Author: AiPlot Research Institute
Focus: RWA / Digital Assets / In-depth Analysis of Financial Infrastructure
Website: https://aiplot.com/?utm_source=aicoin

The most important step in the RWA market is often not the issuance of new tokens by a project, but the formal integration of traditional financial infrastructure with blockchain.

On October 28, 2026, the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) officially launched the DTCC Tokenization Service (DTS) through its depository trust company (DTC). According to DTCC's official statement, this service is designed to mint tokenized certificates from securities held by DTC, enabling conversion between traditional and digital markets, and supporting more efficient asset liquidity, collateral scheduling, and capital utilization.

The implications of this are far greater than "the U.S. now has another securities tokenization platform." DTCC is the core post-trade infrastructure of the U.S. securities market. DTC currently holds assets exceeding $114 trillion, while the DTS launch page indicates that the asset scale eligible for tokenization is approximately $30 trillion.

It's essential to distinguish between two figures: $114 trillion is the total custody asset scale of DTC, while about $30 trillion represents the asset range entering the tokenization service at the initial stage. Neither figure represents already tokenized assets nor should $30 trillion be directly understood as having flowed into blockchain.

Yet, even so, the signal is still strong:

Tokenization is transitioning from experimental initiatives within financial institutions to formal infrastructure within the U.S. securities market.

1. DTCC is not "issuing stock tokens," but connecting securities rights to the digital market

Many people's first reaction upon seeing securities tokenization is, "Stocks can be traded like cryptocurrencies in the future." However, the design of DTS is not simply to replicate stocks on a public blockchain, nor is it to allow anyone to freely issue stock tokens.

DTCC's core approach is to create a tokenized representation for securities already held by DTC, known as digital twins. The tokens are supported 1:1 by the underlying securities and retain all ownership rights, economic interests, and investor protections corresponding to traditional securities.

This means the value of tokenized assets still derives from the traditional securities themselves. Blockchain adds new records, transfer, and aggregation methods, rather than creating securities rights from thin air.

Key mechanisms of DTS include:

- Underlying securities are held by DTC;

- Tokenized rights can be converted between traditional and token form;

- Tokens are transferred between compliant registered wallets;

- The trading process incorporates identity, compliance, and risk control;

- Assets can connect traditional markets and blockchain markets;

- Under specific scenarios, 24/7 peer-to-peer transfers can be achieved.

Therefore, DTS is closer to an institutional-level securities digitalization track rather than an open token issuance platform aimed at retail investors.

2. The most critical change: Tokenization begins to enter the "post-trade" phase

Financial markets are typically divided into pre-trade, in-trade, and post-trade stages.

Pre-trade includes issuance, pricing, and orders; in-trade includes matching and transactions; post-trade includes clearing, settlement, custody, asset servicing, collateral management, and risk control.

Previous discussions on RWA mostly focused on "how to issue assets” and "how to trade on-chain." However, what institutions genuinely care about are another set of questions:

- How to deliver assets after transactions;

- How to settle securities and funds simultaneously;

- Whether collateral can be scheduled quickly;

- Whether securities lending can reduce manual steps;

- Whether margin can be supplemented in real-time;

- How to maintain consistency between traditional custody systems and blockchain records.

The real trade verification released by DTCC in July 2026 has already covered collateral pledging, securities lending, cash vs. securities transactions in U.S. Treasury repos, stock cash transactions, stock securities transactions, and central counterparty margin processes.

This indicates that DTCC is not focused on "whether stocks can display prices on-chain," but rather whether securities can integrate into the daily capital and risk management processes used by institutions.

For RWA, this represents a significant directional correction:

Truly commercially valuable tokenization may not initially be reflected in trading volume but might first appear in improvements in clearing efficiency, collateral liquidity, and capital usage.

3. Why collateral movement may be more important than 24/7 trading

All-day trading can easily become a focal point of the tokenization narrative, but for large financial institutions, the most immediate economic value may arise from collateral management.

Banks, brokerages, market makers, and clearing institutions must submit margin or collateral daily. Under traditional systems, assets may be dispersed across different custody accounts and systems, scheduling requires manual confirmation, and inter-institutional transfers are also limited by operating hours, reconciliation, and settlement processes.

If compliant securities tokens can be quickly transferred between registered wallets, then institutions may more rapidly:

- Submit or replace collateral;
- Meet margin requirements;
- Adjust asset allocations for repo transactions;
- Release idle securities;
- Provide asset support for new trades or financing arrangements.

DTCC explicitly states that the goal of DTS is to enhance liquidity, collateral mobility, and capital efficiency.

There is a clear relationship among the three: faster collateral scheduling reduces asset idle time; assets can be reused more frequently, improving capital efficiency; and clearing and reconciliation processes reduce manual operations, lowering operational costs.

From a market size perspective, collateral management is more likely to support institutional adoption than single security transactions. This is because it addresses the liquidity and risk management needs of the entire financial system rather than just the investment needs of a specific trading product.

4. The launch supports Canton and Besu, indicating that institutional RWA will not be restricted to one chain

DTS currently connects to two networks: the Canton Network and DTCC's private Besu network, with DTCC stating that it will add additional blockchain networks in the future.

This design is noteworthy.

If DTCC had chosen to establish only one public chain, the market could interpret it as "traditional finance selecting a particular chain." However, by adopting a multi-network and interoperable model, DTCC indicates that its true goal is to enable securities to circulate between different traditional and digital environments, rather than locking all assets within a single network.

Canton leans more towards institutional privacy, permission control, and financial market collaboration scenarios; the Besu private network, operated by DTCC itself, emphasizes controllability, governance, and infrastructure stability. The coexistence of both reflects a separation between "network choice" and "market standards."

For public chain and consortium chain projects, future competition will not only be about TPS or transaction fees but also about whether they can integrate into compliant institutional workflows, handle identity, permissions, privacy, auditing, and inter-network settlements.

Therefore, the potential value of Canton should not simply be equated with "tokens must rise because DTCC launched." What truly needs to be observed is:

- How much actual trading and transfers of DTS occur on Canton;
- Which financial institutions will continually use that network;
- Whether more custody, trading, market-making, and asset management institutions will connect;
- Whether Canton carries testing traffic or institutional day-to-day business;
- Whether network-related costs will create sustainable economic demand.

Regarding the token value within the Canton ecosystem, it cannot be solely derived from the "cooperation list." Further verification is necessary for usage volume, real costs, token supply changes, and value capture mechanisms.

5. 20 institutions have signed contracts, but what really matters is participant structure

The initial batch of 20 signing DTC participating institutions announced by DTCC includes JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, Fidelity, Citadel Securities, State Street, UBS, Barclays, BNP Paribas, Apex Clearing, Alpaca, DriveWealth, among others.

The significance of this list lies not in the quantity of well-known institutions but in the coverage of different segments of the securities market:

- Global banks and custodians;
- Brokerages and clearing institutions;
- Asset management institutions;
- Market makers and trading firms;
- Financial technology platforms focused on digital assets.

This indicates that DTS is not an internal experiment of a single institution but is attempting to place both traditional finance and the digital asset market within the same infrastructure framework.

DTCC also mentioned that over 150 institutions participated in the development process of this service. Prior real production transactions involved more than 30 institutions across multiple asset classes, wallets, trading platforms, blockchain networks, and applications.

The network effects of financial infrastructure often do not derive from the sheer number of users but from whether participants can create standardized connections. The onboarding of a custodian bank does not signify market formation, but when issuers, custodians, brokerages, market makers, clearing institutions, and wallet service providers are all connected, assets can genuinely begin to flow.

6. DTCC's model contrasts with Hong Kong's RWA route

Previously, Hong Kong's advancement of tokenized gold, tokenized deposits, and secondary trading of money market funds emphasized establishing a connection between assets, digital currencies, and regulated trading platforms.

In contrast, DTCC's DTS highlights traditional securities market capabilities in custody, clearing, collateral, and securities services.

The commonality between the two routes is:

Tokenization is not about establishing a new system detached from the financial market but rather embedding blockchain into the existing asset, capital, and regulatory infrastructure.

The difference is that Hong Kong emphasizes new applications such as cross-border assets, gold, tokenized funds, stablecoins, and offshore RMB, while DTCC emphasizes the large-scale institutional handling of existing assets in the U.S. securities market.

The two directions may eventually converge. Tokenized money market funds, U.S. Treasuries, gold ETFs, stocks, and repo assets could connect between the digital financial infrastructures of different regions.

7. The value capture of RWA will extend from "asset issuance" to post-trade

The launch of DTCC has clarified the RWA value chain.

The first layer is asset issuance. Fund companies, enterprises, or financial institutions turn real assets into identifiable and manageable digital rights.

The second layer is custody and proof. Financial institutions need to prove that the underlying assets genuinely exist and ensure that tokens have not been double-issued or doubly pledged.

The third layer is trading and distribution. Trading platforms, wallets, market makers, and compliant access systems enable assets to find buyers and sellers.

The fourth layer is clearing and settlement. Once transactions are completed, assets and funds need to be transferred simultaneously and accurately.

The fifth layer is collateral and financing. Tokenized assets can be used for repos, margins, securities lending, and other capital management scenarios.

The sixth layer is data and risk control. The market needs to understand asset ownership, pricing, reserves, transfer records, collateral status, and clearing risks in real-time.

Early markets often focus on the first layer. DTCC's approach shows that the subsequent layers may possess more stable and larger scale commercial value.

Because asset issuance might be a one-time action, while custody, settlement, collateral, trading, and data services will occur continuously throughout the asset's entire lifecycle.

8. What this means for ordinary investors

The launch of DTCC does not mean that ordinary investors can immediately trade all U.S. stocks freely on-chain, nor does it mean that all tokenized securities possess the same liquidity.

DTS is aimed at eligible DTC participants, and tokenized assets are still subject to restrictions related to registered wallets, securities qualification, regulatory frameworks, and operational rules.

Thus, a more reasonable understanding in the short term is that DTCC is establishing a standardized pathway for institutional-level digital securities, rather than launching a permissionless securities trading market for the general public.

What ordinary investors genuinely need to pay attention to is the long-term transmission:

- Whether traditional brokerages will integrate tokenized securities into client services;
- Whether tokenized ETFs and money market products will achieve secondary liquidity;
- Whether stablecoins and tokenized deposits can become settlement funds;
- Whether tokenized assets can enter a broader range of collateral and wealth management products;
- Which trading platforms and infrastructure companies can generate real business income.

This is closer to a fundamental analysis of RWA than merely chasing prices whenever a certain network or token is mentioned.

Conclusion 

The official launch of the DTCC Tokenization Service signifies that one of the most critical post-trade infrastructures in the U.S. securities market has begun incorporating blockchain into its service framework.

Its true value lies not in turning 34 securities into tokens, nor in the $30 trillion scale of tokenizable assets itself but in establishing a formal entrance that can connect traditional securities, digital wallets, clearing systems, collateral, and institutional trading.

More importantly, DTCC has chosen a path of 1:1 securities backing, preserving all ownership and investor protection, compliant wallet transfers, and multi-network interoperability. This path may not be the most radical approach in the crypto market but is closer to a realistic route for large-scale institutional adoption.

Future wealth opportunities in RWA may not solely arise from any particular asset price rise but from the ongoing service demand generated within the following chain:

      Securities Custody → Tokenization → Institutional Trading → Clearing and Settlement → Collateral Movement → Capital Management → Data and Risk Control.

Hong Kong is testing secondary trading of tokenized funds and gold ETFs; DTCC is advancing tokenization to the custody and post-trade systems of the U.S. securities market. Both indicate that the next stage of RWA is no longer about proving "assets can go on-chain," but rather proving:

      Traditional financial markets are willing to let these on-chain assets genuinely participate in daily operations.

For more data and analysis, please follow Aiplot:
https://aiplot.com/?utm_source=aicoin

📖 Community communication:

-Telegram: 
https://t.me/+IIYMcJigBAo4Mjg1

The content of this article reflects the author's personal views and does not represent the position of this platform. The views, conclusions, and suggestions in the text are for investors' reference only and do not constitute any investment advice related to this platform. Markets are risky, and investment should be approached with caution.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。