For asset managers, risk committees, custodians, and tokenization teams evaluating whether a tokenized product preserves the rights, structure, and stress behavior of the traditional asset.
~250 investments diligenced · ~$500M AUM · MVEP institutional-equivalence framework
Extends that framing into committee-ready gates: rights parity, custody structure, settlement behavior, insolvency posture, governance controls, and the monitoring thresholds (the specific measurable conditions that should trigger review or change position size).
Rights parity, custody structure, settlement behavior, auditability, and whether the product can survive a stress event without revealing hidden mismatches.
Liquidity pathways, reserve and custody dependencies, control-layer metrics, reporting quality, and which thresholds should trigger closer review or a changed position size.
Routing defaults, gateways, off-chain dependencies, and product structures that appear efficient until institutions rely on them under real conditions.
Closest papers for this lens.
Nine-category checklist reverse-engineered from the six failure modes the USDC/SVB weekend exposed, structured around what risk committees actually ask.
Read
A view of how routing design shapes concentration, resilience, and where hidden dependencies sit.
Read
Settlement, custody, and the control layer behind digital-dollar and cash products, plus what institutions should track before a new money object becomes an operating assumption.
ReadAsset management, tokenization diligence, or investment research. Tell me what you're evaluating and I'll send the most relevant paper, resume version, or supporting material.