When real securities settle on Dusk, network economics change in ways TVL never captures.
€300M+ in tokenized securities is not passive value sitting onchain. On Dusk, that volume translates into settlement activity on DuskDS. Every transfer, corporate action, or ownership update becomes a finalized state transition secured by validators. This is recurring usage, not idle liquidity.
Settlement on DuskDS generates fees denominated in DUSK. That matters because fee flow is tied to actual market operations, not speculative locking. As regulated assets move, fees are paid, validators earn, and demand for DUSK is linked to throughput rather than hype cycles.
Validator incentives follow this structure. Validators are not securing meme liquidity. They are securing settlement finality for regulated instruments. Misbehavior carries economic penalties because failed settlement is not an inconvenience, it is a compliance issue. That tightens the incentive loop between uptime, correctness, and rewards.
Why RWA volume matters more than TVL on Dusk:
● Volume reflects how often settlement is used
● Fees scale with activity, not locked value
● Validators are paid for finality, not liquidity optics
This is why Dusk optimizes for securities flow instead of chasing inflated TVL. Network economics here are driven by movement, not stillness.
