Summary
Standard Chartered sees Robinhood Chain revenue and the potential expansion of real-world asset tokenization as catalysts that could increase Arbitrum’s relevance to traditional finance, and has forecast ARB at $10 by the end of 2030. The report also acknowledges that ARB holders currently have no direct claim on network fees and that Robinhood Chain’s early activity has not been driven primarily by tokenized traditional assets.
A forecast built on infrastructure revenue and tokenization
Standard Chartered has initiated coverage of Arbitrum’s ARB token and issued an ambitious long-term forecast: ARB could reach $10 by the end of 2030. According to the material cited by CoinDesk, that would be roughly 70 times its price of about $0.14 when the report was published. ARB rose about 7% over a 24-hour period after the report circulated, although a short-term market move does not establish a long-term change in fundamentals or guarantee future performance.
The central argument is not that Arbitrum already distributes network income to ARB holders. Instead, the thesis is that Arbitrum may benefit as an infrastructure provider for institutions and companies launching application-specific networks. Robinhood Chain is the main example. Built with Arbitrum Orbit, it illustrates how the ecosystem could earn revenue by supporting customized chains rather than relying only on activity conducted directly on Arbitrum’s main network.
The same argument is connected to real-world asset tokenization. Standard Chartered expects traditional financial institutions to use blockchain infrastructure for issuance, settlement and other functions. If Arbitrum captures a meaningful share of that activity, network revenue and institutional relevance could expand. That outcome, however, depends on several conditions that have not yet been fully demonstrated.
Robinhood Chain as an early revenue case
Robinhood Chain launched in July 2026. CoinDesk, citing Geoffrey Kendrick, Standard Chartered’s global head of digital assets research, reported that the chain helped push Arbitrum’s September revenue run rate to approximately $5 million per month. That was more than five times the level before Robinhood Chain debuted.
TechFlow provided additional figures attributed to the report. It said Robinhood Chain generated approximately $42.58 million in user fees during its first 70 days, with about $4.26 million flowing back to the Arbitrum ecosystem. The report also said Robinhood Chain paid about $360,000 in licensing fees in July, representing 35% of Arbitrum DAO’s total revenue for that month. By September 1, the chain’s daily fee revenue was reported at about $3.75 million, with approximately $370,000 paid to Arbitrum on that day.
These figures are important, but they need to be read alongside the revenue-sharing structure. TechFlow’s account said that 10% of Robinhood Chain’s net protocol revenue goes to the Arbitrum ecosystem: 8% to the DAO treasury and 2% to a developer fund, while the remaining 90% goes to Robinhood. The arrangement creates a measurable revenue stream for the ecosystem, but it does not create an automatic cash flow for ARB holders.
DAO treasury income is not the same as token income
That distinction is the most consequential caveat in the bullish case. ARB primarily functions as a governance token. Holders can participate in Arbitrum DAO votes, but they do not currently receive network fee distributions, buyback proceeds or burn-related benefits simply by holding the token. Arbitrum can therefore generate ecosystem revenue while ARB holders have no direct legal or economic claim on that income.
The gap matters because network growth and token value are not automatically connected. Funds entering a DAO treasury become subject to governance decisions. The DAO may choose to fund development, provide grants, manage reserves or pursue other priorities. It may also consider mechanisms such as token buybacks, burns or rewards, but those possibilities are governance scenarios rather than established policies.
For institutional wallets, custodians and other market participants, the distinction between governance rights and economic rights is particularly relevant. A treasury receiving funds indicates that an ecosystem is accumulating resources; it does not mean that a token holder has a guaranteed entitlement to those resources. Any assessment of Arbitrum’s growth therefore needs to separate protocol revenue, treasury control, token functionality and the regulatory status of potential value-transfer mechanisms.
The RWA thesis is still being tested
The long-term forecast also depends on the expansion of real-world asset tokenization. Standard Chartered’s view is that Arbitrum could become a preferred infrastructure layer for traditional finance as assets move on-chain. Tokenized funds, debt instruments and other financial assets could create demand that is less dependent on retail speculation and short-lived trading cycles.
Robinhood Chain’s early activity, however, does not yet prove that this is the dominant source of demand. CoinDesk noted that much of the chain’s initial activity came from memecoin platforms and trading applications rather than tokenized traditional assets. The chain has demonstrated that an application or institution can launch a customized network using Arbitrum technology, but it has not yet fully demonstrated that regulated real-world assets will become its primary and durable revenue source.
That distinction affects how the growth case should be evaluated. Revenue generated by trading activity may be sensitive to market conditions, user incentives and the life cycle of individual applications. Revenue generated by institutional issuance and settlement would involve a different set of requirements, including compliance controls, investor eligibility, custody, privacy and cross-border supervision. The two forms of activity may produce different levels of durability and different operational risks.
Competition and governance remain material risks
Standard Chartered identified slower tokenization, competition from other blockchains and the absence of direct revenue rights for ARB holders as key risks. Even if traditional financial institutions continue exploring blockchain infrastructure, they will not necessarily select Arbitrum or use Orbit to create application-specific chains. Performance, development tools, liquidity, compliance support and institutional relationships may all influence where a project is deployed.
There is also no automatic link between higher Arbitrum ecosystem revenue and higher economic value for ARB governance rights. If the DAO eventually considers using treasury funds to affect token economics, proposals could raise questions involving governance design, treasury management, conflicts of interest and securities regulation in the United States and other jurisdictions. Direct distributions to token holders may receive particular regulatory scrutiny because of the relationship between passive ownership and expected returns. The supplied reports do not indicate that any such mechanism has been approved or is imminent.
What to watch next
Several indicators will help determine whether the thesis is becoming more credible. First, Robinhood Chain’s fee generation and user activity will need to remain meaningful after its initial launch period. Second, the composition of that activity will matter: sustained institutional and real-world asset use would support the tokenization thesis more directly than short-term trading activity. Third, the size, composition and use of the Arbitrum DAO treasury will need to remain transparent. Finally, market observers will likely watch for formal governance proposals concerning ARB’s utility or the transmission of treasury value, as well as the legal and compliance analysis surrounding any proposal.
Robinhood Chain has given Arbitrum a visible and measurable example of ecosystem revenue growth. It has also strengthened attention on application-specific chains and the possibility that traditional financial assets may eventually use public blockchain infrastructure. But the path from network revenue to the DAO treasury, and from the treasury to ARB’s economic value, still depends on governance decisions, token design and regulatory constraints. Standard Chartered’s $10 forecast represents a long-term scenario in which those conditions develop favorably; it does not describe a current revenue entitlement for ARB holders.
Source: link