Tokenization: The Next Investment Revolution

Transcript

All right, hello everyone. We are here to deliver the hot spicy takes. >> [laughter] >> Most tokenization panels spend all the time talking about infrastructure and rails. Uh, not this one. We're going to focus on changes to investing itself. The investment process, investment products, clients, competition, policy. The gamut. We're lucky to start with four world-class experts, and we're going to dive straight in. Nikhil, I'm going to start with this one coming to you.

Crypto spent years trying to take digital native products and wrap them in ETFs. Today, we're focused on taking traditional assets and bringing them over to the blockchain. Is this the same trade? Is it the opposite trade? Like, how should we think about this as a theme? >> [snorts] >> Great question, Michael. Um, fundamentally, these are different trades, right? Because if you think about what ETPs are doing, they're taking a novel exposure, a crypto exposure, putting it in a familiar wrapper, making it available to investors, fusing it in their behavior.

If you look at it the other way, tokenization is taking traditional exposures, exposures that we have today within the traditional markets, putting it in a format that's amenable to this new cohort that's taking exposures through digital wallets. They're solving different problems, but then there is one unifying sort of, uh, common denominator to both. I'll come to that in a bit. Uh, if you look at ETPs, what they basically solved is like investors were able to single-click access crypto exposures. That's what expanded the market. Now, we are at about 120 billion in about 2 years. That's what ETPs enabled.

If you look at tokenization, what it's enabling is additional utility. So, it's an access versus utility story. The common denominator, however, is the fact that you're not actually changing or forcing a change in user behavior. You're actually providing the exposure where the user actually is. That's what enabled expansion. So, we have seen ETPs expand the market there. Tokenization is a journey in progress. We'll see where that goes. >> Carrying on that theme, Amy, I'm going to come to you on this one.

Earlier this year, the SEC confirmed what I think a lot of TradFi believe to be true, that tokenizing an asset doesn't fundamentally change the nature. You know, a a tokenized security is still a security. >> That's right. >> Now, you've traded emerging markets for many years. And so, using that experience as as a lens, are there sometimes cases where the form is actually more meaningful than the substance? Like, just tokenizing the asset, even if it doesn't change its underlying nature, create new opportunities, new risks that have to be

incorporated into the investment process. >> It's a great question, and I think one of the things we're dealing with where in the in the traditional markets, we had locals, ADRs, derivatives, P-notes, we had they had different names, and you got different features or functions out of those uh assets before. In the new market, especially as we're tokenizing everything, all of those are called tokens. And as we continue to bring more clients into this market, it's starting to get a little confusing.

So, many of the tokens and the activity we've seen today, access plays for international investors, it's a it's a great use case. It's working well. But that's not the same as say a a mirror token and the activity that's happening on DTCC. And it's one of the challenges I think we have today is trying to navigate that. >> Cynthia, I'm going to pull you in here. In the investment process itself, >> Yeah. >> when a PM is running a tokenized asset, what are the core changes that they need to be mindful of?

>> So, that actually is a really interesting question. The portfolio process where the the fund that's being tokenized, if the fund is investing in traditional assets, that investment process in terms of portfolio construction and risk management doesn't change necessarily. What is different and it starts with the liquidity mismatch between the traditional markets in which the portfolio is investing and now this new wrapper that is available to be traded 24 by 7. And so, how you can reconcile the ability for the investor to transfer that asset

throughout the 24/7 global period and be able to understand the impact on an underlying portfolio that doesn't trade at the same time. And so, what that means is there are cutoff times for when investors are able to get in and out of the traditional fund because that's the timeline of the underlying market and the on-chain investors' expectation is not that there is a cutoff time. And so, what a lot of folks right now are trying to work on are ways to be able to bridge that gap between the cutoff times and the natural expectation on chain that you

can, um, transact 24/7. Uh, the impact on the underlying portfolio, as long as you are not impacting the, um, in and out or redeem and and subscription, um, periods of the underlying fund, they continue to trade. The problem is is now finding a way to bridge that liquidity mismatch. >> So, Hunter, at, you know, downstream of that PM activity, end investor perspective, are there new processes that are necessary to hold tokenized assets? Do they need separate due diligence, different, you know, custodial relationships?

How much of this can be reused? How much is brand new? >> Gosh, I agree with everything that's been said and and something that Amy said really resonated with me as it pertains to this question, which is there are so many different dimensions to tokenization right now. We have a a tokenized fund, US CC, which, uh, runs the basis trade, generates yield. That's totally different than tokenized, uh, SPY or, uh, IVV. Um, that's very different than in in our vaults, there's, uh, tokenized GPU credit.

Uh, USDAI or PST, which is tokenized, uh, working capital loans. People know Prime from Figure. So, there's so many different So, the it's almost hard to talk about the subject matter. Um, >> That's why we're here. >> I I know I know even even even uh, I I you know, I feel like people started to use tokenization as shorthand for the liquid stuff and RWAs, which are tokenized, as shorthand for the for the credit collateral. Um, the short answer is yeah, there's there's tons of nuances, uh, that really vary depending on which cross-section, but I think generally speaking, there's a lane which is, uh, public liquid exposure to US equity markets, uh, for investors outside of the US. Um that's

one big lane. There's another which is um uh you know, sort of the opportunity that Biddle uh pioneered, um which is uh uh tokenizing um conventional fund instruments to make them available for uh treasury management and so on and so forth. And then I think there's a there's a third lane today, which is um uh tokenizing credits that can be interesting ingredients in vaults and other on-chain activities. So, depending which one, um there's different details, but there's a lot of details that have to be understood and and have to, you know, you have to get right on the engineering front also, which is kind of a newer dimension from investment engine perspective, as well as the regulatory front and everything else.

>> Throw this one to you, Nikhil, but others can weigh in. You mentioned [snorts] tokenizing conventional assets. Should investors expect those prices to diverge? >> And if so, why? >> That's an interesting one because we kept we we keep getting that question from investors as well or prospects as well that we talked to. Um I'll I'll limit my answer to the fund that uh Hunter mentioned earlier cuz compliance does not allow me to name that fund. Um but when you think about money market funds broadly, um it's useful to decouple what the exposure is, what the utility is, and then the pricing.

So, if you think about money market funds, the one that Hunter mentioned as well, our tokenized liquidity fund in the US, the underlying isn't changing. Which means the yields are the same. If you look at the other money market funds that we've launched, the underlying is public debt treasuries, uh individual currency-based debt, etc. The yield So, the yields are the same. What tokenization enables is essentially taking that same unit in a different format and moving it faster, maybe 24/7 pay transfers, instructing redemptions on chain, etc. That's where utility starts to set in.

So, the question then is the clearest utility that arrived so far with with the fund that we have was for on-chain native investors with the that were already on chain. So, they had stable coins on chain. They were able to sweep it into the money market fund, the tokenized liquidity fund, and yields off it. Um as the aperture widens and institutions start to step in, those utilities have yet to be manifested at scale. What we do believe is some of the unlocks will be on uh collateral mobility, treasury management workflows where the principal stay the same.

Where you're taking a tokenized instrument and saying, "I don't want to redeem it into cash. I can take that yield-bearing uh yield-bearing instrument and just transfer it peer-to-peer either for my treasury management workflows or as collateral or as trading margin." But for that to scale and for an institution to actually say, "This is how I can plug it into my workflows at scale." We are still evolving in that journey. Why that's important is because that's the price discovery procedure. That's the price discovery process as well. That would be the journey when institutions start to see this and almost start to say, "Yes, this is the same uh sort of instrument, same exposure, but providing me a higher utility for which I might be willing to

sort of pay an extra price or have a discount or whatever." So, that's the process we are on. It's an incredible opportunity for the for active management to potentially come back in to the arena. But we we've moved so far to just focusing on passive assets, especially in the traditional finance space. But if you do have additional venues, different ways to access the same exposure, uh there's an opportunity there. And fragmented liquidity, uh mispricing depending on markets that are open, markets that are trading 24/7, I would expect to see some of the investors get involved in that opportunity opportunity across the board.

>> Yeah, I think that's totally fair and and the point that Nikhil made earlier about the fact that um there's obviously our traditional market where the primary liquidity resides um and a new emerging market trading similar instruments um with less liquidity, there's going to be an opportunity for arbitrage, but over time as um liquidity starts to migrate and equal there's an equilibrium that the markets eventually equalize, that arbitration opportunity, right, starts to uh reduce. And that's sort of the the natural evolution of, right, market maturation.

>> There's been a lot of harmony on this panel. I'll try to upset that now with my next question. Hunter, do you crypto-native asset management firms have a head start in this space versus the more traditional asset managers? >> Three of the largest financial institutions in the world sitting here at First of all, don't want to piss any of them off. Uh admire them. Uh do do the crypto-native firms have head start? May- maybe a little bit. I you know, I don't I don't feel tremendously um Yeah, that's that's the I guess it'd be the short answer. I mean, as a firm we have one area of focus, so I suppose in that

sense from a prioritization perspective, I think sometimes in crypto people can forget that these great institutions sitting sitting next to me here are responsible for a lot of things uh that are very important to clients. Um whereas we in some ways have the uh the luxury of uh of just this one focus, but um So we you know, we we try to we try to look to to where things are going and the uh opportunities investors want to participate in and and approach that, but um I don't know if there's any structural reason.

>> Such a gentleman. >> Um some some opportunity there. Um, I think coming from a large um traditional asset manager, um our um operating platform has been optimized uh to perform um and perform at scale uh within a traditional market environment. Um introducing digital assets into that traditional operating environment has been a challenge. And so, I think there's um there's trade-offs to um you know, having that blank slate. If we were to create the correct operating system uh to be able to support digital assets across the entire investment um uh ecosystem, um I may not design it off of the back of a traditional operating

platform. Um and so, does that slow us down a little bit? Does that offer us uh maybe some learnings into how we might, right, think about building um uh ways to be able to support digital assets side by side with the traditional? Um that's also quite a bit tricky. >> No, we coexist pretty well together. So, we we've launched our own crypto ETPs. We were late to the game. You would think, why did we ever need another Bitcoin ETP in the marketplace? And here we are in 6 months, we've hit a billion dollars within our crypto ETPs.

At the same time, Hunter and some of the products that Bitwise uh have launched are also available on our wealth platform, do super well in terms of uh educating our financial advisors. Thank you, that's a huge lift. >> And and then you also have like the automated token portfolios. I mean, that's awesome. It it really is like starting to look at some of the new product that potentially will come to market and uh hopefully at some point we can consider working together on things like that.

>> Still trying to stir controversy. >> Proving Proving very hard. Nikhil, I'll come to you. Does a firm like BlackRock have a house view on whether you'd prefer to steer a client toward a particular wrapper when an exposure could be available through a number of different products? You know, is is a a tokenized asset versus a mutual fund versus a traditional ETF? >> You know, how do you think about prioritizing that type of distribution? >> Actually, it works the other way.

So, it starts with the client outcome, right? So, as long as the client outcome is satisfied, it could be any wrapper, a combination of wrappers, it could be a LEGO block that sort of combines a bunch of wrappers to kind of achieve that particular client objective. And as cliche that that as that might sound, that's exactly the process because it starts with the client sort of saying uh what they actually want and then which product, which wrapper actually satisfied that. So, then the wrapper essentially starts to become a means to an end in terms of what objective needs to be needs to be achieved.

Tokenization, therefore, like as an extension, is um it it provides an interesting proposition in that one, you can use the wrapper to reach a new cohort of investors. You can add utilities that potentially did not exist in the traditional file format of the same asset. As an extension, it also allows you to sort of interact or it allows the holder through the asset to interact with utilities directly on chain. And that's where we come to decentralized finance, wallets, and all the new constructs today.

It's an interesting proposition if you think about it because it's almost like an open access market where regulated financial products could interact. The ability is there because you have created the asset in a format which can interoperate. What needs to happen though is that the control parameters that exist in regulated assets today, think about KYC, AML, the entire governance model, needs to somehow marry with these new protocols as well. Now, that's a work in progress. Today, it might not match one-for-one. It's heartening to see some of the work happening in the space in terms of like identity, privacy preserving identity, verifiable credentials, etc. So, I mean, going forward into the future, we might see a time when like regulated financial

products in some ways can interact with open access protocols. Preserving the control perimeter that exists today, but in a way that's more amenable to this this market. Primarily being like if you can map out KYC, AML to these these tokenized constructs and like bring it into protocols on public chain, it's definitely something that provides more utility. So, something that might urge us to sort of point clients towards that saying, you could hold the same exposure, but you could do X, Y, and Z more than what you're doing today.

That still, going back to your question, doesn't lead us to kind of pushing that to a client. If it really adds to a client portfolio in terms of an addition, bolt-on complement, then we would. But, overall, it's almost like that LEGO block that we would like to create. >> You mentioned vaults. I'm curious if other kind of DeFi-born products are also beginning to make their way into the, you know, product construction process. Like, will we see prediction markets and perps and some of these others begin to emerge inside the more, you know, traditional asset management menu?

>> The way that I think about asset management is, you know, we are um orchestrating, yeah, I'm using a term right common in crypto. We orchestrate capital, we orchestrate investment opportunities, and and we deliver those um opportunities to our investors. And um incorporating new instruments into our investment process is is sort of natural um to an asset manager. It's happened, you know, many times over the last several decades as new derivative instruments have come um into existence that allow for um different ways to be able to slice um exposures or provide, right, more precise hedges. Um and so, you know, I think of um tokenized assets uh being incorporated into a portfolio

as part of the natural portfolio construction process. You're going to look for um the lowest cost way to be able to access an exposure um and and the lowest capital intensive way uh to be able to deliver that taking into account, right, risk management um and uh the overall um you know, quality of the investment experience. And, you know, ultimately, when we think about what the future of wealth management and and asset management looks like, um you know, we're going to succeed if we are able to um you know, demystify for our investors how they access investments.

Um and, you know, we don't talk about, you know, our assets sitting on a traditional ledger or assets sitting in paper form in a vault somewhere, um or our assets, right, sitting on a blockchain, um you know, in their account statement, they're going to look at what their portfolio value is and and what the investments are, um but we're not going to um get into the detail and customers aren't going to ask, you know, exactly how are you recording my ownership of that asset? >> You know, the one thing I like about uh perpetuals, prediction markets, all these other themes that we've talked so much about this year, when it comes to digital assets, we need that infrastructure support 24/7 and the real-time data to be able to do that. So, as we have momentum in so many

of these themes, we're able to push the teams to really think about some of those core infrastructure upgrades that we need to make across the board. And that's critical no matter what takes off and is sustainable long-term. Um so that's the one thing that I'm getting out of it right now. It's really push a lot of the uh teams to continue to build. Maybe if I could just one more item on the basis of what you just said, um you know, one of the um proof cases that uh we've, you know, started talking about internally with our um investment teams is the idea of enhanced price discovery as a result of um perpetuals and and prediction markets because they're operating 24/7. And so they have

the ability to take into account market information real-time um and be able to produce um the impact on prices during hours when markets are not open. And when that reconciliation happens, when the markets open again, um it's actually quite remarkable um how valuable that additional um uh information point is price discovery process. And so this is really, you know, from our standpoint, um an extension of how these new markets are um you know, adding value and and integrating into the fabric of markets.

And ultimately, right, it should be one market, not a traditional market and an on-chain market. >> Incidental but important is collateral. So when these markets are uh sort of proliferating, you do need to post collateral trading margin. And the moment you have a tokenized instrument as collateral, something that you trust, it starts to become an additional sort of instrument that you could sort of plug into these markets. That is something that we will see a proliferation of, I mean, within the control perimeters that exist. Um So that's to add to what Cynthia said.

>> Let me shift to clients for for a moment. Uh Hunter, I'll I'll start with you on this Big picture, who's leaning in? Who's leaning out with respect to tokenized assets? >> Tokenized assets. Well, I want to be on the record as saying I think vaults are awesome and are going to be transformative. Uh we introduced uh we we've just entered the vault category this year. So, I just want to have shouted shouted that out. There's a lot to learn. We're trying to uh understand what what people want and what the building blocks are, but I just think it's a super exciting cross-section of the sort of permissionless democratization blockchains, the tokenization of collateral, um stablecoins, etc. So,

very very um very excited about that. On the client side, uh who's leaning in? Who's Okay. So, today we serve a very broad cross-section of clients. Sovereigns, endowments, billionaires, wealth managers, hedge funds, crypto entities for lack of a better term, individuals. Um we do that across uh the US, Europe, Asia. Um Interestingly, I have it's very hard to paint with a broad stroke and and any any thoughts from anyone uh on this panel would be as valid as mine, but interestingly, my perception has been that the more professional investor is progressing forward and the more individual investor

has seemed timid. Um and uh and so I'll put some data to that. Last year after Bitcoin crossed 100,000, I believe that long-time holders of Bitcoin sold north of $150 billion Bitcoin. that was individuals and people uh that wasn't uh institutions, um that wasn't uh financial advisors. So, uh the great thing and I think an element of the maturation of the market is there's a lot of different market participants. Um but uh that that's a bit of a read. We we put out a report about 2 weeks ago where we shared interviews with 15 institutional allocators, not asset managers, but um endowment endowments, pensions, corporates,

uh one or two sovereigns that own Bitcoin, and um we didn't use their names, but got their permission to share their words, and they all um they all own Bitcoin, they didn't sell it, they're happy to own it, they might buy more. So, that's that's, you know, word of word from 15 institutional allocators, and uh and uh so, I think it's been an interesting interesting 12 months in a sense because uh I think that the professional investor um has generally felt constructive about the space. >> The client base, if it's self-directed, so clients coming and actually putting in their own trades, or financial advisors that are actually advising and offering specific recommendations.

Underneath that, there's so many different client types, and that are in different journeys across either their crypto exposure, or where they want to go with tokenization, and that's making it very hard to actually roll out products, and even educate. Because you have some that have been in the space for a long time, they want a product that helps hedge their Bitcoin exposure, provide a yield on it. There's others that just want price exposure, there there's others that still want the spot crypto exposure, there's others that want lending on the back of it. And it's that on-demand customized solution for clients, uh hopefully agents maybe helps solve that for us.

But, it's really tough. It it creates a really difficult called environment to uh and also there's a blurring, right? Because on our wealth platform, we have find uh family offices, and high net worth investors that are as large as our institutional clients. And and same thing on the self-directed side, it's really tough sometimes to actually identify the client channels, and really segregate that by the client or the product that we push down to certain clients. >> I think one thing to decouple um just to just to Amy's point is like when you look at crypto exposures, it's about access. And that's to sort of Hunter's point and Amy's point in terms of what started out with self-directed

has evolved into an execution only and transforming into advisory, which is where ETPs sort of fit within an investor portfolio. When you look at tokenization, it's about utility. So then you're looking at the initial sort of demand that came in and who leaned in is mainly a stablecoin audience that holds cash on chain, already lives on chain, knows how the behavior is on chain. So it don't know it was almost like an extension of a life that's already being lived on chain.

Now when you start to think about it from an institutional perspective, from a tokenization standpoint, the idea is like I have the exposure already. What is that 10x benefit that I'm getting that I should hold this exposure in a tokenized format? That's what is being uncovered right now, which is as more and more tokenized instruments start to get more prevalent in like institutional portfolios, tokenized deposits, stablecoins, or e-money tokens, depending on which jurisdiction you are in, the question is, okay, I have this tranche of ultra liquid cash, which may be idle at some point in time. What do I do with it? So then I'm starting to think about other tokenized yielding instruments out there, which I can sort of plug into my So it's sort of I mean, we spoke about the wrappers in terms of how they're

coming in from opposite directions. I feel like that has a bearing in terms of how the investor behavior has been as well in terms of it coming in from opposite directions and sort of converging somewhere. >> And then we have this theme around the in-kind transactions to ETPs. So like I agree with you. I mean, the value that will come when we're able to take these tokenized assets is yet to even be delivered in the market, but yet we see crypto assets being in-kind moved into ETPs. And that's been I mean you've seen it the same way we have. Like it's been a pretty active space.

>> It's so fascinating just to describe describe it for those who are not familiar with what we're talking about. There are starting last year and I think more common for all of us this year is individuals taking Bitcoin or Solana or whatever that they already own and swapping it for shares of the ETF. >> Yep. >> And I think we've probably all seen in some cases hundreds of millions of dollars of that activity this year which is sort of fascinating but people saying the benefits of of the ETF or feel strong enough that I'd rather own the ETF shares than the spot asset. I think I think ultimately of course the answer will be that people want a bit of both in the same way that everyone in the audience sometimes uses cash, sometimes a credit card, sometimes a wire, sometimes an ACH. Different you know different

formats for you [clears throat] know one one person one institution can use different formats but that has been a fascinating development this year. >> I think the diversity of the ownership population across the ETFs really reflects the different use cases. The in-kind transactions you know one of the primary benefits of owning an ETF or an exchange-traded fund is the tax efficiency that comes because the portfolio manager doesn't have to actually buy and sell the underlying asset in order to accommodate subscriptions and redemptions. And so now the ETPs have been able to take advantage of that in-kind transaction which is tax efficient to the underlying

investor. But what we saw a lot of the conversions were coming from investors who wanted to be able to hold their Bitcoin for example or ether or Solana in an exchange-traded product where custody was the responsibility of the ETF. And for them uh, that was a a combination of things in terms of, right, safety and security, um, in a location that they trusted. Um, there was some estate planning, um, uh, that went along with their thinking in terms of why better to have it through a third-party custodian and not necessarily one that, um, you know, they had to, um, individually open the

account and and set up. >> One of the dominant themes that we've heard from this stage over the past couple of days is tokenization, digital assets, you know, blockchains broadly being an extraordinary, you know, symbiotic, uh, partner to agentic commerce. I'm curious with some of the world's leading asset managers on the stage, is agentic a channel that you're beginning to consider, or is that still science fiction? >> So, maybe this is where we're going to get a diversity of views. Um, I I'd say, um, agentic commerce, um, you know, agents, uh, deployed within the, you know, fiduciary activity of investment advisors, um, and and asset managers,

um, is is something that, you know, should be considered, um, and and, you know, is actively being considered, I know, across, um, a number of different, um, organizations. Uh, it's it's something that, um, uh, when you look at the, um, increase in use cases for stablecoins, um, and the ability to be able to transact, um, you know, cash value on chain, um, how that has transformed, um, payment and settlement networks, um, you know, we're seeing, you know, with the, uh, application of, uh, AI agents, um, there are definitely a number of, right, potential use cases, but I think it's

still really early days before we can really establish the overall governance and and operational and risk management frameworks, um, for how they can actually be deployed at scale. So, early days in terms of research and development. >> I think at at a principles level, instead of getting into whether we are implementing it or not, at a principles level as to why it matters is if you think about the marriage between AI and tokenization, AI is essentially ingesting a lot of information, sequencing it, providing your decision. You then need to execute the decision through value, and that's where tokenization comes in.

So, if we go by fundamentals in terms of like what is tokenization enabling you, it's enabling you to represent value in a machine-readable format. So, if you have an AI workflow in which you want to you want to plug in intuitively, organically an asset, which is what has started with agentic commerce in terms of if you have a payment workflow and you need a digital asset to plug into it organically, that's where stablecoins come in. That's been the start point. Now, if you actually extrapolate that journey into seeing what what could agentic AI do as a next step? It could potentially do delivery versus payments, where you have a regulated asset like a money market fund or the assets that we spoke about, and a regulated liability, which could be any form of cash on chain,

and then that settlement is executed by an agentic AI platform. Now, what tends to happen when when you start to get into these sort of journeys is that the transactions could become complex, at which point you have an agent actually running on its own and then executing something extremely complex directly on chain, at which point it could require compute, additional compute on the go. So, then that almost creates a possibility for you where there could be a new sliver of a market that's created where as I'm executing that transaction as an agent, I could buy compute on the go.

So, the possibilities are endless, but the crux of it remains where AI is essentially contextualization and you have tokenized assets that naturally fit in through like execution of that decision with value. >> I'm going to give a slightly different, more real-time example. So, going back maybe about 5 7 years ago on the institutional investing side, we had this trend. Uh so, on on our investment team, we had institutional clients that were coming in and starting to really get into the details. They'd bring in these quant analysts and they would just start going through every single element of the data of the fund, risk parameters,

performance details, and even the portfolio managers themselves didn't really have a good view, a good lens on the this risk-return profile down to like the nth detail. What an agent can do for consumers now in this day and age, they can start doing that same analysis and really democratizing it down for every consumer, and then also start finding hidden fees. What is there an optimized portfolio position? Now, for well asset and wealth managers, you better have the best product out there, or else the agent's going to be providing a trade to that client and saying maybe there's a better product out there. And that can happen today. I

don't even think we have to wait for tokenization to have that in the market. >> Can I ask? I'd love to actually ask ask the audience, very briefly if you forgive me, how many of you have asked ChatGPT about an ETF or to try to find an ETF to invest in? I'm so curious. >> Decent number. >> Some. Maybe maybe 10%? Maybe 20%? Yeah, interesting. So, you know, I I think I think a lot of different vectors uh on this, um but I think the short answer is it's it's inevitable that these two things are colliding. All right, we've got 90 seconds. We're going to do a couple of lightning round questions. Quick answers.

What percentage of your clients will hold a tokenized product in 5 years? >> 5 years. going to go with 10 in 5 years. >> Hunter? >> 60, 50, 60, 70, something like that. >> I'm going to skip this one. >> I had a hunch. >> Yeah, I was going to say 10%. We put out some research and um by 2030, you know, we were looking at numbers that were around 10%.

>> All right. I'll pivot to overrated or underrated for institutions. 24/7 trading. Overrated or underrated? >> Overrated in terms of um opportunity or in terms of frequency of use, um but underrated in terms of the opportunity set and of having it available. >> Appropriately rated. >> Um underrated in terms of what it can enable, but the nuance is important that we're talking about just just-in-time or on demand rather than 24/7 because market quality may not be appropriate 24/7. So, in that respect, it might be overrated.

>> Totally agree. Underrated for like what it can really do in the future, but overrated in terms of people trading around the clock 24 hours a day. >> All right, we're out of time. Please join me in thanking our panelists.