NYSE plans tokenized securities platform with 24/7 trading and on-chain settlement

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-01-19Last updated on 2026-01-19

Abstract

NYSE plans to develop a platform for trading and on-chain settlement of tokenized securities, enabling 24/7 trading of U.S.-listed equities and ETFs, subject to regulatory approval. The platform will support fractional shares, dollar-based orders, and stablecoin funding, using blockchains like Ethereum and Solana for near-instant settlement. Tokenized shares will be fully fungible with traditional securities, preserving dividends and shareholder rights. This initiative is part of parent company ICE’s broader digital strategy, which includes collaboration with banks like BNY and Citi. The project remains pending regulatory approval but represents a major step toward integrating blockchain into traditional markets.

The New York Stock Exchange has announced plans to develop a platform for trading and on-chain settlement of tokenized securities. The move would allow 24/7 trading of U.S.-listed equities and ETFs, subject to regulatory approval.

In a statement released on 19 January, the NYSE said the platform would support fractional share trading, orders sized in dollar amounts, and stablecoin-based funding, while enabling near-instant settlement using tokenized capital.

24/7 trading and tokenized settlement

According to the exchange, the new digital platform is designed to enable continuous trading. This breaks from traditional market hours that have historically governed U.S. equities markets.

The NYSE said this would allow investors to trade tokenized securities around the clock. Also, settlement will take place on-chain rather than through conventional clearing cycles.

The infrastructure will combine the NYSE’s Pillar matching engine with blockchain-based post-trade systems.

The exchange said the platform will support multiple blockchains, like Solana and Ethereum, for settlement and custody, enabling flexibility as digital market infrastructure evolves.

Tokenized shares remain fully fungible

The NYSE said tokenized shares traded on the platform would be fungible with traditionally issued securities. This means they would represent the same underlying asset.

Tokenized shareholders would continue to receive dividends and governance rights, including voting, in line with existing shareholder protections.

Access to the platform would be provided through qualified broker-dealers, with distribution designed to remain non-discriminatory and aligned with established market-structure principles.

Part of a broader ICE digital strategy

The initiative forms part of a wider digital strategy by Intercontinental Exchange, the NYSE’s parent company.

Intercontinental Exchange [ICE] said it is preparing its clearing infrastructure to support continuous trading. Also, it is exploring the use of tokenized collateral to meet margin and funding requirements outside traditional banking hours.

ICE added that it is working with banks, including BNY and Citi, to support tokenized deposits across its clearinghouses.

The goal is to allow clearing members to manage liquidity and funding across different time zones and jurisdictions without being constrained by standard settlement windows.

Regulatory approval still required

“For more than two centuries, the NYSE has transformed the way markets operate,” said Lynn Martin, President of NYSE Group, adding that the exchange aims to lead the industry toward “fully on-chain solutions” while maintaining existing regulatory standards and investor protections.

ICE executives said the project reflects a long-term shift toward operating market infrastructure on-chain, spanning trading, settlement, custody, and capital formation.

The NYSE has not disclosed a launch timeline, and the platform remains subject to regulatory approval.

If approved, it would mark one of the most significant steps yet by a major U.S. exchange toward integrating blockchain technology directly into traditional securities markets.


Final Thoughts

  • The NYSE’s move signals that tokenization is shifting from pilot projects to core market infrastructure, rather than remaining a niche digital asset experiment.
  • By keeping tokenized shares fully fungible with traditional securities, the exchange is prioritising continuity in market structure and investor protections.

Related Questions

QWhat are the key features of the NYSE's proposed tokenized securities platform?

AThe platform would enable 24/7 trading of U.S.-listed equities and ETFs, support fractional share trading and orders sized in dollar amounts, use stablecoin-based funding, and provide near-instant on-chain settlement. It is designed to be compatible with multiple blockchains like Solana and Ethereum.

QHow will tokenized shares on the new platform differ from traditional securities?

ATokenized shares will be fully fungible with traditionally issued securities, meaning they represent the same underlying asset. Shareholders will retain all rights, including dividends and governance rights like voting, in line with existing protections.

QWhat is the role of Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) in this initiative?

AIntercontinental Exchange (ICE), the NYSE's parent company, is leading a broader digital strategy. This includes preparing its clearing infrastructure for continuous trading, exploring the use of tokenized collateral for margin requirements, and working with banks like BNY and Citi to support tokenized deposits across its clearinghouses.

QIs the NYSE's new platform operational, and what is required for it to launch?

ANo, the platform is not yet operational. The NYSE has not disclosed a launch timeline, and the platform remains subject to regulatory approval before it can be launched.

QAccording to the article, what does the NYSE's move signal for the future of tokenization?

AThe move signals that tokenization is shifting from being a niche digital asset experiment to becoming a core component of market infrastructure, integrating directly into traditional securities markets while maintaining regulatory standards and investor protections.

Related Reads

It Took Me a Year to See the Bitter Truth About Agent Payments

After a year building infrastructure for the Agent economy, engaging with major players like Stripe, Visa, and Coinbase, the author shares a sobering analysis of the current state of Agent payments. The core finding is a stark lack of genuine, immediate demand across most envisioned use cases. The article breaks down four key market segments: 1. **Agent-to-Merchant (Consumer Shopping):** For most product categories (e.g., clothing, electronics), conversational AI shopping is a step backwards from visual e-commerce interfaces. While agents excel at understanding needs, they can't replace side-by-side product comparison. Real merchant interest is defensive "Agent Engine Optimization," not driven by current customer demand. Potential exists for high-frequency, low-decision purchases (like food delivery) or navigating complex store UIs, but these require massive B2C distribution channels dominated by giants like Amazon. 2. **Agent-to-API (Developer Services):** Developers already have subscriptions and billing relationships for APIs (compute, data). Prepaid balances solve micro-payment issues for low transaction volumes. A deeper structural problem is that major SaaS vendors' business models rely on enterprise contracts, resisting granular pay-per-call pricing. While protocols like MPP and x402 serve the long tail of niche services, this market is small and developers are historically low-willingness-to-pay. 3. **Agent-to-Agent:** This remains largely theoretical with minimal transaction volume. While it represents a long-term bet on a fundamentally new transaction infrastructure (sub-second, micro-penny to million-dollar, multi-party settlements), it does not constitute a present market. 4. **Agent-to-Finance:** This is the only category with existing, paying demand. Integrating AI into financial workflows (trading, portfolio management) is a natural evolution and enables new capabilities like autonomous rebalancing. However, competition favors established, regulated institutions. The "real problem" is not moving money between agents, but the broader challenge of **coordination**—orchestrating work between agents and humans, verifying outcomes, and settling results. Payment is just one component of settlement, which is itself part of coordination. Companies that solve the coordination layer will subsume payment, not the other way around. While well-funded incumbents build defensively for a long-term future, startups must find where the market is today—which, for the author's team, lies outside these four categories in an area of real, growing, and underserved activity.

marsbit4m ago

It Took Me a Year to See the Bitter Truth About Agent Payments

marsbit4m ago

It Took Me a Year to See the Hard Truth About Agent Payments

**Title: It Took Me a Year to See the Hard Truth About Agent Payments** Over the past year, I've worked on infrastructure for the Agent economy, engaging with major players like Stripe, Visa, Coinbase, and numerous startups. The findings reveal a stark reality: genuine, widespread demand for Agent-based payments does not yet exist. **Key Observations:** * **Agent-to-Merchant (Shopping):** The user experience for AI shopping often falls short, especially for visual product discovery. While AI excels at understanding needs, conversational interfaces can't yet replace browsing and comparing multiple products visually. Current merchant interest is largely defensive ("Agent Engine Optimization") for a future that hasn't arrived. High-frequency, low-friction purchases (like food delivery) are potential fits, but lack open APIs and face high AI inference costs. Simpler, more affordable, or cross-language interactions for complex UIs are a niche opportunity but require massive consumer distribution to scale. * **Agent-to-API (Developer Tools):** Developer payment needs for APIs (computing, data, models) are already met through subscriptions and prepaid credits. The core challenge is not payment friction but supplier economics: most large SaaS providers prefer enterprise contracts over micropayments for API calls. Protocols like MPP and x402 suit the long-tail of smaller services but cater to a developer market historically reluctant to pay for these tools. Major infrastructure needs at the top of the stack are already being addressed. * **Agent-to-Agent (Machine Commerce):** This is a long-term vision with almost no current transaction volume. While a future with high-speed, high-frequency, multi-party machine-to-machine transactions would require novel infrastructure, it remains theoretical. The market is not here yet. * **Agent-to-Finance:** This is the only category with clear, present demand. Financial professionals and DeFi users already pay for tools, and AI augmentation is a natural evolution. Autonomous AI agents can enable entirely new financial strategies. However, competition is fierce from established, regulated incumbents who can more easily layer AI onto their existing products. **The Core Insight:** Companies, especially giants with long time horizons, are building defensively for a potential future of mass machine commerce. For them, early investment is a low-cost hedge. For startups, the current market reality is different. The primary challenge isn't just moving money between agents (payments). The larger, unsolved problem is **orchestration** – coordinating work between agents and humans, verifying outcomes, and then settling. Payment is just a part of settlement, which is just a part of orchestration. Companies that solve the orchestration problem will subsume payments, not the other way around. After a year of building, we see the real, growing, and underserved market opportunity lies in this broader domain of orchestration.

链捕手27m ago

It Took Me a Year to See the Hard Truth About Agent Payments

链捕手27m ago

Claude Opus 4.8 Finds a $4.5 Billion Bug: The AI Era is Mass-Producing Hackers

A researcher discovered a critical "infinite mint" vulnerability in the Zcash cryptocurrency's Orchard protocol using Claude Opus 4.8, leading to a swift fix but also a 50% market drop, erasing billions in value. This incident highlights a new era where powerful, accessible AI models are dramatically lowering the barrier to finding software vulnerabilities. Previously, the security community feared specialized models like Claude Mythos Preview, capable of finding decades-old zero-day exploits. The Zcash case, however, involved a publicly available, general-purpose model. This shift makes advanced security auditing—and attack capabilities—accessible to far more people, not just experts. The mass democratization of vulnerability discovery brings a dual challenge: a flood of low-quality, AI-generated false reports that overwhelm maintainers, and the real, rapid uncovering of deep, dangerous bugs. Open-source projects, often understaffed and unfunded, are particularly vulnerable to this "attention DDoS." The article cites examples like curl shutting down its bug bounty program due to the unsustainable workload. Our perceived digital safety has often been luck, relying on the high cost and effort required to find deeply hidden flaws in complex systems, as seen with historical vulnerabilities like Heartbleed or Baron Samedit. AI changes this cost structure, effectively "mass-producing flashlights" to illuminate every corner of our codebase. While large companies operate extensive security chains involving external white-hat hackers and massive defensive operations, the global cybersecurity workforce faces a severe shortage, especially of experienced personnel capable of analyzing complex threats and coordinating fixes. The core dilemma emerges: AI makes *finding* bugs cheap and scalable, but *fixing* them remains a slow, expensive, and human-intensive process. The article concludes that AI won't destroy the internet but acts as a bright light, revealing that our digital existence is not inherently secure but is precariously maintained by ongoing human effort. The true cost in the AI era may not be discovery, but whether there will be enough people left willing and able to do the hard work of repair.

marsbit1h ago

Claude Opus 4.8 Finds a $4.5 Billion Bug: The AI Era is Mass-Producing Hackers

marsbit1h ago

Codex Goal Mode Usage Guide: How to Make AI Continuously Pursue a Specific Objective

"Codex Goal Mode: How to Make AI Work Continuously Toward a Specific Goal" OpenAI's Codex "goal mode" (/goal) transforms the AI from a reactive code assistant into a proactive execution agent capable of working autonomously for hours or even days to achieve a defined objective. To maximize its effectiveness, follow these key principles: 1. **Define Clear, Verifiable Exit Criteria:** The goal prompt should be a concise, measurable success condition, not a lengthy specification. Use quantifiable metrics like "reduce build time by 30%" or "achieve 100% test parity." 2. **Provide Initial Guidance and Tools:** Direct Codex toward likely problem areas and specify available tools (e.g., browsers, testing environments) to prevent it from exploring unproductive paths. 3. **Enable Progress Measurement:** Equip Codex with ways to track advancement, such as creating comparison tools for visual tasks or evaluation sets, ensuring it can gauge its own progress. 4. **Use a Realistic Execution Environment:** For tasks like performance optimization, provide access to environments that closely mimic production (e.g., similar configs, databases) to yield valid results. 5. **Be Cautious with Visual Goals:** Avoid vague "pixel-perfect" instructions. Instead, supplement visual references with functional checklists or design system specifications to prevent Codex from obsessing over minor details. 6. **Implement Progress Tracking:** For long-running tasks, have Codex commit code to draft PRs, update progress documents, or send Slack updates to maintain visibility into its work. 7. **Review and Consolidate Results:** Once the goal is met, instruct Codex to review its work, clean up ineffective experimental code, and reflect on what strategies succeeded or failed. Ultimately, using goal mode shifts the developer's role from writing prompts to managing a persistent engineering agent—defining objectives, establishing metrics, configuring environments, and conducting final reviews.

marsbit2h ago

Codex Goal Mode Usage Guide: How to Make AI Continuously Pursue a Specific Objective

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片