Conflux co-founder fires shots at RWA analytics platform RWA.xyz

In a move that is sending ripples through the RWA ecosystem, one of Conflux’s founders, Yuanjie Zhang, who goes by Forgivenever on X and serves as a key ecosystem promoter — think Mert Mumtaz but for Conflux and RWAs — has publicly called out the RWA analytics platform RWA.xyz. 

His statement is coming at a sensitive time for the RWA sector, which witnessed an explosion of institutional interest in 2024 and 2025.

In a long X post that Zhang penned in his native language of Chinese, the co-founder accused RWA.xyz of sharing biased data and selectively reporting blockchain networks. 

What did Conflux’s co-founder say about RWA.xyz? 

In his X post, Forgivenever implied that the RWA.xyz platform has deliberately avoided reflecting the true scope of activities happening on non-EVM compatible chains or those he claims fall outside a group of protocols favored by the West. 

His allegations imply the platform is no longer impartial and now dictates which projects and networks become visible as more institutional investors get involved. 

Zhang claims that by leaving out or under-reporting the actual RWA volume on fringe, less-popular, or non-Western platforms like Conflux, RWA.xyz is pushing out a skewed erosion of the global RWA market. 

According to him, the platform’s new methodology, which it switched to a month ago after it underwent a revamp, prioritizes narratives over unfiltered on-chain facts. He suggested that the new approach to data curating does not take into account the significant liquidity pools in the growing Asian market. 

Prior to the revamp, RWA.xyz claimed industry-wide RWA scale was around $300 billion. However, after the redesign, that figure became $410 billion, and two new metrics were introduced. 

The first metric is the Reported Asset Value, which is the $410 billion and covers assets that are tokenized as digital certificates on private or permissioned chains, even though they lack true on-chain transfers or genuine public distribution. 

The second metric introduced is the Distributed Asset Value, which is rated at $18 billion and covers assets that have been distributed via on-chain protocols of blockchains and exchanges and that are accessible to crypto investors who can hold them via wallets or custodians. 

As far as Zhang is concerned, the second metric is what represents the true crypto-relevant scale. 

According to him, the other metric, which has the hyped $410 billion value, is 91% dominated by Canton’s private chain, who he claims is the new “sugar daddy.” He implied that it replaced Figure’s Provenance chain, which he claims was the first entity to bribe the RWA.xyz platform and has been relegated to second position behind Canton since it has gone public and won’t be “renewing its subscription.”

Zhang alleged that Figure bribed the platform so as to forcibly stuff a home equity loan company’s data into the industry’s statistics table, inflating the real $18 billion in RWA assets that have actually been sold to investors to over $300 billion. 

Now, it is Canton doing the bribing, which is why Figure only makes up 3% of the Reported Asset Value while Canton makes up 91%. 

He alleged that it was not the first time RWA.xyz was dabbling in data manipulation, citing Figure’s loans, which served to boost numbers before reclassifying them. Zhang implied that commercial incentives are what drive inclusions. 

According to him, after excluding Figure’s inflated anomalies from the Distributed Asset Value, it regains some fair reference value. 

Zhang claims in his post that RWA.xyz has been scamming US investors in the crypto and stock sectors. He claims that the platform now has its sights set on the Hong Kong market after seeing that Asia’s RWA sector is booming.

How true are the allegations?

The claims that Zhang made in his post were corroborated by his followers, who also claimed discrepancies. When one user asked which of the data aggregation platforms provided accurate data, another claimed most of the others are better than RWA.xyz since none of them contain such exaggeration. 

It is true that compared to RWA.xyz, which reports a TVL in tokenized treasuries and private credit exceeding $21 billion, data from other major aggregators like DefiLlama show notable gaps. 

DefiLlama uses a permissionless bottom-up indexing method and usually displays higher numbers for certain protocols and even includes data from chains that RWA.xyz has yet to fully acknowledge or integrate. This is especially true in the private credit sector, where DefiLlama lists emerging protocols on L1 networks that are not present on RWA.xyz’s league table. 

When Figure co-founder, Mike Cagney called out DefiLlama in September for excluding Figure’s data from its platform, the aggregator defended the action by revealing that Figure’s data was not verifiable and lacked any true on-chain footprints. 

Meanwhile, RWA.xyz has defended its methodology by claiming it “standardizes and verifies first-party data” to ensure institutional-grade accuracy. Still, there are critics, like Zhang, who believe the so-called verification process is essentially a whitelist. 

The discrepancy Zhang speaks of is most noticeable when one considers the Asian RWA market. It becomes clear that RWA.xyz is heavily dominated by US-based entities like Ondo and BUIDL, while tokenized commercial paper and green bonds occurring on Eastern infrastructure like Conflux and various Hong Kong-based pilots go underrepresented. 

In response to the allegations, the cofounder and CEO of RWA.xyz shared a blog talking about the new framework and suggested he was ready to work with Conflux as soon as they provided “feedback.”

Join a premium crypto trading community free for 30 days – normally $100/mo.