SEC Promotes Tokenized Stocks, Is the Traditional Finance Industry Starting to Worry?

marsbitОпубликовано 2026-05-22Обновлено 2026-05-22

Введение

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is preparing to formally release an "innovation exemption" framework this week. This framework would allow third parties to tokenize U.S. stocks like Apple and Tesla without approval from the listed companies. The move, rooted in a deregulatory vision proposed by pro-crypto commissioners earlier this year, could accelerate the migration of traditional stock markets to blockchain. This development poses a structural threat of "fragmentation" to traditional finance. Core concerns are liquidity fragmentation—where trading volume disperses across multiple blockchains and platforms, leading to price disparities and reduced market efficiency—and revenue fragmentation—where trading fees and intermediary income shift away from domestic exchanges to overseas or competing platforms. The report compares the traditional stock market to a monopolistic "supermarket." Tokenization enables countless "street stalls" to operate outside this system, threatening the exchange's dominance, diluting liquidity for large orders, and slicing into revenue streams. Evidence of this capital fragmentation is already emerging. On the same day the SEC signaled the framework, decentralized platform Hyperliquid saw its RWA (real-world asset) open interest hit a record $2.6 billion, driven by demand for 24/7 on-chain trading of traditional assets. Traditional institutions face a dilemma: either collaborate to build tokenization infrastructure proactively or...

Author: Tiger Research

Compiled by: AididiaoJP, Foresight News

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is preparing to formally announce an "innovation exemption" framework this week, which will allow third parties to tokenize U.S. stocks like Apple and Tesla without approval from the listed companies. This move could accelerate the migration of traditional stock markets to blockchain, while also raising deep concerns among exchanges about liquidity fragmentation and revenue loss.

According to a Bloomberg report on May 18, this framework originates from the deregulation vision proposed by pro-crypto commissioners Paul Atkins and Hester Peirce in February. Coinbase and the Blockchain Association had previously submitted formal letters of support, strongly advocating for granting third parties the right to tokenize. However, the guidance issued by Peirce on May 22 is narrower in scope than market expectations, applying only to on-chain stock instruments that fully retain shareholder rights and explicitly excluding synthetic stock tokens that do not carry voting or dividend rights.

Two Core Threats: Liquidity Fragmentation and Revenue Fragmentation

The core impact of tokenized stocks lies in "fragmentation." While the crypto industry often discusses liquidity aggregation, the traditional finance world views it as a structural threat.

  • Liquidity Fragmentation: When the same stock is tokenized on different blockchains and decentralized platforms, the trading volume and order flow originally concentrated on the NYSE or Nasdaq will disperse across multiple venues. This will lead to price disparities between platforms, increased slippage for large orders, and reduced overall market efficiency.
  • Revenue Fragmentation: With the dispersion of trading venues, transaction fees and intermediary revenues that originally belonged to domestic exchanges will flow to overseas or competing platforms, directly impacting national financial competitiveness.

A Tiger Research report uses South Korea as an example: The SK Hynix 2x Leveraged ETF launched by Hong Kong asset manager CSOP has grown into the world's largest single-stock leveraged ETF, with assets exceeding 110 billion won (approximately $80 billion). If South Korea could have taken the lead in launching similar products through regulatory sandboxes, these management fees and financial revenues could have stayed within the country.

The End of Traditional Exchanges' "Supermarket" Monopoly

The report uses a vivid metaphor to describe this change: the traditional stock market is like a dominant supermarket where all buyers and sellers are concentrated, and the exchange monopolizes transactions and collects fees. Tokenized stocks are akin to allowing anyone to set up thousands of street stalls without permission, conducting trades directly outside the supermarket.

This dispersion will lead to buyer loss, thinner inventory at each stall, difficulty in executing large trades, and the slicing up of revenue sources. If domestic exchanges hesitate due to regulatory constraints, competing platforms in other jurisdictions will rush to seize global capital flows and intermediary revenues.

Capital Fragmentation Is Already Happening

On the same day the SEC signaled the framework (May 18), the open interest for RWAs (Real World Assets) on the decentralized platform Hyperliquid surpassed $2.6 billion, reaching a record high. Driven by the demand for 24/7 on-chain trading of traditional assets, RWA trading volume on perpetual DEXs is expected to surge further.

Traditional financial institutions and regulators face a dilemma: one option is to proactively build tokenization infrastructure through cooperation, like the NYSE; the other is to lobby regulators to block innovation to protect existing revenues. Regulators are also conflicted—they must control the pace of innovation while preventing domestic revenue from being siphoned off by overseas platforms.

Even if the framework is formally announced, potential conflicts are just beginning. Future focal points will include:

  • A second "clarity war" surrounding shareholder rights;
  • How to bring platforms like Hyperliquid, which have grown in regulatory gray areas, into the regulatory system. If deemed unlicensed exchanges, this could trigger a new wave of liquidity and uncertainty shocks.

In the era of digital assets, if financial institutions and jurisdictions do not act quickly, they will permanently lose their long-monopolized fee rights and financial leadership, and capital will continue to disperse in all directions.

Связанные с этим вопросы

QWhat is the SEC's upcoming 'innovation exemption' framework expected to allow, according to the article?

AThe SEC's upcoming 'innovation exemption' framework is expected to allow third parties to tokenize stocks like Apple and Tesla on the blockchain without requiring approval from the companies themselves, provided the tokenized instruments fully retain shareholder rights such as voting and dividends.

QWhat are the two main 'fragmentation' threats that tokenized stocks pose to traditional finance, as outlined in the Tiger Research report?

AThe two main 'fragmentation' threats are liquidity fragmentation and revenue fragmentation. Liquidity fragmentation means trading volume spreads across multiple blockchain platforms, causing price discrepancies and higher slippage. Revenue fragmentation refers to the diversion of trading fees and intermediary income away from national exchanges to competing or foreign platforms.

QWhat example does the article use to illustrate the financial loss a country can suffer by not moving quickly with tokenized products?

AThe article uses the example of South Korea. A Hong Kong-based asset manager's leveraged ETF on SK Hynix has grown into the world's largest single-stock leveraged ETF. The report suggests that if South Korea had acted faster through a regulatory sandbox, the management fees and financial revenue from such a product could have remained within the country.

QWhat platform's RWA (Real World Asset) open interest hit a record high on the same day the SEC signaled its new framework?

AOn the same day (May 18), the decentralized platform Hyperliquid saw its RWA open interest surge to a record high, exceeding $2.6 billion.

QWhat are the two strategic options traditional financial institutions and regulators face in response to tokenization, as mentioned in the article?

AThe two strategic options are: 1) To proactively build tokenization infrastructure through partnerships, similar to what the NYSE is doing. 2) To lobby regulators to block innovation in order to protect existing revenue streams.

Похожее

Fei-Fei Li's Team Clarifies the Concept of 'World Models', Sora Merely a Renderer

"World Models" has become a widely used yet confusing term in AI. To address this, a team led by Fei-Fei Li and World Labs proposed a functional taxonomy based on the Partially Observable Markov Decision Process framework. This taxonomy categorizes systems called "world models" into three distinct projections: Renderers, Simulators, and Planners. Renderers, like OpenAI's Sora and other video generation models, focus on producing photorealistic visual outputs for human perception. They prioritize visual fidelity over physical accuracy. Simulators, such as NVIDIA Omniverse, aim to compute precise future environmental states for computational tasks like engineering analysis or digital twins. Planners, like Vision-Language-Action models, take in observations and goals to output executable actions for robots or agents. The article clarifies that most current "world models," including Sora, are primarily Renderers. They generate convincing visuals but lack the core ability to simulate state transitions based on actions, a key requirement for a true world model in classic reinforcement learning definitions. This conceptual confusion has practical implications, leading to potential misalignment in technology selection, investment, and public understanding of AI capabilities. Clear categorization is crucial. It helps enterprises avoid costly mistakes (e.g., using a renderer for robot training), allows investors to accurately assess markets, and enables researchers to build comparable benchmarks. While future systems may integrate these functions, recognizing current boundaries is essential for honest assessment and progress.

marsbit21 мин. назад

Fei-Fei Li's Team Clarifies the Concept of 'World Models', Sora Merely a Renderer

marsbit21 мин. назад

Bloomberg Uncovered: How Do China's Wealthy Circumvent the Annual $50,000 Limit to Transfer Assets?

**Summary: How Wealthy Chinese Circumvent $50,000 Annual Foreign Exchange Limits** Despite China's strict capital controls, including an annual $50,000 per person foreign exchange quota, an estimated $150 billion in funds still leaves the country annually via various gray and underground channels. This report outlines the evolution of China's "capital wall" and the methods used to bypass it. **The Evolving Capital Controls:** * **Foundation (1994):** The system of "current account convertibility with strict capital account controls" was established. * **Quota Set (2007):** The $50,000 individual annual forex purchase limit was formalized. * **Crackdown Begins (2015-2017):** Following market volatility, enforcement tightened. Banks were required to scrutinize transactions, and channels like using UnionPay cards for Hong Kong insurance premiums or buying overseas property were blocked. * **Digital & Legal Upgrades (2024-2026):** Enhanced algorithms now flag suspicious patterns (e.g., "smurfing"). The Common Reporting Standard (CRS) provides Chinese tax authorities with data on citizens' offshore accounts. Unlicensed cross-border brokers have been targeted. **Five Primary Methods for Moving Capital:** 1. **Underground Banking / "Hawala" (Duiqiao):** The largest-scale method. No money crosses borders. Clients pay RMB to a domestic account; an overseas associate deposits equivalent foreign currency into the client's offshore account. Risks include high fees, account freezes, and legal penalties. 2. **"Smurfing" or "Ant Moving":** Using multiple individuals' $50,000 quotas to pool funds for one offshore recipient. Increasingly detected by anti-money laundering algorithms. 3. **Trade Invoice Manipulation:** Businesses over-invoice imports or under-invoice exports via offshore shell companies, creating a pretext to transfer excess funds abroad under the guise of trade. 4. **Channel Migration:** After a crackdown on internet brokers, funds flow toward more compliant but costly channels like major banks' cross-border wealth management services or Qualified Domestic Institutional Investor (QDII) quotas. 5. **Structural Arrangements:** High-net-worth individuals use complex, high-cost legal structures involving offshore trusts, insurance, and investment migration programs to transfer asset ownership. **Regulatory Response: Focusing on People, Not Just Money** The current strategy extends oversight from enterprises to **individual residents**. Tools like CRS allow retroactive visibility into offshore assets. Cryptocurrencies, once seen as a potential loophole, are now actively monitored and prosecuted as an illegal channel. The underlying driver remains: with significant wealth concentrated among millions of affluent households seeking diversification amid domestic economic shifts, the incentive to move assets offshore persists despite regulatory barriers.

marsbit41 мин. назад

Bloomberg Uncovered: How Do China's Wealthy Circumvent the Annual $50,000 Limit to Transfer Assets?

marsbit41 мин. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片