓成本和風險均攤到多方參與者。
機構分配目標顯示對相關產品有巨大潛在需求——77% 的機構及高資產值投資者正在主動研究代幣化資產，當中 55% 計劃在 1 至 2 年內配置。不過，實際配置仍然取決於營運能力提升、風險管理框架成熟度，以及市場壓力下的表現證明。保守的機構文化，或會待基建經過長時間驗證後，才會廣泛採納。
競爭格局則有利 incumbents with regulatory expertise and established institutional relationships over pure technology providers. Traditional asset managers including BlackRock, Franklin Templeton, and Goldman Sachs demonstrate advantages through regulatory compliance capability, institutional distribution networks, and operational scale that create barriers to entry. However, partnership models with blockchain specialists enable capability access without internal development requirements.
具有監管專業知識及既有機構關係的現有參與者，較純粹的科技供應商具備優勢。傳統資產管理公司，例如貝萊德（BlackRock）、富蘭克林坦伯頓（Franklin Templeton）及高盛（Goldman Sachs），在合規能力、機構分銷網絡和營運規模方面展現出優勢，形成了行業進入門檻。不過，與區塊鏈專才的合作模式則可讓這些機構無需自行開發，即可獲取所需能力。
Geographic adoption patterns reflect regulatory and infrastructure differences that may create competitive advantages for specific jurisdictions. Singapore's Project Guardian, UK regulatory development, and US GENIUS Act implementation provide different frameworks that may attract institution domicile and operational decisions. The European MiCA complexity creates potential opportunities for more accommodating jurisdictions to capture market share in tokenized asset development.
各地區的應用模式反映出監管及基礎設施上的差異，這些差異有機會為特定司法管轄區帶來競爭優勢。新加坡的 Project Guardian、英國的監管發展，以及美國 GENIUS Act 的實施，分別提供不同的規管框架，可吸引機構選擇其作為註冊或營運據點。至於歐盟 MiCA 的複雜性，則為更具包容性的司法管轄區在代幣化資產發展上帶來搶佔市佔的機會。
Technology maturation timelines suggest gradual rather than revolutionary change over 3-5 year periods. Current pilot programs demonstrate feasibility while revealing implementation complexity that requires systematic solution development. The combination of infrastructure scaling, regulatory clarification, and institutional capability development creates conditions for accelerated adoption, but within evolutionary rather than disruptive timeframes.
技術成熟的時間表預示變革將以漸進而非革命性的方式，在三至五年內逐步發生。目前的試點計劃證明可行性同時亦揭示出推行上的複雜性，需透過系統化的解決方案來處理。基礎設施擴展、監管清晰度提升及機構能力提升的結合，為加快採納鋪路，但亦會在漸進的步伐下演進而非爆發式顛覆。
Key success factors for either technology include regulatory compliance, institutional relationship development, technical infrastructure reliability, and strategic partnership execution. The most successful approaches likely combine traditional finance expertise with blockchain innovation rather than purely internal development or technology-first strategies that neglect institutional requirements and regulatory compliance.
無論是哪種技術，成功的關鍵因素包括規管合規、建立機構關係、技術基礎設施的可靠性，以及執行策略性合作。最具成效的策略，往往是結合傳統金融專業及區塊鏈創新，而非僅依賴內部開發或只著重技術本身，卻忽略機構需求和合規要求。
Monitoring indicators for adoption acceleration include meaningful institutional allocation announcements, infrastructure milestone achievements, regulatory framework completion, and demonstrated operational reliability during market stress. These catalytic events could create momentum shifts beyond linear adoption projections, while negative developments could substantially delay implementation timelines.
判斷應用加速的關鍵指標，包括有份量的機構資金配置公告、基礎設施達到重要里程碑、監管框架正式落實、以及在市場波動時依然能展現運作可靠性。這些催化劑事件可帶動應用步伐超越原有預測，而若出現負面發展則有可能大大延遲推行時程。
The future outlook suggests tokenized money market funds will capture significant institutional market share through superior alignment with treasury management requirements, regulatory clarity, and yield generation capability. However, this adoption will complement rather than replace stablecoin applications optimized for payments and trading. The maturation of both technologies creates opportunities for integrated solutions that optimize efficiency across different use cases rather than forcing binary technology choices.
未來展望顯示，代幣化貨幣市場基金有望憑著更能符合財資管理需求、更明確的監管，以及具備收益能力而奪得大量機構市佔。不過，這種取代會是互補現有以支付或交易為主的穩定幣應用，而非完全取而代之。兩種技術漸趨成熟，將為不同應用場景帶來一體化方案，提升效率，而非迫使市場作二選一的選擇。
Success ultimately depends on industry collaboration to develop shared infrastructure, regulatory frameworks, and operational standards that reduce implementation barriers while maintaining institutional-grade security and compliance. The substantial market opportunity, demonstrated institutional demand, and technical feasibility create foundation for significant adoption, though the timeline and ultimate market structure remain dependent on coordinated execution across multiple dimensions of complexity.
真正成功最終也要靠行業協作，攜手發展共用基礎設施、規管框架及運作標準，減少推行障礙，同時維持機構級的安全和合規。龐大的市場潛力、實質的機構需求和技術可行性都奠定大規模普及的基礎，但推行時間表和最終市場結構，仍需多方面通力協作來配合複雜情況。
The convergence of traditional finance stability with blockchain efficiency represents a fundamental evolution in financial infrastructure that could reshape institutional cash management, cross-border payments, and digital asset markets over the coming decade. Understanding these dynamics becomes essential for all stakeholders navigating the transformation from traditional to digital financial systems.
傳統金融穩定性和區塊鏈效率的融合，標誌著金融基礎設施的一大演進，未來十年有望重塑機構現金管理、跨境支付及數碼資產市場。對於所有參與者而言，深入了解這些趨勢，將成為由傳統金融系統過渡至數碼金融時不可或缺的關鍵。