Solutions · Depositories & market infrastructure

You are the system of record. Tokenization decides whether you stay one.

Every argument for tokenization is an argument about who holds the authoritative record. That is your business. The question is whether the tokenized instrument settles through you, or around you.

Where you are

The situation, as we usually find it.

Your position is structural, not defensible by default

A depository's power comes from being the single place the record lives. A shared ledger offers the same property — which makes it either the biggest threat to your mandate or the largest expansion of it.

Reconciliation is your revenue and your exposure

A material share of post-trade cost exists because ledgers disagree. Infrastructure that removes disagreement removes cost — and some of that cost is your income.

The mandate question comes before the technology question

Whether you may hold, settle or register a tokenized instrument is usually unresolved in your governing statute. That is the first thing to fix.

What blocks you

Three things stand in the way — and none is solved by technology alone.

Blocker 1

Does the record become the asset?

Anchoring a hash of your register to a chain is cheap and changes little. Making the on-chain record the authoritative one changes everything — including your legal exposure. Most programmes never make this choice explicitly.

Blocker 2

Interoperation with existing settlement

A tokenized instrument has to settle against cash, meet your existing DvP model, and appear correctly in participants' books. Parallel rails are a migration problem, not a launch problem.

Blocker 3

Participant readiness

Your participants' operations, not your architecture, will set the pace. Any design that requires them all to change at once will not launch.

The journey

From where you are to a live, admitted product.

Highlighted steps are the ones we carry end to end. Durations are indicative for a first asset; each subsequent asset in the same class reuses most of the work.

01

Strategic position

Decide what you want to be in a tokenized market — registrar, settlement layer, or both.

3–6 wks
02

Anchor-or-tokenize decision

The single decision that determines everything downstream, taken with its legal consequences on the table.

4–6 wks
03

Target architecture

Chain topology, record authority, settlement model, participant interface.

8–12 wks
04

Mandate and regulatory alignment

Statutory changes, supervisory approval and participant rulebook amendments.

12–20 wks
05

Pilot instrument

One instrument, one participant cohort, real settlement, bounded exposure.

12–20 wks
06

Integration and migration

Parallel running, participant onboarding, and the path off the legacy rail.

ongoing
Division of labour

What we carry. What stays yours.

We carry
  • The anchor-versus-tokenize analysis and its legal consequences
  • Target architecture and settlement model
  • Statutory and rulebook change support
  • Pilot design, build and assurance
  • Participant onboarding and migration design
You keep
  • Your mandate and your participants
  • The rulebook and market policy
  • Settlement finality and risk management
  • Fee structure and governance
Why us, here

Relevant experience, not a capability list.

We have built a depository

Our board includes the key architect of a national securities depository and its KYC registry, and a former head of distributed systems for a national payments, CBDC and DLT programme.

Registry-level tokenization, delivered

We have taken a national register from an authoritative database to an authoritative on-chain record, including the legislation that made it lawful.

Published thinking on the question you face

The tokenized depository — what a CSD becomes when the record it maintains is the asset rather than a claim on one — is part of our Asset State series.

The depositories that matter in a tokenized market will be the ones that decided early whether the record they hold is the asset. It is a legal decision first.

Other routes