Similar to WisdomTree, if I’m an Exchange Traded Fund and Asset Manager, an incumbent in the financial industry, I get that it’s logical that my strategy, when it comes to blockchain and digital assets, would be to tokenize funds and make those available onchain in the form of a token i.e. a wrapper.
That’s what incumbents would, and should do. If not, they risk getting left behind in the current blockchain technology disruption that is playing out as we speak. However, the need for mutual funds or ETF’s is gone once investors have the ability to acquire an entire portfolio of assets with sub-cent transaction costs.
So as an incumbent, yes, you have to go with the above incumbent strategy But you should also find a way to participate in the more disruptive corners of blockchain and digital assets technology.
And think about this: if all the individual, underlying assets of your existing funds or ETF’s exist onchain as their own individual tokenized assets, then “Poof”, no need for mutual funds or ETF’s anymore . All you need in that world, are portfolio models to match your targeted investment strategies, as a the gateway to acquiring the individual onchain tokenized assets in those portfolio models.
I can walk through the design for what that looks like for anyone who is interested.
Hi that‘s theoretically possible but requires a decision if we want trading to happen directly retail to Goldman (peer to peer) or if retail investor has a broker who has a duty to the investors to execute trades into the tokenized underlying. The asset manager function then becomes this contractual execution function. This is where all these models have beg a logical question: if we want to separate trading from post trading and retail from professional for reasons of risk management and fairness then we need business models that transform retail to professional and that’s an asset manager.
Similar to WisdomTree, if I’m an Exchange Traded Fund and Asset Manager, an incumbent in the financial industry, I get that it’s logical that my strategy, when it comes to blockchain and digital assets, would be to tokenize funds and make those available onchain in the form of a token i.e. a wrapper.
That’s what incumbents would, and should do. If not, they risk getting left behind in the current blockchain technology disruption that is playing out as we speak. However, the need for mutual funds or ETF’s is gone once investors have the ability to acquire an entire portfolio of assets with sub-cent transaction costs.
So as an incumbent, yes, you have to go with the above incumbent strategy But you should also find a way to participate in the more disruptive corners of blockchain and digital assets technology.
And think about this: if all the individual, underlying assets of your existing funds or ETF’s exist onchain as their own individual tokenized assets, then “Poof”, no need for mutual funds or ETF’s anymore . All you need in that world, are portfolio models to match your targeted investment strategies, as a the gateway to acquiring the individual onchain tokenized assets in those portfolio models.
I can walk through the design for what that looks like for anyone who is interested.
Hi that‘s theoretically possible but requires a decision if we want trading to happen directly retail to Goldman (peer to peer) or if retail investor has a broker who has a duty to the investors to execute trades into the tokenized underlying. The asset manager function then becomes this contractual execution function. This is where all these models have beg a logical question: if we want to separate trading from post trading and retail from professional for reasons of risk management and fairness then we need business models that transform retail to professional and that’s an asset manager.