Hashkey Capital Singapore Secures Capital Markets Services License From MAS

CoinDeskPolicyPublicado em 2023-12-18Última atualização em 2023-12-19

Resumo

The firm follows crypto exchange DigiFT, which received a CMS license last month.

Crypto asset manager Hashkey Capital's Singapore subsidiary has secured a central bank license allowing it to provide fund-management services in the country.

The Capital Markets Services (CMS) license from the Monetary Authority of Singapore will enable Hashkey Capital Singapore to contribute to the local blockchain community, CEO Deng Chao said in a statement. It received an in-principle license in November 2022.

6.5K

The company follows crypto exchange DigiFT, which received a CMS license in November, and SBI Digital Markets, a subsidiary of the digital assets arm of Japan's financial services giant SBI Holdings, which was granted the license in September last year.

Advertisement
Advertisement

HashKey Capital wants to "create an environment where traditional and digital financial ecosystems harmoniously converge," according to the statement.

The firm completed a $500 million raise for its third fund in January and is planning to invest in Web3 and crypto initiatives around the world.

Edited by Sheldon Reback.

Leituras Relacionadas

Why Is No One Buying DeFi Insurance?

"Why DeFi Insurance Remains Unpurchased" explores the paradox of decentralized finance insurance. While DeFi insurance promises automatic, unbiased payouts via smart contracts—eliminating traditional insurers' denial practices—it struggles to attract users. The core issue is economic viability. Premiums are prohibitively high relative to the yields from DeFi protocols. For example, insuring a deposit on Aave or Maple Finance can consume most or even all of the annual yield, leaving returns comparable to or worse than traditional savings. Only the safest protocols, like MakerDAO, offer affordable premiums. Furthermore, the DeFi insurance model is structurally fragile. Unlike traditional insurance where risks are uncorrelated, DeFi risks are highly interconnected (e.g., oracle failures, bridge hacks). A single major exploit can simultaneously threaten multiple protocols, potentially bankrupting the entire insurance pool, which holds only millions against billions in total value locked. The governance model also creates a conflict of interest. In platforms like Nexus Mutual, token holders who vote on claims risk their own capital if payouts are approved, incentivizing denials. Consequently, the market is tiny and shrinking. Nexus Mutual dominates with $81.56 million in assets, but the industry lacks the capacity to cover a catastrophic event like the $292M Kelp DAO hack. Other providers have dwindled or shut down. The article concludes that DeFi insurance faces a "tragedy of the commons": its stability requires widespread adoption, but individual users have no incentive to pay for it, as premiums destroy their yields. Current solutions involve preventative measures like bug bounties and seeking external capital from traditional reinsurance, acknowledging that on-chain capital alone is insufficient to cover on-chain risks.

marsbitHá 3h

Why Is No One Buying DeFi Insurance?

marsbitHá 3h

Trading

Spot
活动图片