CZ Claims AI Trading Will Be Implemented Before AI Payments
CZ stated at the Easy Residency S4 Demo Day in Bhutan that his previous judgment on the short-term implementation of AI payments was overly optimistic; currently, leading AI companies are still focusing resources on enhancing model capabilities, and payments are not the core technical bottleneck of the industry. The practical application of AI trading may appear before AI payments.
He mentioned that users primarily use AI to generate or assist trading strategies, while actual payments still largely rely on traditional credit card networks. His judgment is that AI trading-related products and underlying execution systems are more likely to be driven first by crypto-native teams, as these teams already have experience in on-chain settlement, wallets, permissions, and automation; however, which link in identity verification, privacy, authorization, security, clearing, and settlement will first experience a loophole remains difficult to predict.
Reflecting on the changes in the perception of stablecoins, CZ noted that Binance initially primarily offered crypto-to-crypto trading; when Bitcoin fell, users would transfer assets to fiat trading platforms to exchange for USD, leading to capital outflow from the platform. Therefore, Binance launched stablecoin trading pairs to retain trading liquidity. He later believed that the pricing logic of one stablecoin corresponding to one dollar is easy for ordinary users to understand, and on-chain cross-border transfers are faster than traditional banking systems, with stablecoins forming a clear commercialization space in the past 3 to 5 years.
Regarding RWA, he mentioned that he was still reserved about it about a year and a half ago, reasoning that investors who can directly purchase US stocks may not need on-chain trading. However, he believes that most global users do not have the conditions to open US brokerage accounts; even if they can open accounts, time zone issues mean many users can only trade late at night. On-chain formats allow users from different regions to access US stocks, stocks from other countries, and government bonds at low cost, transparently, and around the clock.
The key to his RWA logic is not to replace US brokerages but to connect small market assets that originally lacked coverage from international investors to global on-chain liquidity. Asset issuers can gain cross-border buying power, while users who cannot directly access overseas brokerage systems gain trading entry; traditional brokers, market infrastructures limited by trading hours, and regional distribution channels will face competitive pressure.
On entrepreneurial advice, CZ believes that entering the market later than competitors does not necessarily lead to failure; Google and Facebook were not the earliest participants in their respective fields. The real high risk lies in blindly expanding when product demand and cash flow have not yet been validated. He attributes the sustainability of a business to the resilience of its founders: the larger the company, the higher the operational, regulatory, financial, and organizational pressures it faces.
Source: Public Information
ABAB AI Insight
CZ's past understanding of stablecoins came from exchange liquidity rather than a payment revolution. Binance rapidly expanded through crypto-to-crypto trading in 2017, and stablecoin trading pairs primarily addressed the issues of user exit, asset transfer, and loss of trading depth during market downturns; stablecoins like USDT and USDC subsequently became the pricing units, collateral, and cross-platform clearing mediums in the crypto market. Binance itself has experienced the exit of BUSD and compliance contractions in multiple regions under regulatory pressure, which also explains why he now places greater emphasis on stablecoins as cross-border liquidity infrastructure, rather than just "on-chain mirrors of the dollar." In terms of capital pathways, stablecoin issuers earn revenue through reserve assets, exchanges gain retention and fees through trading pairs, market-making depth, spot and derivatives collateral systems, while public chains earn network fees through transfers, exchanges, and DeFi activities. RWA extends this pathway to stocks and government bonds: issuance, custody, compliance screening, price oracles, secondary liquidity, and redemption channels each control different fee nodes. Whoever can control fiat entry and exit, asset custody, and redemption holds the most critical pricing power in asset tokenization. Historically, internet brokers expanded the range of stock participants with low commissions and mobile experiences; Robinhood brought zero-commission trading to the masses and subsequently restructured brokerage income through order flow payments and financing services. RWA is at an earlier stage: it is not trying to solve the user interface for domestic US users, but rather cross-border access, market time zones, and asset accessibility under capital controls. The obstacles it faces are also harder than those of internet brokers, including securities attributes, investor qualifications, custody ownership, asset isolation, redemption mechanisms, and regulatory conflicts across different jurisdictions. Essentially, it is about restructuring the industrial chain. The traditional securities system disperses account opening, trading, clearing, custody, and cross-border access among brokers, exchanges, central counterparties, and custodians; on-chain systems attempt to compress these links into wallets, smart contracts, whitelists, stablecoin settlements, and tokenized certificates. The reason for the change is not that on-chain trading itself is "new," but that there has long been a gap between global asset demand and regional financial licenses; however, as long as fiat redemption, securities registration, and regulatory permissions remain off-chain, true control will not fully transfer to public chains. ABAB News · Laws of Cognition
Trading first solves liquidity, payments then solve daily needs
The threshold for global assets is not in buying but in access
Unverified demand expansion is essentially amplifying losses