The problem is there's pretty much no on-chain fixed income per se. Crypto "yield" is supported by mostly borrowing <> lending spread, funding rate, leverages, etc. Tradfi has an established fixed income system. Corporates borrow based on cash flow. So an IG bond offers 5-6%, there's a market to justify yields based on credit ratings. Issue for crypto? Most apps and protocols don't make $ and hence they don't have cash flow besides the money they raised from investors - They can't issue any corporate bonds like tradfi, backed by cash flow. So few things here: 1) yield on aave, Morpho, etc., are all supported by market activities, not corporate fundamentals. When market slows down, Aave has an ridiculously low yield of 2.5%, again that's not fixed income. Normally you would need a much higher risk premium to justfiy on-chain activities. 2) firms with cash flow / revenue have all the advantages (like @wintermute_t and other MMs, trading firms, etcs) to issue undercollaterized private credits. Typically a collaterized priavte credit IRL offers 10%+(much safer), think about a real estate backed 12 months loan issued by a real estate developer. But why? Because there are really no choices in crypto, so yes if staying on-chain I would rather do private credits (even there's no credit rating, and they are undercollaterized). 3) fixed income (again, not any other things, but fixed income) in crypto would never able to expand beyond private credit if these on-chain protocols (beyond defi) like gaming, social, you name it, are not making cash. We won't see a thriving holistic fixed income system built out. 4) I guess that's why RWA is hot, because native crypto protocols are struggling with revenue, we can only introduce tradfi. @functi0nZer0