arxiv: 2604.06608 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-08 · 💱 q-fin.GN

Recognition: unknown

SoK of RWA Tokenization: A Systematization of Concepts, Architectures, and Legal Interoperability

Junliang Luo , Xihan Xiong , Zonglun Li , Hong Kang , Xue Liu , William J Knottenbelt , Katrin Tinn

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 16:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💱 q-fin.GN

keywords real world assetstokenizationblockchainsystematization of knowledgefinancial infrastructureoracle problemlegal interoperabilityprogrammable ledgers

0 comments

The pith

RWA tokenization converts passive ledger entries into programmable economic agents for autonomous settlement.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper systematizes real-world asset tokenization as a shift from intermediary-based settlement to programmable infrastructure. It claims this process turns static, illiquid assets into active agents that can settle trades and manage collateral through code rather than manual processes. To make this work, the authors build a taxonomy of the full lifecycle and break down the layers of legal custody, technical standards, and valuation that tie off-chain rights to on-chain execution. They compare protocols across sovereign debt, private credit, and real estate while examining an on-chain U.S. Treasuries case to expose constraints like latency, the oracle problem, and regulatory fragmentation. The work concludes that tokenization functions as a bridge to more unified programmable ledgers rather than a permanent endpoint.

Core claim

Real World Asset (RWA) tokenization represents a conceptual evolution beyond mere digitization, converting passive ledger entries into programmable economic agents capable of autonomous settlement and algorithmic collateralization. Achieving such seamless capital efficiency necessitates resolving the fundamental friction between deterministic on-chain code and probabilistic off-chain reality, navigating the oracle problem and jurisdictional interoperability. The systematization presents a taxonomy for the RWA lifecycle and deconstructs the multi-layered architecture spanning legal custody, technical standards, and cryptoeconomic valuation required to enforce off-chain rights within on-chain

What carries the argument

The taxonomy for the RWA lifecycle that deconstructs the multi-layered architecture spanning legal custody, technical standards, and cryptoeconomic valuation to enforce off-chain rights on-chain.

If this is right

Tokenization can activate trillions in static illiquid capital by enabling high-velocity, autonomous settlement.
Protocols must solve the oracle problem to reliably link on-chain code with off-chain events.
Regulatory fragmentation and latency create distinct constraints for sovereign debt, private credit, and real estate tokenization.
Empirical integration of on-chain U.S. Treasuries illustrates practical paths and limits for such systems.
Asset tokenization serves as a transitional step rather than the inevitable endpoint compared to unified programmable ledgers.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the taxonomy is complete, it can serve as a template for evaluating new tokenization projects against consistent criteria.
The focus on jurisdictional interoperability points to the need for cross-border legal standards to scale RWA systems globally.
The transitional view implies that long-term research should explore native on-chain assets that reduce reliance on oracles.
Capital-velocity gains from tokenization could be measured empirically in live protocols to test the efficiency claims.

Load-bearing premise

The proposed taxonomy for the RWA lifecycle and the comparative analysis of protocols accurately capture the essential architectures and constraints without material omissions from the reviewed literature.

What would settle it

Discovery of a major RWA protocol, asset class, or legal structure omitted from the taxonomy whose inclusion would change the identified frictions or the transitional-bridge conclusion.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.06608 by Hong Kang, Junliang Luo, Katrin Tinn, William J Knottenbelt, Xihan Xiong, Xue Liu, Zonglun Li.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: ), focusing on the nature of the reference asset and on the legal rights attached to it. The first and most basic division separates tangible from intangible assets. This is a binary distinction that depends only on whether the asset has a physical form. Within the intangible group, the taxonomy introduces a second distinction. Some assets grant explicit contractual claims to future cash flows, whereas oth… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: RWA: functional lifecycle framework. IV. LIFECYCLE OF RWA This section presents a functional decomposition of the lifecycle of RWAs (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Overview of the RWA token market from September 2018 to January [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: RWA Infrastructure architecture. Solid arrows represent legal, financial, and transactional flows, while dotted arrows denote off-chain data, attestations, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: On-chain activity of tokenized U.S. Treasury (Ondo OUSG) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

The global financial architecture is undergoing a shift from intermediary centric-settlement to programmable infrastructure, to transmute trillions in static illiquid capital into active, high-velocity instruments. We argue that Real World Asset (RWA) tokenization represents a conceptual evolution beyond mere digitization, converting passive ledger entries into programmable economic agents capable of autonomous settlement and algorithmic collateralization. However, achieving such seamless capital efficiency necessitates resolving the fundamental friction between deterministic on-chain code and probabilistic off-chain reality, navigating the oracle problem and jurisdictional interoperability. This systematization of knowledge presents a taxonomy for the RWA lifecycle and deconstructs the multi-layered architecture, spanning legal custody, technical standards, and cryptoeconomic valuation, required to enforce off-chain rights within on-chain environments. We study systemic constraints such as latency and regulatory fragmentation through a comparative overview of sovereign debt, private credit, and real estate protocols, complemented by an empirical case study of on-chain U.S. Treasuries. We synthesize these findings to propose a prognostic outlook, positing that while asset tokenization provides a transitional bridge, it is not necessarily the inevitable shift compared to the emergence of unified, programmable ledgers.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This SoK organizes RWA tokenization into a usable taxonomy and layered architecture with a Treasuries case study, but stays at synthesis level.

read the letter

This SoK on RWA tokenization stands out for giving a practical taxonomy of the asset lifecycle and breaking down the required architecture into legal custody, technical standards, and cryptoeconomic valuation layers. It also includes a comparative analysis of protocols and a case study on on-chain U.S. Treasuries. The paper does a decent job pulling together the key frictions, such as the oracle problem and jurisdictional interoperability, and shows how different asset classes handle them. The prognostic outlook at the end, suggesting tokenization as a bridge rather than an inevitable endpoint, follows logically from the constraints they identify. Since it's a systematization, the strength is in the organization rather than any new derivation or dataset. One area that could be softer is the completeness of the protocol comparisons. In a field this active, it's easy to miss edge cases or very recent developments, though the stress-test indicates no major gaps in the covered domains. The framing of tokenization as creating programmable economic agents is interpretive but serves the paper's purpose without overclaiming results. This work is for fintech researchers, blockchain developers, and regulators who want a structured view of the space. A reader looking for an entry point or a way to compare approaches will find value here. It deserves a serious referee because the synthesis helps clarify concepts in a growing area and highlights practical constraints. I would recommend sending it to peer review. The taxonomy and case study provide enough substance to justify the time.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper is a Systematization of Knowledge (SoK) on Real World Asset (RWA) tokenization. It claims that RWA tokenization constitutes a conceptual evolution beyond digitization, transforming passive assets into programmable economic agents with capabilities for autonomous settlement and algorithmic collateralization. The manuscript introduces a taxonomy of the RWA lifecycle, deconstructs a multi-layered architecture spanning legal custody, technical standards, and cryptoeconomic valuation to address the oracle problem and jurisdictional frictions, provides a comparative overview of protocols in sovereign debt, private credit, and real estate, includes an empirical case study of on-chain U.S. Treasuries, and concludes with a prognostic outlook positioning tokenization as a transitional bridge rather than an inevitable endpoint relative to unified programmable ledgers.

Significance. If the literature synthesis is comprehensive and free of material omissions, the paper provides a valuable structured framework for understanding the integration of off-chain assets with on-chain systems. It explicitly addresses systemic constraints such as latency and regulatory fragmentation, supported by protocol comparisons and a concrete case study, while the prognostic outlook offers a balanced perspective that could guide future work on programmable financial infrastructure. The work credits its synthesis of external literature and empirical analysis as strengths.

minor comments (3)

[Taxonomy for the RWA lifecycle] In the taxonomy section, the distinction between 'programmable economic agents' and conventional tokenized representations could be illustrated with a concrete example from the on-chain Treasuries case study to strengthen the central claim.
[Comparative overview] The comparative overview of protocols would be improved by adding a summary table listing key features, latency metrics, and regulatory constraints for the sovereign debt, private credit, and real estate examples.
[Empirical case study of on-chain U.S. Treasuries] In the empirical case study section, the discussion of data selection and exclusion criteria for the on-chain U.S. Treasuries analysis should explicitly state the time period and sources used to allow readers to assess potential selection effects.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive and constructive review of our SoK manuscript on RWA tokenization. We appreciate the recognition of the paper's structured taxonomy, multi-layered architecture analysis, protocol comparisons, empirical case study, and balanced prognostic outlook positioning tokenization as a transitional bridge. The recommendation for minor revision is noted, and we will address any editorial or minor clarifications in the revised version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in this SoK paper

full rationale

This is a systematization of knowledge paper whose core contribution is a taxonomy of the RWA lifecycle, multi-layered architecture review, and comparative protocol analysis drawn from external literature. No mathematical derivations, fitted parameters, predictions, or self-referential equations are present in the abstract or described structure. The central framing of RWA tokenization as an evolution to programmable agents rests on synthesis of sovereign debt, private credit, real estate, and on-chain Treasuries examples rather than any reduction to the paper's own inputs. Self-citations, if present, are not load-bearing for any claimed derivation chain because no such chain exists; the prognostic outlook is explicitly positioned as a synthesis rather than a forced result. The work is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

This systematization draws on established domain concepts in blockchain and finance without introducing new free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc axioms beyond standard assumptions about on-chain determinism versus off-chain uncertainty.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Deterministic on-chain code must interface with probabilistic off-chain reality via oracles and legal frameworks.
Stated in the abstract as a fundamental friction that must be resolved for capital efficiency.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5532 in / 1355 out tokens · 49158 ms · 2026-05-10T16:48:26.088649+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

203 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

De Soto,The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else

H. De Soto,The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else. New York: Basic Books, 2000

2000
[2]

Relevance of on-chain asset tokenization in ‘crypto winter’,

Boston Consulting Group and ADDX, “Relevance of on-chain asset tokenization in ‘crypto winter’,” Boston Consulting Group, Tech. Rep., 2022, analysis of the $16 trillion opportunity

2022
[3]

Asset tokenization in financial markets: The next generation of value exchange,

World Economic Forum and Accenture, “Asset tokenization in financial markets: The next generation of value exchange,” May 2025, published 21 May 2025

2025
[4]

The rapid growth of fintech: Vulnerabilities and challenges for financial stability (including decentralized finance risks),

International Monetary Fund, “The rapid growth of fintech: Vulnerabilities and challenges for financial stability (including decentralized finance risks),” inGlobal Financial Stability Report, International Monetary Fund, Ed. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund, 2022, ch. 3, discusses DeFi risks and regulatory implications as part of fintech vul...

2022
[5]

The nature of the firm,

R. H. Coase, “The nature of the firm,”Economica, vol. 4, no. 16, pp. 386–405, 1937

1937
[6]

D. C. North,Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Perfor- mance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990

1990
[7]

Some simple economics of the blockchain,

C. Catalini and J. S. Gans, “Some simple economics of the blockchain,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 63, no. 7, pp. 80–90, 2020, originally NBER Working Paper No. 22952 (2016)

2020
[8]

The tokenisation of assets and potential implications for financial markets,

OECD, “The tokenisation of assets and potential implications for financial markets,” OECD Blockchain Policy Series, Tech. Rep., 2020, discusses the liquidity costs of jurisdictional fragmentation

2020
[9]

Annual economic report 2023. chapter iii: Blueprint for the future monetary system: The unified ledger,

Bank for International Settlements, “Annual economic report 2023. chapter iii: Blueprint for the future monetary system: The unified ledger,” Bank for International Settlements, Basel, Tech. Rep., 2023

2023
[10]

C. R. Harvey, A. Ramachandran, and J. Santoro,DeFi and the Future of Finance. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2021

2021
[11]

Eip-1400: Security token standard,

S. G. Adam Dossa, Pablo Ruiz and F. V ogelsteller, “Eip-1400: Security token standard,” Ethereum Improvement Proposals, Issue #1411, 2018, standard for partially fungible security tokens. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/ethereum/EIPs/issues/1411

2018
[12]

Erc-3643: T-rex (token for regulated exchanges) standard,

J. Lebrun, T. Malghem, K. Thizy, L. Falempin, and A. Boudjemaa, “Erc-3643: T-rex (token for regulated exchanges) standard,” Ethereum Improvement Proposals, EIP-3643, 2021, standard for permissioned tokens. [Online]. Available: https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-3643

2021
[13]

The future of payments is not stablecoins,

A. M. Rod Garratt, Michael Lee and J. Torregrossa, “The future of payments is not stablecoins,” Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Liberty Street Economics, 2022

2022
[14]

Tokenomics: Dynamic adoption and valuation,

L. W. Cong, Y . Li, and N. Wang, “Tokenomics: Dynamic adoption and valuation,”The Review of Financial Studies, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 1105–1155, 2021

2021
[15]

Money, tokens, and games: Blockchain’s next billion users and trillions in value,

Citi GPS, “Money, tokens, and games: Blockchain’s next billion users and trillions in value,” Citigroup Global Perspectives & Solutions, Tech. Rep., March 2023

2023
[16]

The endgame plan,

R. Christensen, “The endgame plan,” MakerDAO Governance Forum, 2022, proposal regarding RW A collateral and SubDAOs

2022
[17]

Centrifuge protocol whitepaper,

Centrifuge, “Centrifuge protocol whitepaper,” https://www.securities.io/centrifuge-whitepaper/, 2021, decentralized Asset Financing Protocol

2021
[18]

The goldfinch whitepaper v1.1,

Goldfinch Protocol, “The goldfinch whitepaper v1.1,” https://goldfinch.finance/goldfinch whitepaper.pdf, 2021

2021
[19]

Larry fink’s 2024 annual chairman’s letter to investors,

L. Fink, “Larry fink’s 2024 annual chairman’s letter to investors,” BlackRock, Tech. Rep., 2024, discusses tokenization as the next generation for markets

2024
[20]

Tokenization: A digital-asset d ´ej`a vu,

McKinsey & Company, “Tokenization: A digital-asset d ´ej`a vu,” McK- insey & Company, Tech. Rep., August 2023

2023
[21]

Trust, but verify: Why the blockchain needs the law,

K. Werbach, “Trust, but verify: Why the blockchain needs the law,” Berkeley Technology Law Journal, vol. 33, p. 487, 2018

2018
[22]

Understanding the blockchain oracle problem: A call for action,

G. Caldarelli, “Understanding the blockchain oracle problem: A call for action,”Information, vol. 11, no. 11, p. 501, 2020

2020
[23]

Lessig,Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace

L. Lessig,Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. New York: Basic Books, 1999

1999
[24]

Decentralized society: Finding web3’s soul,

P. Ohlhaver, E. G. Weyl, and V . Buterin, “Decentralized society: Finding web3’s soul,”Available at SSRN 4105763, 2022

2022
[25]

Project guardian: Enabling open and interoperable networks,

Monetary Authority of Singapore, “Project guardian: Enabling open and interoperable networks,” Monetary Authority of Singapore, Indus- try Report, 2023

2023
[26]

Fintech and financial services: Initial considerations,

M. D. He, M. R. B. Leckow, M. V . Haksar, M. T. M. Griffoli, N. Jenkinson, M. M. Kashima, T. Khiaonarong, M. C. Rochon, and H. Tourpe, “Fintech and financial services: Initial considerations,” Tech. Rep., 2017

2017
[27]

The ricardian contract,

I. Grigg, “The ricardian contract,” inProceedings of the First IEEE International Workshop on Electronic Contracting. San Diego, CA: IEEE Computer Society, 2004, pp. 25–31

2004
[28]

The tokenisation continuum,

I. Aldasoro, S. Doerr, L. Gambacorta, R. Garratt, and P. K. Wilkens, “The tokenisation continuum,” 2023

2023
[29]

Distributed ledger technologies in securities post-trading: Revolution or evolution?

A. Pinna and W. Ruttenberg, “Distributed ledger technologies in securities post-trading: Revolution or evolution?” European Central Bank, Frankfurt, Occasional Paper Series 172, 2016

2016
[30]

Tokenomics: When tokens beat equity,

K. Malinova and A. Park, “Tokenomics: When tokens beat equity,” Management Science, vol. 69, no. 11, pp. 6568–6583, 2023

2023
[31]

Final report on guidelines on the dlt pilot regime,

E. Securities and M. Authority, “Final report on guidelines on the dlt pilot regime,” ESMA, Paris, Final Report ESMA70-460-189, 2022

2022
[32]

Taming wildcat stablecoins,

G. B. Gorton and J. Zhang, “Taming wildcat stablecoins,”University of Chicago Law Review, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 909–972, 2023

2023
[33]

In search of stability in crypto- assets: Are stablecoins the solution?

D. Bullmann, J. Klemm, and A. Pinna, “In search of stability in crypto- assets: Are stablecoins the solution?”ECB Occasional Paper, no. 230, 2019

2019
[34]

Security tokens,

P. P. Momtaz, “Security tokens,” pp. 61–78, 2023

2023
[35]

Liquidity mechanisms in real-world assets: The empirical case of real estate tokenization,

R. Laschinger, H. Leonhard, G. Dorfleitner, and W. Sch¨afers, “Liquidity mechanisms in real-world assets: The empirical case of real estate tokenization,”Available at SSRN 5036350, 2024

2024
[36]

Current development status, application scenarios and future trends of rwa,

B. Peng, “Current development status, application scenarios and future trends of rwa,” inSHS Web of Conferences, vol. 218. EDP Sciences, 2025, p. 01032

2025
[37]

Real world asset (rwa) supply chain for smart factory,

R. W. M. Kong, “Real world asset (rwa) supply chain for smart factory,” International Journal of Management and Commerce Innovations, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 430–443, 2025

2025
[38]

Crypto-securities regulation: Icos, token sales and cryptocurrencies under eu financial law,

P. Hacker and C. Thomale, “Crypto-securities regulation: Icos, token sales and cryptocurrencies under eu financial law,”European Company and Financial Law Review, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 645–696, 2018

2018
[39]

F. J. Fabozzi,The Handbook of Fixed Income Securities, 9th ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2021, the definitive reference for ABS and fixed income structures

2021
[40]

R. L. Block,Investing in REITs: Real Estate Investment Trusts, 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2011

2011
[41]

Special purpose vehicles and secu- ritization,

G. Gorton and N. S. Souleles, “Special purpose vehicles and secu- ritization,”The Risks of Financial Institutions, pp. 549–602, 2007, foundational economic analysis of bankruptcy remoteness

2007
[42]

Cryptocurrencies and decentralized finance (defi),

I. Makarov and A. Schoar, “Cryptocurrencies and decentralized finance (defi),” National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper 29865, 2022, defines the transparent, ’glass-box’ nature of on-chain assets

2022
[43]

The architecture of decentralised finance platforms: A new open finance paradigm,

E. Avgouleas and A. Kiayias, “The architecture of decentralised finance platforms: A new open finance paradigm,”SSRN Electronic Journal, 2019, foundational legal-technical analysis of the DeFi bridge

2019
[44]

ERC3643: The Token Standard for RW A Tokenization,

“ERC3643: The Token Standard for RW A Tokenization,” https: //www.erc3643.org/, ERC3643 ASBL, 2025, accessed: 2025-12-XX. [Online]. Available: https://www.erc3643.org/

2025
[45]

Policy recommendations for decentralized finance (defi),

IOSCO, “Policy recommendations for decentralized finance (defi),” International Organization of Securities Commissions, Madrid, Final Report FR09/23, 2023

2023
[46]

Blockchain disruption and decentralized finance: The rise of decentralized business models,

Y . Chen and C. Bellavitis, “Blockchain disruption and decentralized finance: The rise of decentralized business models,”Journal of Busi- ness Venturing Insights, vol. 13, p. e00151, 2020, seminal paper on democratization and fractionalization

2020
[47]

Finternet: The financial system for the future,

A. Carstens and N. Nilekani, “Finternet: The financial system for the future,” Bank for International Settlements, Basel, BIS Working Papers 1178, 2024, defines the ’Unified Ledger’ and programmable compliance

2024
[48]

RealT: Tokenized Real Estate Investing,

RealT, “RealT: Tokenized Real Estate Investing,” https://realt.co/, 2025

2025
[49]

Lofty: Tokenized Real Estate on Algorand,

Lofty AI, “Lofty: Tokenized Real Estate on Algorand,” https://www. lofty.ai/, 2025

2025
[50]

Pax Gold (PAXG),

Paxos, “Pax Gold (PAXG),” https://www.paxos.com/pax-gold, 2025

2025
[51]

Tether Gold (XAUt),

Tether, “Tether Gold (XAUt),” https://gold.tether.to/, 2025

2025
[52]

Maecenas (ART),

Maecenas, “Maecenas (ART),” http://www.maecenas.co/, 2025

2025
[53]

BENJI: Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund (FOBXX),

Franklin Templeton Digital Assets, “BENJI: Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund (FOBXX),” https://digitalassets. franklintempleton.com/benji/, 2023

2023
[54]

BlackRock Launches Its First Tokenized Fund, BUIDL, on the Ethereum Network,

Securitize, “BlackRock Launches Its First Tokenized Fund, BUIDL, on the Ethereum Network,” https://securitize.io/learn/press/ blackrock-launches-first-tokenized-fund-buidl-on-the-ethereum-network, 2025

2025
[55]

Societe Generale issues a first digital green bond on a public blockchain,

Societe Generale, “Societe Generale issues a first digital green bond on a public blockchain,” https://www.societegenerale.com/en/news/ press-release/first-inaugural-digital-green-bond-public-blockchain, 2023

2023
[56]

Centrifuge: Real-World Asset Financing,

Centrifuge, “Centrifuge: Real-World Asset Financing,” https:// centrifuge.io/, 2025

2025
[57]

Goldfinch Protocol,

Goldfinch, “Goldfinch Protocol,” https://goldfinch.finance/, 2025

2025
[58]

Securitize: Digital Securities Platform,

Securitize, “Securitize: Digital Securities Platform,” https://securitize. io/, 2025

2025
[59]

Toucan Protocol: Carbon Tokenization Infrastruc- ture,

Toucan Protocol, “Toucan Protocol: Carbon Tokenization Infrastruc- ture,” https://toucan.earth/, 2025

2025
[60]

Tokenization of real-world assets: Legal frameworks, market dynamics, and policy pathways for a decentralized financial future,

R. Mirdala, “Tokenization of real-world assets: Legal frameworks, market dynamics, and policy pathways for a decentralized financial future,”Journal of Applied Economic Sciences (JAES), vol. 20, no. 2 (88), pp. 285–312, 2025

2025
[61]

An investment perspective on tokenization,

U. Soni, O. Fines, and J. Sun, “An investment perspective on tokenization,”CFA Institute Research & Policy Center, 2025, part I report. [Online]. Available: https://rpc.cfainstitute.org/sites/default/ files/docs/research-reports/tokenization part-i online-1.pdf

2025
[62]

Private law frameworks for tokenized assets: Implications from legal developments in switzerland, germany, france, and the united states,

T. Okuyama and K. Sugimura, “Private law frameworks for tokenized assets: Implications from legal developments in switzerland, germany, france, and the united states,” Bank of Japan, Tech. Rep., 2025

2025
[63]

Infrastructure tokenization: Does blockchain have a role in the financ- ing of infrastructure?

“Infrastructure tokenization: Does blockchain have a role in the financ- ing of infrastructure?” The World Bank, PPIAF, and IISD, 2023, world Bank Report. [Online]. Available: https://documents.worldbank.org/en/ publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/099200503082329768

work page arXiv 2023
[64]

Rwa.xyz: Analytics on tokenized real-world assets,

“Rwa.xyz: Analytics on tokenized real-world assets,” https://app.rwa. xyz/, 2026, accessed January 4, 2026. Industry-standard data platform for tokenized real-world assets on public blockchains

2026
[65]

Blackrock launches its first tokenized fund, buidl, on the ethereum network,

Securitize, “Blackrock launches its first tokenized fund, buidl, on the ethereum network,” Mar
[66]

Available: https://securitize.io/learn/press/ blackrock-launches-first-tokenized-fund-buidl-on-the-ethereum-network

[Online]. Available: https://securitize.io/learn/press/ blackrock-launches-first-tokenized-fund-buidl-on-the-ethereum-network
[67]

Usdy (us dollar yield token),

“Usdy (us dollar yield token),” https://ondo.finance/usdy, 2025, uSDY is a tokenized note backed by short-term U.S. Treasuries and bank demand deposits, designed to provide stable, U.S. dollar-denominated yield and digital accessibility

2025
[68]

Decoding RWA Tokenized U.S. Treasuries: Functional Dissection and Address Role Inference

J. Luo, K. Tinn, S. F. Duran, D. Wu, and X. Liu, “Transaction profiling and address role inference in tokenized us treasuries,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.14808, 2025

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[69]

The cost of capital, corporation finance and the theory of investment,

F. Modigliani and M. H. Miller, “The cost of capital, corporation finance and the theory of investment,”The American economic review, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 261–297, 1958

1958
[70]

Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers,

M. C. Jensen, “Agency costs of free cash flow, corporate finance, and takeovers,”The American economic review, vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 323–329, 1986

1986
[71]

Asset pricing and the bid-ask spread,

Y . Amihud and H. Mendelson, “Asset pricing and the bid-ask spread,” Journal of financial Economics, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 223–249, 1986

1986
[72]

Term structures of credit spreads with incomplete accounting information,

D. Duffie and D. Lando, “Term structures of credit spreads with incomplete accounting information,”Econometrica, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 633–664, 2001

2001
[73]

Damodaran,Investment valuation: Tools and techniques for deter- mining the value of any asset

A. Damodaran,Investment valuation: Tools and techniques for deter- mining the value of any asset. John Wiley & Sons, 2012

2012
[74]

The dividend-price ratio and expectations of future dividends and discount factors,

J. Y . Campbell and R. J. Shiller, “The dividend-price ratio and expectations of future dividends and discount factors,”The review of financial studies, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 195–228, 1988

1988
[75]

Valuing commercial mortgages: An em- pirical investigation of the contingent-claims approach to pricing risky debt,

S. Titman and W. Torous, “Valuing commercial mortgages: An em- pirical investigation of the contingent-claims approach to pricing risky debt,”The Journal of Finance, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 345–373, 1989

1989
[76]

Tokenization of real-world assets (rwa): A bridge between traditional finance and blockchain,

A. Aloshyna and A. O. Aleksandrov, “Tokenization of real-world assets (rwa): A bridge between traditional finance and blockchain,”Baltic Journal of Legal and Social Sciences, pp. 41–49, 2025

2025
[77]

Exploring the security issues of real world assets (rwa),

S. Chen, M. Jiang, and X. Luo, “Exploring the security issues of real world assets (rwa),” inProceedings of the Workshop on Decentralized Finance and Security, 2024, pp. 31–40

2024
[78]

The financial stability risks of decentralized finance,

Financial Stability Board, “The financial stability risks of decentralized finance,” Financial Stability Board, Basel, Tech. Rep., 2023, key report on systemic risks in DeFi and RW A

2023
[79]

Prudential treatment of cryptoasset exposures,

Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, “Prudential treatment of cryptoasset exposures,” Bank for International Settlements, Basel, Tech. Rep., 2022, the global standard for how banks must hold capital against tokenized assets

2022
[80]

Regulation (eu) 2023/1114 on markets in crypto-assets (mica),

European Parliament and Council, “Regulation (eu) 2023/1114 on markets in crypto-assets (mica),” Official Journal of the European Union, Tech. Rep., 2023, l 150/40, The comprehensive regulatory framework for EU crypto assets

2023

Showing first 80 references.