#Nasdaq #Tokenized #Crypto

Reuters reports that Nasdaq has submitted a proposal to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) seeking rule changes that would allow securities listed in traditional digital or tokenized form to trade on the Nasdaq exchange.

In its filing to the SEC, Nasdaq voiced an issuer-centric concern: “Nasdaq believes that the tokenization of securities should not deprive issuers of the right to determine where and how their shares trade.” The document also notes that Nasdaq has limited ability when it comes to granting issuers such a choice.

Nasdaq President Tal Cohen said the company hopes to “build a bridge between the digital-asset world and traditional assets.” He also wrote on LinkedIn: “The challenge and responsibility is to ensure that this transformation always puts investors’ interests first.”

This is, without question, a deep-sea torpedo that caught everyone off guard. Why such a strong market reaction? Simply put:

• It’s no longer small brokers or crypto platforms testing at the margins — it’s Wall Street’s “cathedral of tech stocks” embracing blockchain.

• For the first time, TradFi and the Web3 world are converging at the level of the “regular army.”

So the question is: Can Nasdaq truly open the “tokenized securities” door? What are its motives, implications, and challenges? And what opportunities might crypto investors find here?

Below, we break down this historic move from multiple angles.

Whether ordinary shares or tokenized shares, orders would go into the same order book and follow the same trading rules. In other words, tokenized Tesla or Microsoft that investors buy would carry no difference in shareholder rights versus the conventional stock. Dividends, voting, shareholder meetings — all identical.

This sends a crucial signal: tokenization is not a “substitute” but a digitized version of the same regulated security.

In the past, crypto markets popularized “tokenized Tesla” or “tokenized Apple” mainly as synthetic assets, typically backed by platform collateral and tracking price via derivatives. Those tokens were not stock; holders lacked shareholder rights and merely got price exposure.

By contrast, Nasdaq’s tokenized securities proposal would write shareholder rights into the product’s rule framework. That means a buyer of tokenized Microsoft is fully equal to a buyer of regular Microsoft stock. This is true, compliant security tokenization.

For the broader crypto market, that implies a major step up in legitimacy and trust.

Order entry and matching would remain on existing infrastructure, but settlement could use on-chain tokens. Ultimately, the Depository Trust Company (DTC) and the established clearing system would still provide the backstop.

This is a transitional design. In traditional finance, clearing and custody are the core systemic-risk touchpoints. Rather than rushing into “disintermediation,” Nasdaq proposes a two-sword approach:

• Matching: Keep the mature, proven matching engine for stability.

• Settlement: Introduce a blockchain tokenization option to boost efficiency and flexibility.

• Risk backstop: DTC and other clearing institutions remain the ultimate safety net.

The dual model satisfies regulators’ safety priorities while letting investors experience blockchain benefits.

For cross-border investors in particular, tokenized settlement could compress settlement cycles from T+2/T+1 toward T+0, a huge leap in liquidity and trading experience.

If all goes well, U.S. investors could see the first batch of tokenized stocks trade on Nasdaq’s main board as early as Q3 2026.

Why 2026?

A. Lengthy regulatory review.The SEC’s process includes rigorous review, public comment, industry hearings, and rule amendments — typically 18–24 months at minimum.

B. Technical integration.Marrying blockchain with existing market plumbing isn’t just “add a chain.” Account models, KYC/AML, custody, and more require careful re-architecture.

C. Market education.Investors — especially traditional institutions — need time to understand “tokenized stock.” Nasdaq must roll out rules, education, and outreach progressively.

In other words, 2026 is actually ambitious. If achieved, it would mark a sweeping endorsement of tokenization by traditional finance.

Investors wouldn’t just trade stock prices on a chain; on-chain identity could carry dividends, voting, and governance. In time, smart contracts could even automate shareholder meeting outcomes.

Imagine an investor in a small African town using a crypto wallet to directly hold shares of a Nasdaq-listed company — without convoluted cross-border account opening.

If approved, Nasdaq’s blueprint becomes a template. The NYSE, Cboe, and even Asian venues (HKEX, SSE) could follow.

Two previously siloed worlds — securities markets and crypto — gain a tokenization bridge. For Web3, the design space explodes.

Tokenized stocks could ultimately offer 7×24 trading like crypto spot. The classic open-close rhythm of TradFi may be rewritten — very familiar terrain for crypto traders.

Crypto investors wouldn’t be limited to BTC/ETH/altcoins; they could buy tokenized Tesla or Coca-Cola directly. That reshapes capital flows and asset allocation.

RWA used to be a buzzword. Putting tokenization on one of the world’s biggest exchanges moves it from the edge to the center.

The SEC won’t greenlight this lightly. Expect comment rounds and industry debate. Traditional powerhouses like Citadel have already warned about potential regulatory-arbitrage risks.

Many listed companies may not want their shares tokenized. Recall that when Robinhood listed an OpenAI tokenized stock, OpenAI quickly distanced itself.

On-chain settlement must interoperate with today’s clearing rails. Any flaw could be amplified. With quantum computing inching closer, security sensitivity only rises.

Legacy brokers and market-makers may resist trends that disintermediate them and threaten entrenched revenue streams.

#Nasdaq #Tokenized #Crypto

Reuters reports that Nasdaq has submitted a proposal to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) seeking rule changes that would allow securities listed in traditional digital or tokenized form to trade on the Nasdaq exchange.

In its filing to the SEC, Nasdaq voiced an issuer-centric concern: “Nasdaq believes that the tokenization of securities should not deprive issuers of the right to determine where and how their shares trade.” The document also notes that Nasdaq has limited ability when it comes to granting issuers such a choice.

Nasdaq President Tal Cohen said the company hopes to “build a bridge between the digital-asset world and traditional assets.” He also wrote on LinkedIn: “The challenge and responsibility is to ensure that this transformation always puts investors’ interests first.”

This is, without question, a deep-sea torpedo that caught everyone off guard. Why such a strong market reaction? Simply put:

• It’s no longer small brokers or crypto platforms testing at the margins — it’s Wall Street’s “cathedral of tech stocks” embracing blockchain.

• For the first time, TradFi and the Web3 world are converging at the level of the “regular army.”

So the question is: Can Nasdaq truly open the “tokenized securities” door? What are its motives, implications, and challenges? And what opportunities might crypto investors find here?

Below, we break down this historic move from multiple angles.

Whether ordinary shares or tokenized shares, orders would go into the same order book and follow the same trading rules. In other words, tokenized Tesla or Microsoft that investors buy would carry no difference in shareholder rights versus the conventional stock. Dividends, voting, shareholder meetings — all identical.

This sends a crucial signal: tokenization is not a “substitute” but a digitized version of the same regulated security.

In the past, crypto markets popularized “tokenized Tesla” or “tokenized Apple” mainly as synthetic assets, typically backed by platform collateral and tracking price via derivatives. Those tokens were not stock; holders lacked shareholder rights and merely got price exposure.

By contrast, Nasdaq’s tokenized securities proposal would write shareholder rights into the product’s rule framework. That means a buyer of tokenized Microsoft is fully equal to a buyer of regular Microsoft stock. This is true, compliant security tokenization.

For the broader crypto market, that implies a major step up in legitimacy and trust.

Order entry and matching would remain on existing infrastructure, but settlement could use on-chain tokens. Ultimately, the Depository Trust Company (DTC) and the established clearing system would still provide the backstop.

This is a transitional design. In traditional finance, clearing and custody are the core systemic-risk touchpoints. Rather than rushing into “disintermediation,” Nasdaq proposes a two-sword approach:

• Matching: Keep the mature, proven matching engine for stability.

• Settlement: Introduce a blockchain tokenization option to boost efficiency and flexibility.

• Risk backstop: DTC and other clearing institutions remain the ultimate safety net.

The dual model satisfies regulators’ safety priorities while letting investors experience blockchain benefits.

For cross-border investors in particular, tokenized settlement could compress settlement cycles from T+2/T+1 toward T+0, a huge leap in liquidity and trading experience.

If all goes well, U.S. investors could see the first batch of tokenized stocks trade on Nasdaq’s main board as early as Q3 2026.

Why 2026?

A. Lengthy regulatory review.The SEC’s process includes rigorous review, public comment, industry hearings, and rule amendments — typically 18–24 months at minimum.

B. Technical integration.Marrying blockchain with existing market plumbing isn’t just “add a chain.” Account models, KYC/AML, custody, and more require careful re-architecture.

C. Market education.Investors — especially traditional institutions — need time to understand “tokenized stock.” Nasdaq must roll out rules, education, and outreach progressively.

In other words, 2026 is actually ambitious. If achieved, it would mark a sweeping endorsement of tokenization by traditional finance.

Investors wouldn’t just trade stock prices on a chain; on-chain identity could carry dividends, voting, and governance. In time, smart contracts could even automate shareholder meeting outcomes.

Imagine an investor in a small African town using a crypto wallet to directly hold shares of a Nasdaq-listed company — without convoluted cross-border account opening.

If approved, Nasdaq’s blueprint becomes a template. The NYSE, Cboe, and even Asian venues (HKEX, SSE) could follow.

Two previously siloed worlds — securities markets and crypto — gain a tokenization bridge. For Web3, the design space explodes.

Tokenized stocks could ultimately offer 7×24 trading like crypto spot. The classic open-close rhythm of TradFi may be rewritten — very familiar terrain for crypto traders.

Crypto investors wouldn’t be limited to BTC/ETH/altcoins; they could buy tokenized Tesla or Coca-Cola directly. That reshapes capital flows and asset allocation.

RWA used to be a buzzword. Putting tokenization on one of the world’s biggest exchanges moves it from the edge to the center.

The SEC won’t greenlight this lightly. Expect comment rounds and industry debate. Traditional powerhouses like Citadel have already warned about potential regulatory-arbitrage risks.

Many listed companies may not want their shares tokenized. Recall that when Robinhood listed an OpenAI tokenized stock, OpenAI quickly distanced itself.

On-chain settlement must interoperate with today’s clearing rails. Any flaw could be amplified. With quantum computing inching closer, security sensitivity only rises.

Legacy brokers and market-makers may resist trends that disintermediate them and threaten entrenched revenue streams.