Which tokenized T-bill actually pays what it promises
Signed basis-point deviation between the APY each tokenized U.S. Treasury advertises and the yield the smart contract actually distributes on-chain, measured over 30 days.
TL;DR. As of , SyrupUSDC leads yield deviation at 0.030% (24h avg) on Which tokenized T-bill actually pays what it promises. Source: OpenChainBench, https://openchainbench.com/benchmarks/rwa-yield-accuracy.
Every tokenized U.S. Treasury on the market publishes an APY. BlackRock BUIDL says 5.3 percent, Franklin BENJI says 5.1 percent, Ondo USDY says 5.4 percent. This page measures what they actually pay their token holders on-chain, using each issuer's own distribution mechanism (rebase, monthly USDC dividend, or NAV appreciation), and compares it to the number each issuer advertises on its public dashboard. The delta in basis points, sign preserved, is the honest read on whether the tokenized wrapper delivers what the marketing page claims. Every measurement traces back to an on-chain event and a citable issuer disclosure. No opinion, just the two numbers side by side.
Methodology
For each tokenized T-bill in the cohort we compute the delivered yield over a 30-day rolling window from the issuer's own on-chain distribution mechanism, then compare to the promised APY published on the issuer's official dashboard. Deviation is expressed in basis points with sign preserved: negative means the token paid less than advertised over the window, positive means more. The three distribution mechanisms measured are rebase (USDY), monthly USDC dividend transfers (BUIDL, USTB) and NAV appreciation reported by the issuer (BENJI, OUSG). Windows: 30-day rolling annualized as the headline, plus 7d and lifetime for volatility context.
Frequently asked
Why does the delivered yield sometimes differ from the advertised APY?
Three main reasons. First, distribution timing: dividend-style tokens like BUIDL and USTB accrue yield daily but pay it monthly, so a 30-day window that starts mid-cycle undersamples. Second, weekend and holiday accrual: U.S. Treasuries do not yield on Saturdays, Sundays or federal holidays, so a naive calendar-day annualization differs from the SEC's own convention. Third, management-fee timing: fees are accrued daily but recognized at the fund level on different schedules, which can create a 5 to 30 bps short-window gap even when the annual net yield matches the advertised APY exactly.
Which distribution model is the most transparent?
Rebase, exemplified by USDY. Delivered yield is a pure function of totalSupply at t=now versus t=window ago, both readable on-chain by anyone. Dividend-style (BUIDL, USTB) is one step less transparent: delivered yield sums USDC Transfer events from the treasury wallet, which requires knowing the treasury address (documented here). NAV-style (BENJI, OUSG) is the least on-chain-native: the daily NAV is set by the fund manager off-chain and posted daily; a delayed NAV update looks like a yield gap even when the underlying portfolio is fine.
Where does the promised yield come from?
From each issuer's own public dashboard or fund fact sheet, refreshed at least weekly. Each entry in the harness config logs the source URL and the date the value was last read. When an issuer updates the advertised APY, the change is picked up on the next config reload.
Can this benchmark tell me if an issuer is misrepresenting yield?
No. It tells you how the delivered yield tracks the advertised yield over a specific window. A persistent negative deviation is a signal worth investigating, but the cause can be timing, methodology, weekend conventions or fee schedules. This bench provides the number; investors and regulators can investigate the cause with the issuer directly.
Why is BUIDL sometimes below its promised yield at 30 days?
BUIDL distributes dividends monthly, near the end of each calendar month. A 30-day rolling window that ends mid-month will undersample the next distribution. Compare against the lifetime column for the cleanest read, or wait for month-end to see the 30d value re-converge with the stated APY.
Why don't you include DAI, USDS, sUSDe or other yield-bearing stablecoins?
This bench is scoped to tokenized U.S. Treasury and money-market funds where an off-chain issuer publishes a specific advertised APY that can be compared to delivered yield. Yield-bearing stablecoins backed by CDP interest, LSTs or perp funding are a different question with a different measurement contract; they may join a sibling bench later.
Source code github.com/ChainBench/OpenChainBench/tree/main/harnesses/rwa-yield-accuracy