# Counterparty Risk Related Articles

HTX News Center provides the latest articles and in-depth analysis on "Counterparty Risk", covering market trends, project updates, tech developments, and regulatory policies in the crypto industry.

Trezor: If You Don't Have the Keys, You Don't Own the Bitcoin

The article argues that owning a promise or right to Bitcoin (e.g., through an exchange, broker, or ETF) is not the same as truly owning the asset, as access can be revoked by third parties due to regulation, bankruptcy, or policy changes. It emphasizes the importance of self-custody, where the user holds their private keys and has full control, eliminating counterparty risk. It highlights the launch of the first Trezor hardware wallet 12 years ago, which solved the problem of secure self-custody by keeping keys offline. While technology has made self-custody user-friendly, the main barrier now is a lack of awareness and trust, with many users discouraged from holding their own keys. Recent trends like ETFs and regulatory actions in Europe illustrate the risks of trusting intermediaries. The conclusion is that self-custody is the secure and simple answer, and the industry's focus should be on making it more accessible and understood, empowering users to take control before they learn its importance through loss.

cryptonews.ru07/29 17:42

Trezor: If You Don't Have the Keys, You Don't Own the Bitcoin

cryptonews.ru07/29 17:42

The Robinhood Stock Tokens You Bought Are Just Debts from Jersey Island

The Robinhood stock tokens you buy are essentially debt securities issued by a shell company in Jersey, not real equity. These tokens merely track stock prices like NVIDIA or Apple but grant no shareholder rights like voting or dividends. If the underlying company fails, you have no claim on its assets. Instead, you hold a debt instrument from Robinhood Assets (Jersey) Limited, which promises returns based on stock performance. If this Jersey entity goes bankrupt, you become an unsecured creditor. This complex structure stems from Robinhood's past crisis during the 2021 GameStop short squeeze, where T+2 settlement caused liquidity issues. The blockchain-based tokens enable instant settlement, theoretically preventing such trading halts. The product is classified by the SEC as a "linked security" or structured note, carrying counterparty risk not borne by actual shareholders. It is available globally but excluded from the US, UK, and other major markets, while Robinhood offers a fully compliant, asset-backed token model in Europe under MiFID II. The system relies on oracles for pricing, which poses risks like manipulation and faulty liquidations seen in DeFi exploits. Robinhood profits from spreads and aims to become a full-chain settlement layer. Meanwhile, competitors like Ondo have launched SEC-registered, fully compliant equity tokens in the US with actual voting rights and dividends. Robinhood’s Jersey debt model appears as a transitional, regulatory-arbitrage product, aiming to capture market share ahead of future regulatory clarity.

Foresight News07/07 03:20

The Robinhood Stock Tokens You Bought Are Just Debts from Jersey Island

Foresight News07/07 03:20

Five Counterparty Risk Architectures: A Settlement-Layer Methodology for Classifying TradFi Models in Crypto Exchanges

**Summary:** This companion piece reframes the five TradFi-on-crypto exchange architectures, previously classified by "architectural fingerprint," through the lens of counterparty risk. The core question is: whose balance sheet bears the loss first in a stress scenario, and has it historically done so? Each of the five models corresponds to a distinct risk holder with its own documented failure modes. * **Model 1 (Stablecoin-Settled CEX Perpetuals):** Risk is held by the stablecoin issuer (e.g., reserve composition, bank connectivity) and the CEX's own book. History includes Tether's banking disconnections (2017) and reserve misrepresentations (CFTC 2021 Order). * **Model 2 (CFD Brokers):** Risk resides on the broker's balance sheet (B-book model). Regulatory differences (e.g., ESMA's mandatory negative balance protection vs. Mauritius FSC's lack thereof) define loss allocation rules, as seen in the 2015 SNB event (Alpari UK insolvency). * **Model 3 (Off-Chain Custody & Transfer Agent Chain):** Risk lies with the off-chain custodian/platform. User asset recovery depends on Terms of Use and corporate structure, exemplified by the Celsius bankruptcy ruling (2023) where Earn Account assets were deemed property of the estate. * **Model 4 (DEX Perpetual Protocols):** No single balance sheet bears risk. Loss absorption relies on a protocol's insurance fund and Auto-Deleveraging (ADL) mechanism, as demonstrated in the GMX V1 (2022) and dYdX v3 YFI (2023) incidents. * **Model 5 (Regulated CCP - DCM-DCO-FCM):** The most institutionalized model concentrates risk in the Central Counterparty (CCP). However, history shows CCPs can employ non-standard tools under extreme stress, such as mass trade cancellation (LME Nickel, 2022) or enabling negative price settlements (CME WTI, 2020). The report argues that regulatory choices and counterparty risk structures are co-extensive, not in an upstream-downstream relationship. It concludes with five separate observation checklists (not predictions) for monitoring the structural vulnerabilities of each risk model.

marsbit05/12 00:06

Five Counterparty Risk Architectures: A Settlement-Layer Methodology for Classifying TradFi Models in Crypto Exchanges

marsbit05/12 00:06

活动图片

Technology Trendsright-arrow

Ethereumright-arrow