SEC Approves Tokenized Securities—DTCC To Establish Blockchain Standards

ccn.comPublished on 2025-12-12Last updated on 2025-12-12

Abstract

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has approved the DTCC to develop a securities tokenization program. Its subsidiary, the Depository Trust Company, will establish standards for recording ownership of stocks, ETFs, and Treasuries on blockchain. This initiative aims to launch a pilot program in the second half of 2026. As the core of U.S. financial infrastructure, the DTCC processes quadrillions in transactions annually and will now define objective technology standards for tokenization. While it won’t mandate a specific blockchain, it will maintain a list of approved networks that meet its criteria. This move is expected to shape the future of tokenized securities globally, including decisions on approved blockchains and token data inscription requirements.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has granted the Depositary Trust and Clearing Company (DTCC) approval to develop a securities tokenization program.

The Depository Trust Company, a DTCC subsidiary, is now tasked with developing standards to record the ownership of stocks, ETFs, and Treasuries on the blockchain.

Tokenization at the Heart of U.S. Financial Infrastructure

Some of the first tokenized securities in the U.S. include money market funds like Franklin Templeton’s FOBXX and BlackRock’s BUIDL.

Although these are real, regulated products, they exist outside of DTCC clearing and settlement.

Up until now, blockchain-powered issuance and settlement have existed as parallel rails that remain subordinate to the core financial infrastructure.

With a no-action letter from the SEC, the DTCC will move forward with a pilot tokenization scheme expected to launch in the second half of 2026.

DTCC To Set Blockchain Standards

As the United States’ primary central securities depository, pretty much every transfer of U.S. equities, corporate bonds, or notes runs through the DTCC, which processed transactions worth $3 quadrillion in 2023.

When it sets standards, they have implications for capital markets around the world.

In other words, the future of securities tokenization—questions like which blockchains will be approved and what kind of information tokens must be inscribed with—now rests with the DTC.

Rather than prescribing a particular blockchain, the SEC has tasked the DTC with defining objective technology standards that platforms must meet.

In practice, however, the organization will maintain a list of approved blockchains that meet its criteria.

Participants in the tokenization pilot are expected to receive this list in the coming months.

Related Reads

Bank of Japan Signals Interest Rate Hike Despite Keeping Them at 1%

The Bank of Japan (BOJ) kept its benchmark interest rate at 1% on July 31, as widely expected, following a June hike to a 31-year high. The decision passed with an 8-1 vote, with board member Hajime Takata again dissenting in favor of a hike to 1.25%. Despite holding rates steady, the BOJ signaled a hawkish tilt, warning that underlying inflation is likely to accelerate and exceed 2% from the latter half of the fiscal year. While it slightly lowered its core inflation forecast for FY2026, officials expressed stronger confidence that an overshoot will occur later, driven by yen weakness, corporate pricing behavior, and lingering energy shock effects. Markets were focused on the BOJ's forward guidance. Analysts noted the central bank appeared to balance short-term caution with a long-term warning of tighter policy. Governor Kazuo Ueda faces the challenge of reconciling a government reluctant to tighten further with bond markets already pricing in additional hikes, with the timing of the next move debated. Adding complexity, the BOJ reportedly intervened in currency markets hours before the rate decision, buying yen to support the currency which had fallen to 40-year lows against the dollar. Yen weakness stems from the wide U.S.-Japan interest rate gap, high fuel prices, and market skepticism about the pace of BOJ policy normalization. The yield on Japan's 10-year government bonds fell to 2.8%, indicating investor expectations for future monetary tightening.

cryptonews.ru5m ago

Bank of Japan Signals Interest Rate Hike Despite Keeping Them at 1%

cryptonews.ru5m ago

Why Are Leveraged ETFs like 7709 Inherently Negative EV Products?

This article argues that the SK H力士 2x Leveraged ETF (7709) is fundamentally a negative expected value (EV) product, rather than simply a "double SK H力士" investment. Its core issue stems from its daily rebalancing mechanism to maintain a 2x leverage target. After a price move, the fund must buy more after a rise or sell after a fall to readjust its leverage, creating a systematic pattern of buying high and selling low. This introduces a "delay loss": it always reacts to past price changes, missing potential gains from adjusting earlier during an uptrend and suffering greater losses from adjusting later during a downtrend. While more frequent intraday rebalancing would improve returns in strong, smooth trending markets by reinvesting profits or cutting losses sooner, it also dramatically increases volatility drag (frictional losses) during choppy, oscillating markets due to more frequent high-buy/low-sell trades. The author draws a parallel to an option seller who delta hedges (short gamma), which involves similar "buy high, sell low" dynamic hedging. However, unlike an option seller who receives upfront premium (IV and theta) as compensation for this risk, the leveraged ETF investor receives no such compensation. Instead, they bear all the path-dependent volatility decay, plus additional costs like swap/derivatives financing, management fees, and trading slippage. Thus, the product's return profile can be framed as: 2x directional return minus realized variance drag minus financing costs minus derivatives costs minus management fees minus transaction costs. For the investor to profit, SK H力士's price must not only rise significantly but do so in a strong, sustained, and smooth trend to overcome these inherent structural costs. High volatility and frequent price reversals are particularly damaging. The article also notes that while the ETF has no explicit liquidation line like perpetual futures, avoiding a sudden "blow-up," its net asset value can still decay towards zero over time through this combination of volatility drag and fees. For experienced traders, directly managing leverage via perpetual contracts may offer more control and potentially lower costs than this packaged, mechanistic product.

marsbit12m ago

Why Are Leveraged ETFs like 7709 Inherently Negative EV Products?

marsbit12m ago

'Backstabbing' or 'Win-Win'? How Likely Is TradeXYZ to Break Away from Hyperliquid and Go Solo?

The article discusses the growing debate over whether TradeXYZ, which dominates Hyperliquid's HIP-3 market with over 90% of its volume, might break away to build its own independent trading platform. This possibility is fueled by TradeXYZ's immense market influence and the common industry trend of successful projects seeking more control and profit capture. Key arguments for a potential split include TradeXYZ's overwhelming contribution to Hyperliquid's metrics and the financial incentive to retain all transaction fees, as it currently splits them 50/50 with Hyperliquid. The piece draws parallels to other cases, like Anthropic's "Claude Code" competing with its former partner Cursor, suggesting "betrayal" can occur when business leverage shifts. However, strong counterarguments suggest a split is unlikely or would be detrimental. TradeXYZ relies on Hyperliquid's high-performance infrastructure and its platform as a primary user acquisition channel. Building a comparable system would be challenging. Furthermore, the founders of both projects share a history of trust and mutual admiration. The analysis concludes that a separation would likely be a lose-lose scenario: Hyperliquid would lose a major growth narrative and trading volume, while TradeXYZ would face technical hurdles, user migration issues, and reputational damage, potentially allowing competitors to seize market share. The most rational path is seen as continued collaboration, with TradeXYZ potentially negotiating better terms while leveraging Hyperliquid's established strengths.

marsbit22m ago

'Backstabbing' or 'Win-Win'? How Likely Is TradeXYZ to Break Away from Hyperliquid and Go Solo?

marsbit22m ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片