Tokenisation and ownership: why self-custody matters

The digital financial world is in constant evolution, and asset tokenisation is undoubtedly one of its greatest revolutions. As this market grows exponentially, however, important discussions arise about the true nature of ownership. Fact-checking this article led to a correction worth stating openly: the market-size figure that appeared here was not found in any verifiable source and has been removed. We deliberately do not repeat it — a wrong number lodges in the reader's memory even when accompanied by its denial. The survey that does exist, carried out by BeInCrypto, tracked around US$60 billion in tokenised real-world assets as of 31 May 2026, excluding stablecoins and repo operations. And the most uncomfortable figure in that survey is not the size of the market: it is that approximately 97% of that value is inaccessible to US retail investors or lacks retail-grade regulation — leaving around US$1.7 billion effectively open to that public.

What Is Tokenisation and Why Does It Matter?

Essentially, tokenisation is the process of turning a real or digital asset into a digital token on a blockchain. A blockchain is a distributed and immutable digital ledger that stores transactions securely and transparently. This technology allows assets such as real estate, works of art, company shares and even commodities to be divided into small digital fractions, making them more accessible and liquid for a larger number of investors. The promise of tokenisation is to democratise access to investments, reduce intermediaries and increase market efficiency. It is an advance that could redefine how we interact with ownership and investment.

The Ownership Dilemma in the Tokenisation Boom

Although tokenisation brings many benefits, the BeInCrypto report points to a fundamental problem: the question of ownership. When an asset is tokenised, it is represented by a digital token. But does holding that token necessarily mean you have direct and unrestricted control over the underlying asset? Not always. In many cases, custody of the real asset — or even of the tokens — may remain centralised with a third party. That creates a situation where, despite "owning" a token, your autonomy over the asset can be limited or dependent on an intermediary. This scenario runs counter to one of the fundamental principles of blockchain technology: decentralisation and the user's sovereignty over their own property.

The Role of Self-Custody in Guaranteeing Your Ownership

This is where the concept of self-custody comes in, meaning exclusive control over your private keys and, consequently, over your digital assets. In a self-custody environment, you are solely responsible for the security of your tokens and do not depend on third parties to access or move them. To address the "ownership problem" highlighted by BeInCrypto, self-custody is crucial. It ensures that digital ownership is as real and unquestionable as physical ownership, eliminating risks of censorship, confiscation or intermediary failure. It is the true embodiment of the principle that "your keys, your coins (or your assets)".

VKX: Your Gateway to Tokenised Assets with Self-Custody

VKX Wallet understands the importance of true ownership and autonomy in the digital world. That is why we already offer a solution that directly addresses the ownership problem raised by the BeInCrypto report. With VKX you already have access to tokenised assets, such as shares and ETFs (index funds), simply and accessibly, using PIX to buy. Most importantly, all of this happens with self-custody. That means when you acquire these tokenised assets through VKX, you keep full control over them, ensuring your ownership really is yours, without depending on intermediaries to access or manage it. It is a practical example of how tokenisation can be implemented in a way that respects and reinforces user autonomy.

The Future of Digital Ownership

The growth of tokenisation is real, and the roughly US$60 billion tracked is only an early phase. As this market grows, however, the discussion about true ownership of and control over tokenised assets will become ever more relevant. Choosing platforms that prioritise self-custody is not merely a preference, but a necessity for anyone seeking security and sovereignty in their digital finances. Understanding the difference between holding a token and actually owning the asset it represents is essential to navigating this new and exciting financial landscape safely.

---

Disclaimer: This content is purely informational and educational, and does not constitute an investment recommendation or financial advice. The crypto asset and tokenised asset market carries risks, and it is essential that you do your own research and consider seeking professional advice before making any investment decision.

Three structures, three meanings of "owner"

The question "who owns the tokenised asset?" has no single answer, and that is why it has become a matter of public policy. The International Monetary Fund put it in these terms: market participants need to know whether the tokenised record constitutes definitive ownership, whether settlement finality is legally recognised and which law applies — and, without that clarity, tokenisation will remain fragmented and peripheral.

In practice, the tokens circulating today fall into three structures, and the difference between them is what you actually hold:

direct ownership — the token represents the asset itself, and whoever holds the token holds the property;
fund unit — the token represents a share in a vehicle that holds the asset. You have a claim against the fund, not over the asset;
synthetic exposure — the token tracks the asset's price without granting any right over it. Economically it looks the same; legally it is not.

Self-custody solves part of this and not the rest, and it is worth being precise about which is which. Holding the key guarantees that nobody moves the token without you — it eliminates the risk of the platform locking your access, disappearing or being breached. What it does not change is the nature of the right the token carries: if the product is synthetic exposure, keeping the key in self-custody is still keeping synthetic exposure. Reading the structure before buying is irreplaceable.

Sources

BeInCrypto — half of the US$60 billion tokenisation market has no real activity — the roughly US$60 billion tracked as of 31 May 2026, the 97% inaccessible to retail, the US$1.7 billion open to that public and the three token structures
Readable mirror of the same survey (the origin page refuses automated reading) — the same survey figures and the ownership question raised by the IMF, on a page accessible to automated verification
IMF — The Rise of Tokenization: Deciphering New Trends in Payments and Asset Tokenization — the International Monetary Fund's own publication on legal ownership, settlement finality and applicable jurisdiction for tokenised assets
IMF — Tokenization Can Change the World Financial Architecture — the IMF's institutional position that without legal clarity tokenisation remains peripheral

Frequently Asked Questions

What does it mean to tokenise an asset?

It means creating a blockchain record that represents a real-world asset, such as a government bond or a fund unit. The record circulates at the speed of an on-chain transaction.

Does holding the token mean owning the asset?

Not necessarily, and that is precisely the point in dispute. There are structures in which the token grants direct ownership, others in which it grants a fund unit, and others in which it grants only synthetic exposure to the price, with no right over the asset. Reading the structure before buying is indispensable.

Why does self-custody matter in this context?

Because holding the key is what guarantees nobody moves the token without you. It does not settle the legal question of who owns the underlying asset — that depends on the product's structure, not on the wallet.

Tokenisation: who owns the asset and why self-custody matters