Honestly, when I saw a leading asset management institution launch a trust product for Walrus on August 12, 2025, my first feeling wasn't joy but—pressure.

Why? Because once a project is packaged into a configurable asset, the evaluation system completely changes. It’s no longer just about your technology or whether the ecosystem is active, but about asking: How do you explain the risks? Is the cash flow logic sustainable? What is the long-term supply and demand relationship? For an infrastructure project, this is not an enhancement but a huge test.

So I want to look at this from a different perspective. Using a reverse approach: If Walrus is to truly enter the stage of sustained attention from traditional funds, what aspects must it establish a foothold in? Where are the easiest pitfalls?

First, let's clarify the current situation: What is the essence of this trust product launch (along with DeepBook)? My understanding is—assets like WAL now have a more standardized and clearer holding channel. This brings two sides of a double-edged sword: On one hand, the potential buyer structure may become more stable; on the other hand, market accountability will be harsher—people will scrutinize more seriously why you deserve this valuation.

Walrus finds itself in an awkward position: it is fundamentally a payment and incentive mechanism for a storage network, but once it is priced as an asset, this identity becomes quite complex.