News

From marginal experiment to global market infrastructure: Tokenization is rewriting finance


تكنلوجيا اليوم
2026-01-27 04:00:00

The following is a guest post and opinion from Laura Estefania, Founder and CEO of Conquista PR.

The past decade of digital assets has been shaped as much by debacle as by innovation. High-profile collapses, sensational headlines, and regulatory whiplash distorted public perception, leaving technologies capable of modernizing global finance viewed through a lens of suspicion.

Beneath that noise, however, tokenization has quietly crossed an irreversible threshold.

As recent analysis by Larry Fink and Rob Goldstein makes clear, tokenization is no longer an experiment. It is becoming part of the underlying infrastructure of financial markets. The constraint today is not technological maturity, it is perception.

Tokenization is edging closer to becoming a mainstream capital raising tool. The efficiency gains and benefits of broader access are simply too big to ignoreIssuers in growing economies have an unrivaled opportunity to boost market inclusion through blockchain-native capital raises.”

The Perception Problem Is Not Cosmetic

Perception in finance shapes real outcomes. It influences capital formation, informs regulatory posture, and determines whether institutions feel confident enough to integrate new systems.

The problem is not that tokenization lacks technical readiness. The problem is that it is still being judged through the legacy optics of past crypto excesses.

In finance, perception becomes a gating mechanism. It defines what decision-makers feel allowed to deploy.

What Tokenization Changes, and What It Does Not

Tokenization does not expand the regulatory perimeter or rewrite who may invest in which instruments. Securities laws, investor classifications, and jurisdictional restrictions remain firmly in place.

What changes is the infrastructure through which compliant participation is executed, monitored, and scaled.

Tokenization tends to improve:

  • Settlement speed, reducing counterparty and liquidity risk
  • Operational efficiency, reducing reconciliation and administrative overhead
  • Transparency, improving auditability of ownership and flows
  • Programmability, enabling automated compliance and distributions

Tokenization does not automatically change:

  • Who is eligible to invest
  • Whether an instrument is regulated
  • Disclosure obligations
  • Jurisdictional restrictions and enforcement

Why “Fractional Ownership” Isn’t the Revolution People Think It Is

Fractional ownership is not a legal breakthrough. Corporate equity has always been divisible, and debt has long been issued in varied denominations. The limiting factor has been operational, not conceptual.

Traditional market plumbing makes granular participation inefficient due to:

  • Settlement delays
  • Reconciliation layers
  • Custodial overhead
  • Administrative complexity

By recording ownership as a verifiable digital entry that can move at the speed of information, tokenization removes friction. What was legally permissible but economically impractical becomes viable at scale.

Major asset managers are already building regulated tokenized products and settlement rails, including initiatives tied to BlackRock and Franklin Templeton.

The Misalignment: Capability vs. Narrative

None of this is speculative or ideological. It is infrastructure improvement.

Yet tokenization is still evaluated through the afterimage of prior market failures, where retail speculation and platform collapses dominated the public story. That misalignment risks slowing adoption precisely where tokenization offers measurable benefits: lower costs, faster settlement, and greater transparency.

The consequence is simple: institutions hesitate, even when the technology is ready and the use case is already regulated.

Emerging Markets Are Treating Tokenization as a Utility

Outside the West, tokenization is often less a theory and more a practical response to structural friction. In many emerging markets, the challenge is not replacing a highly efficient banking system, it is compensating for one that can be fragmented, slow, and expensive to access.

Common pain points include:

  • High financing costs driven by currency risk and intermediary fees
  • Slow or costly cross-border settlement
  • Limited access to stable settlement assets
  • Administrative barriers to efficient capital flows

Tokenization does not remove regulatory constraints, but it can reduce operational frictions that inflate the effective cost of capital. Faster settlement, transparent ownership records, and programmable compliance reduce reliance on intermediaries, allowing global liquidity to reach local projects with fewer layers of cost and delay.

This dynamic is discussed in broader regional adoption research, including the Milken Institute’s coverage of Sub-Saharan Africa’s digital asset landscape here.

The West’s Perception Gap Is Becoming a Competitive Risk

In the U.S. and Europe, regulatory attention remains heavily oriented toward classification and containment, even as stablecoins and tokenized government securities already move significant value across borders. Institutions run pilots, then pause. Not because the tech fails, but because reputational risk and public perception still blur “market infrastructure” with “speculative activity.”

Citi, for example, projects that tokenization of financial and real-world assets in private markets alone could reach the trillions by 2030. Yet many institutions still treat tokenization as optional experimentation rather than inevitable modernization.

This is not merely a communication problem. It is a competitive one. Jurisdictions that assess tokenization through efficiency, risk management, and capital flow optimization are pulling ahead, while others preserve complexity the rest of the world is actively designing around.

CryptoSlate Daily Brief

Daily signals, zero noise.

Market-moving headlines and context delivered every morning in one tight read.