Credit Protocol Comparison — Maple vs Centrifuge vs Figure vs Tradable

Credit Protocol Comparison — Maple vs Centrifuge vs Figure vs Tradable

The tokenized credit market at $3.1 billion in distributed value is served by protocols with fundamentally different architectures, underwriting models, and target markets. This comparison evaluates the four largest credit tokenization platforms across key dimensions.

AUM and Product Matrix

Architecture Comparison

Maple — Delegated Vaults: Professional pool delegates perform credit underwriting and deploy vault capital into institutional loans. Lenders deposit stablecoins and receive yield-bearing receipt tokens. Advantages: simplicity for lenders, professional management, DeFi composability. Disadvantages: delegate concentration risk, opaque borrower-level exposure.

Centrifuge — Originator-Driven Pools: Asset originators tokenize receivables and deposit them into Tinlake pools with senior/junior tranche structure (DROP/TIN). Advantages: transparent asset-level exposure, structured credit mechanics, DeFi-to-TradFi bridge. Disadvantages: originator-specific risk, pool-level fragmentation.

Figure — Purpose-Built Chain: HELOCs originated and managed on the Provenance blockchain. Assets are represented (not distributed), focusing on operational efficiency rather than DeFi composability. Advantages: massive scale, traditional finance integration, asset lifecycle management. Disadvantages: limited DeFi access, permissioned network.

Tradable — Institutional Term Notes: Senior secured term notes originated on ZKsync Era as represented assets. Products include North America Rent Financing ($202.5M), Gov’t Contractor Financier ($181.3M), and others. Advantages: institutional-grade structuring. Disadvantages: limited liquidity, represented-only distribution.

Yield Comparison

Risk Assessment

Each protocol carries distinct risk vectors:

• Maple: Borrower default risk mitigated by delegate underwriting; 2022 defaults demonstrated this risk in practice
• Centrifuge: Originator-specific risk varies by pool; JAAA’s -43.93% weekly decline highlights credit product volatility
• Figure: Consumer credit risk across HELOC portfolio; Provenance permissioned model limits external audit access
• Tradable: Concentrated term note exposure; represented-only status limits liquidity

Underwriting Model Comparison

The most significant difference between credit protocols is their underwriting approach — how credit risk is assessed, approved, and managed:

Maple’s delegated underwriting: Professional pool delegates perform credit assessment independently, deploying vault capital based on their institutional lending expertise. The delegate model concentrates credit decisions in experienced professionals but creates key-person risk and potential conflicts of interest. Maple’s 2022-2023 credit losses demonstrated the risks when delegate judgment fails, but the reformed framework with enhanced accountability and cover pool mechanics has rebuilt institutional confidence, as evidenced by the growth to $2.72B.

Centrifuge’s originator-driven model: Asset originators bring existing credit portfolios to Centrifuge’s platform, tokenizing receivables for DeFi distribution. This model distributes credit origination across multiple independent originators rather than concentrating it in protocol-selected delegates. The DROP/TIN tranche structure provides risk segmentation that Maple’s single-tranche vaults do not offer. However, originator-specific risk varies significantly by pool, and Centrifuge’s JAAA CLO fund’s 43.93% weekly decline demonstrates the volatility inherent in originator-driven credit products.

Figure’s institutional origination: Figure originates consumer HELOCs directly using automated underwriting systems, managing the full credit lifecycle from application through securitization on Provenance blockchain. This model provides maximum control over credit quality but limits the asset class to home equity lending. The $15.84B scale demonstrates operational maturity but operates on a permissioned chain without DeFi composability.

Tradable’s platform origination: Tradable originates institutional term notes on ZKsync Era, primarily as represented assets. The platform focuses on specific credit verticals (rent financing, government contractor financing, BNPL) with standardized senior secured structures. Individual products range from $102.5M to $202.5M, suggesting institutional-scale origination with limited public market accessibility.

Growth Momentum Comparison

Maple dominates credit market growth, with syrupUSDT’s 57.47% monthly increase representing the fastest growth rate among all major RWA products. Centrifuge’s JAAA decline warrants monitoring for credit stress signals. Figure’s steady growth reflects consistent HELOC origination volume in the $350 billion U.S. home equity market.

Credit Cycle Considerations

The current credit market environment has been favorable for tokenized credit products, with strong institutional demand and limited defaults since Maple’s 2022-2023 credit losses. However, the credit cycle has not fully tested the reformed frameworks:

• Maple: Reformed underwriting, enhanced delegate accountability, and rebuilt cover pools remain untested under genuine credit stress
• Centrifuge: JAAA’s 43.93% decline may be an early indicator of credit cycle sensitivity in structured credit products
• Figure: Consumer HELOC credit performance depends on housing market conditions, employment trends, and interest rate environment
• Tradable: Senior secured term notes benefit from collateral protection but may face liquidity constraints during stress

The How to Evaluate RWA Protocol Risk framework provides a structured approach to assessing credit cycle risk across these protocols.

Selection Framework

• DeFi yield: Maple Syrup USDC at 4.89% APY — simplest access, highest distributed credit yield, fully DeFi-composable
• Structured credit: Centrifuge Tinlake pools with tranche selection — DROP for conservative, TIN for yield-seeking exposure
• Operational scale: Figure at $15.84B represented value — largest single RWA product, permissioned infrastructure
• Institutional notes: Tradable on ZKsync Era — senior secured term notes, represented asset distribution
• Risk minimization: Treasury tokens (BUIDL at 3.46%, USDY at 3.55%) for investors who prioritize capital preservation over yield premium

Related: Private Credit Tokenization Framework | Institutional Credit Infrastructure | Treasury Token Yield Comparison | Protocol Metrics Dashboard | Maple Syrup Growth Brief | Moody’s On-Chain Ratings Brief

Data as of March 18, 2026. Source: RWA.xyz. Contact info@uaetokenizedrwa.com for institutional research.