📊 Deloitte projects that over US$4 trillion in real estate could be tokenized by 2035 – up from less than US$300 billion in 2024.
That’s a staggering jump in absolute terms – and yet, it would still represent barely 1% of the global real estate market, which currently totals US$379.7 trillion (more here).
But what’s even more telling is the shape of the forecast curve:
📈 Flat until 2030 – then a steep takeoff.
This is not the same pattern we see in projections for total tokenized real-world assets (RWAs), such as the EY Parthenon Report (Sep 2023), which foresees a linear rise across asset classes (more here). There, tokenized RWAs are expected to reach US$28.7 trillion by 2030, with real estate accounting for ~US$400 billion – surprisingly aligned with Deloitte’s value for that year.
🤔So why the kink in Deloitte’s RE-specific curve?
Unlike other real-world assets such as equities or fixed income, real estate remains both the biggest and the hardest to trade (= illiquid). Bringing it on-chain takes time. Not only to solve regulatory and custodial complexity – but also to win trust and usability, especially among institutional investors. Retail will follow even later.
🎯 From my view, whether the $4 trillion target is hit or not is secondary. What matters is the shape of the curve. It won’t be linear – and we should be watching the inflection point.
🔗 Deloitte article here.
🧱⋯🧊 From bricks to blocks: This isn’t about hype. It’s about real-world adoption
Winning trust from institutional investors….the thing is that blockchain can be hacked, especially many smart contracts, which will probably be a big part of any real estate transactions. There are companies that can provide audits to preclude the vulnerabilities, but I think many people don’t realize this. They can google and see ‘blockchain hacked’ and rightfully be concerned, but there is a solution that might help investors be more comfortable with the shift.
Thanks for raising this – trust is absolutely key for institutional adoption.
Security concerns often dominate early conversations. A quick search on “blockchain hacked” can indeed be alarming, but the real risks usually lie outside the core protocol.
From experience, common entry points for exploits (ordered by typical vulnerability) include:
1 User Interfaces (Layer 5 – Application Layer)
2 Wallets & Key Management (Layer 4 – Access Layer)
3 Oracles & External Feeds (Layer 3 – Integration Layer)
4 Bridges / Interoperability Modules (Layer 2 – Infrastructure Layer)
5 Smart Contracts (Layer 2 – Execution Layer)
6 Consensus Mechanisms & Blockchain Protocols (Layer 1 – Base Layer)
So while smart contracts can pose risks, the base blockchain (Layer 1) is typically the most robust part of the stack.
That’s why audits are so important – ideally not just for smart contracts, but across the entire security architecture: infra, integrations, and user-facing components included.
Appreciate your input – and fully agree: comprehensive audits build confidence and are essential for institutional comfort.
Markus,
Thanks for the reply. So if I understand what you are saying correctly, it’s really all the layer apps beyond the base layer that introduce the security issues. Have you ever heard of a case where Layer 1 was hacked?
Thanks!
Hey Ceguro (?)
No, sure there were L1 hacks, most prominent one probably the DAO hack of #Ethereum back in 2016, causing a hard fork decision, later also Binance Chain and Solana, both with bigger economical damages.
Yet, bottom line, these hacks prominent, yes, but in number and scale much less heavy than L2+ layers
Pingback: Web3 Real Estate: A Blueprint for Actual Liquidity? - HammerBlocks