Skip to main content
Tokenization is the practice of recording an asset claim on a shared, programmable ledger. The Financial Stability Board defines it as the digital representation of assets on a distributed ledger. A token is a technical representation of an asset. The legal entitlement remains governed by the contracts and regulations that already apply (FSB, The Financial Stability Implications of Tokenisation). The Bank for International Settlements similarly defines tokenization as the digital representation of claims on programmable ledgers. Tokenization changes where a claim is recorded and what can happen while it resides there. It does not create a new kind of asset.

What a shared ledger provides beyond a database row

Every bank already records deposits, positions, and obligations in a database. The difference is not that the record is digital. A shared ledger is a record maintained across participating parties. The European Central Bank describes the current model plainly: each party separately updates its own ledger after an asset transfer. The industry then spends effort proving those ledgers agree. A tokenized arrangement instead creates one shared record. The ECB calls this record a single source of truth that reduces reconciliation (ECB Macroprudential Bulletin, tokenisation and the Eurosystem’s policy response). A shared ledger also lets rules travel with the asset. The ECB notes that tokenised assets can execute payments, enforce compliance rules, or trigger transactions under predefined conditions. A database row carries no transfer logic of its own, while a token can.

The distinctions that matter for a bank

Tokenization covers instruments with very different legal shapes. An IMF note on payment tokenization groups them into tokenized deposits, stablecoins, tokenized securities, and other real-world assets (IMF, The Rise of Tokenization). The issuer and the holder’s claim separate these instruments. A tokenized deposit is the instrument banks care about most. It remains an account-based bank liability within the two-tier monetary system, operating on a programmable platform. Interbank settlement still runs through central bank accounts (BIS, Pushing the monetary frontier). The BIS argues that this structure makes tokenized deposits and stablecoins behave differently as money. Its 2026 annual report says current stablecoin designs fall short on singleness: different forms of money cannot always be redeemed exactly at par (BIS press release, 23 June 2026). If a payee accepts only another issuer’s coin, the payer needs a secondary market conversion that may not clear at par.
Regulatory treatment, capital treatment, and deposit insurance vary by jurisdiction and an institution’s regulatory position. The rules are also moving. Nothing here is legal or regulatory advice. Confirm treatment with your own compliance and legal functions.

Why institutions are doing this

Four mechanisms account for most of the case for tokenization. Atomic settlement is a transaction that either fully completes or fully fails. The ECB definition requires the asset transfer and payment to occur simultaneously and inseparably. This closes the window in which one leg has settled and the other has not. The BIS Project Agorá prototype found secure atomic settlement achievable across currencies and jurisdictions (BIS, Project Agorá press release). Programmability is the placement of operational conditions within the transfer itself. A programmable transfer carries conditions that most arrangements keep in an operations runbook. Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook cites automated margin calls and collateral substitution. She also cites reduced settlement times and less manual intervention (Cook, Perspectives on Tokenization). Continuous availability is ledger operation without closing periods. It removes dependency on operating windows, so interbank settlement and intraday treasury movement can continue. Cross-border payments can also occur outside local hours. Reduced reconciliation is often the largest mechanism, though it receives less attention. When both sides read the same record, they do not need to prove that two records agree. Settlement speed has one qualifier. The Dallas Fed notes that settlement typically operates in layers: customer transfers settle quickly on chain, while the resulting interbank obligations may be netted and settled later. This creates intraday liquidity and counterparty exposure that institutions must manage (Dallas Fed, tokenized deposits). Fast front-end settlement does not mean settlement has occurred everywhere.

What tokenization does not change

The asset still has an issuer, a legal owner, and a regulatory regime. That regime does not soften because the record moved. Project Agorá states the point directly: the contemplated tokenisation does not alter the legal characterisation or associated obligations of central bank reserves and commercial bank deposits. US regulators take the same position on capital. In March 2026, the Federal Reserve Board, FDIC, and OCC jointly clarified that the capital rule is technology neutral. An eligible tokenized security should generally receive the same capital treatment as its non-tokenized form (OCC news release, Agencies Clarify the Capital Treatment of Tokenized Securities). One test distinguishes the cases: a change in who owes what to whom creates a new instrument. Without that change, the instrument is the same claim on a different record.

What is genuinely hard

Interoperability is the ability of separate ledgers to communicate. Ledgers do not provide it natively. The BIS gives a direct example: a coin on Ethereum is not equivalent to a coin with the same name on Solana. The coins reside on separate ledgers that do not natively communicate (BIS Annual Economic Report 2026, Chapter III). The ECB adds that transfers between networks generally depend on bridges and off-ramps, which introduce cost and disruption. Technical finality is a transaction’s irreversibility on a ledger. Legal finality is the transaction’s final status under law. A transaction can have the first without the second. Project Agorá found settlement finality achievable across all seven participating jurisdictions. Further work remains on the technical, operational, and contractual requirements that best align with each jurisdiction’s legal framework. The two forms of finality must be aligned deliberately. Compliance at transfer time is the application of controls as value moves. When value moves continuously and directly, its controls must move with it. The BIS notes that public blockchains’ pseudonymity complicates enforcement of anti-money laundering rules. Account-based, supervised arrangements make that enforcement more manageable. The ECB observes that regulated execution still requires an authorised venue or operator to implement the rules. Screening, sanctions, and policy checks run at the point of transfer, not in a nightly batch.

Where this fits

The Cosmos Tokenization Suite (CTS) implements one part of this model: tokenized deposits issued against balances that remain on the bank’s own core.

What is CTS

The capabilities, solutions, and applications CTS provides.

Use cases

The asset categories covered, and which are available today.

Tokenized deposits

How a deposit stays a deposit while becoming transferable.