The Largest Securities Exchange in the World is Coming Onchain | Michael Blaugrund of NYSE and Carlos Domingo of Securitize

任何证券都可以进行收集。

Any security will be able to gather.

然后我告诉你我的钱包地址。

And then I tell you what my wallet is.

从法律上讲，我只是声明这个钱包属于我，而不是像我的朋友那样，或者我那个想拥有Securitize的海外朋友。

And legally speaking, I am just claiming that this wallet is mine rather than, like, my friends who just wants to be able to my offshore friend who wants to be able to own a Securitize.

我们的方式是，我们会要求你将钱包连接到我们的平台，这样我们就知道你已签署了一笔交易，因此我们知道你拥有该钱包的私钥。

Well, the way we do it is is we we actually ask you to connect your wallet to our platform so we we know that you've unsigned a transaction, so we know that you have the private keys of the wallet.

对。

Right.

好的。

Okay.

从法律上讲，比如，

And then legally speaking like,

是更多的ETH，还是使用WalletConnect。

it's more amount of ETH or or do WalletConnect.

我们使用与任何DeFi协议相同的钱包连接协议来连接到我们的平台，这样我们就知道钱包由你控制，然后我们才会使用它。

Like, we use the same the same wallet connectivity protocols that any DeFi protocol uses to connect to our platform, and then we while we know the wallet is controlled by you, and then we while use it.

对。

Right.

作为过户代理，你们拥有我的身份信息，我的名字上绑定了证券，同时你们也拥有我的钱包，所有信息都集中在这里。

And then you have as the transfer agent, you have my identity, you have the security added to my name, and then you also have my wallet where it's all kind of held.

所以如果我丢失了钱包，我可以联系安全机构，转移到一个新的钱包。

And so if I lose my wallet, I can go get to security on a new wallet.

对吗？

Correct?

对。

Correct.

对。

Right.

因为我是所有者。

Because the am the owner.

拥有者不是我的钱包。

It's not my wallet that's the owner.

拥有者是我自己。

It's me that's the owner.

对。

Correct.

所以，这并不是一种更好的资产。

So so the this is not a better asset.

正如迈克尔所说，意思是嗯。

As Michael said, it means Mhmm.

不像比特币或以太坊那样，但它是一种更好的资产，因为一旦丢失就真的丢了。

Not like Bitcoin or ETH, but it's a better asset that if you lose it, you lose it.

这是一种记录在我们区块链上的无纸化证券，因此如果你丢失了，可以来找我们。

This is a a secure this is a an uncertificated security that is represented on our blockchain, and, therefore, if you lose it, you can come to us.

我们会核实你的身份，确认你确实是本人，然后将你当前钱包中的证券代币销毁，并在你新连接的钱包中重新发行。

We'll verify that who you are, who you say you are, and then we'll then burn the security tokens on the on the wallet that you've got access to and and remint it on a new wallet that you've connected with with us.

我们。

Us.

因此，这种风险的成本远低于数字资产的风险成本。

So the the cost of risk of this is much lower than the cost of risk of digital assets.

对。

Right.

因为这种情况同样适用于你，卡洛斯，如果我的埃克森股票被黑、被盗或遭到破坏的话。

Because this would apply, Carlos, the same thing if my Exxon shares were hacked or stolen or something like this or crushed.

或者，如果你拥有纸质股票凭证——你可能不信，但它们确实还存在。

Or or if you have share certificates like paper share certificates, which believe it or not, they still exist.

我不确定。

And I don't know.

如果你家发生火灾，它们被烧毁了。

And there's a fire in your house, and they burn down.

你仍然可以处理你的股票。

You can do that still your shares.

所以你可以回到过户代理那里，把它们拿回来。

So you can go back to the transfer agent and and get them back.

所以

So

如果我想把我的股份转入AAVE呢？

What about if I wanna take my shares and I wanna put them in AAVE?

这就会变得稍微复杂一点。

That gets a little bit more complicated.

AAVE不是一个法律实体。

AAVE, not a legal entity.

你只需要将智能合约加入白名单，它就能正常工作。

You just you technically just need to whitelist the smart contracts, and then it can work.

从法律角度来说，我猜这比那要复杂一些。

Legally speaking, I get guessing it's a little bit more complicated than that.

我们需要注意哪些细微之处？

What are the what are the nuances here that we need to understand?

好的。

Okay.

这是个非常好的问题。

That's a very good question.

所以，与去中心化金融（DeFi）集成大致有两种途径，我们来把DeFi分为借贷和交易两类，因为它们是两回事。

So so there's kind of two paths to integrate with with DeFi and let's break DeFi in in lending versus trading because these are two different things.

在借贷方面，大致有两种途径。

On the on the lending side of things, you know, there's kind of two paths.

一种是像Aave这样的公司正在构建Aave的版本。

One is companies like Aave are basically building, you know, versions of Aave.

以Aave为例，它有一个叫Aave Horizon的产品，已经设计好可以接受代币化证券作为抵押品。

In the case of Aave, it's called Aave Horizon that are already designed to take, you know, tokenized securities as collateral.

嗯。

Mhmm.

所以，他们已经为我这样的投资者搭建了所有必要的接口，就像瑞安说的，我持有埃克森公司的股票，就可以把它抵押到Aave Horizon上，然后进行借贷。

So they've already built all the necessary hooks there for me as an investor that I hold, let's say, Exxon shares, as Ryan was saying, to be able to post them on average horizon and then borrow against it.

然后还有一个清算人，他们会处理这些资产，就像传统的借贷协议中的违约处理一样，但Aave有一个专门的市场叫Aave Horizon，用于处理许可类资产。

And then there's a liquidator that will take them like semi structures, a normal default lending protocol, but Abe has a separate marketplace called Abe Horizon that works for permission assets.

然后我们还发布了一项名为金库注册的技术，这是一个金库，任何DeFi协议都可以集成这项金库技术，以将证券作为抵押品纳入其DeFi协议中。

Then there is other we've released something called the the the vault register, which is basically a vault where any DeFi protocol can integrate this vault technology to be able to take security as collateral on their DeFi protocol.

我们已经有了一些机构，比如Euler、Loop Scale、Zarta，正在集成这项技术。

And we have some people like Euler, Loop Scale, Zarta, that they are now integrating that.

所以这是同一个协议。

So it's the same protocol.

他们不需要做任何额外的工作，只需要将抵押品存放在我们提供给他们的独立金库中，因为这个金库并不会改变证券的所有权——你仍然是所有者，直到被清算为止。

They don't need to do anything there, and and they just need to keep the collateral on a separate vault that that, you know, we provide to them because that vault basically does not change the ownership of the security because you're still collateral, but you're still the owner until it gets liquidated.

然后我们需要对清算人进行白名单管理，因为清算人可能会获得证券的所有权。

And then we have to white list the liquidators because the liquidators might take possession of the security.

所以说实话，这并没有太多摩擦。

So it's not actually a lot of friction, to be honest with you.

对清算人进行白名单管理，有点类似于对做市商进行白名单管理。

Whitelisting the liquidators is kind of similar to just like whitelisting a a market maker.

做市商

A market maker

他们会来，这是一家机构。

comes and like, it's institution.

所以他们对任何协议来说都是已知的实体。

So they are already known entities to any protocol.

对吧？

Right?

是的。

So Yeah.

他们已经是

They are they're already

专业机构。

professional organizations.

好的。

So Okay.

不。

No.

我相信这一点，顺便说一下，这是一个巨大的机会。

I I do believe that that and by the way, this is a massive opportunity.

对吧？

Right?

因为如果你想想股票借贷，这对普通人来说并不是一件简单的事。

Because if you think about stock lending, this is not something that is simple to do for people.

就像我今天提到的，去试试在富达证券借出你的埃克森股票，然后试着用它们做抵押贷款。

Like, as I mentioned today, just go go and try your your shares in in Fidelity of Exxon, right, and and try to get a loan against them.

接着在下一个节目里，跟观众讲讲你尝试这个过程的经历。

Try and then next program, tell tell the audience the experience of doing that.

对你来说这几乎是不可能的

It's gonna be impossible for you

做到。

to do.

我从未

I've never

尝试过。

been to try.

你无法想象用整个投资组合去抵押贷款进行交易。

You can't imagine loan against your entire portfolio to trade more.

所有经纪商都会提供这种服务。

All brokers will give you that.

但如果你想用你那些长期增值的埃克森股票来购房，祝你好运。

But if you wanna buy a house against your, you know, Exxon shares that have appreciated over time, good luck with that.

是的。

Yeah.

所以这些将会打开巨大的市场。

So so these are things that are that are gonna open up big markets.

此外，股票是很好的抵押品来源。

Also, you know, equities are a good source of collateral.

很多交易公司会将证券作为抵押品存入。

Like, a lot of trading firms deposit equities as collateral.

而且，再次强调，抵押品的流转效率很低，因为证券的转移本身就很低效——把证券从一个地方转移到另一个地方是个繁琐的过程。

And, again, a collateral moves very inefficiently because the securities move very inefficiently because moving securities from place to place is is a cumbersome process.

所以，代币化的证券可以在那里交易，由于纽约证券交易所等交易平台的存在，它们将变得更具流动性。

So tokenized securities will be able to to trade there, then they will be liquid because of the the the New York Stock Exchange venue, etcetera.

这将开启许多有趣的应用场景。

So this is gonna open a lot of interesting applications.

所以，卡洛斯，我总结一下，我的理解是：虽然把一个去中心化金融应用加入白名单并非易事，但也不算特别复杂。

So, Carlos, basically, I'm hearing in summary is that while it's not a trivial thing to whitelist a DeFi app, It is also not that complicated either.

我们的目标是在获得转让代理机构的白名单、KYC认证的前提下，实现证券的代币化。

And that the idea is we will actually be able to have tokenized securities under the condition that we are white laced whitelisted KYC ed with the transfer agent.

我们可以在去中心化金融应用中持有证券。

We will be able to have securities in DeFi apps.

听起来，我们还需要去中心化金融应用方的配合。

We sounds like we also need some participation on the DeFi app side of things.

这必须是一个双向的对话，但最终来看，从这里到那里似乎并没有根本性的障碍。

It has to be a two way conversation, but, ultimately, it doesn't sound like there's any fundamental roadblocks between here and there.

我不这么认为。

I don't think so.

我认为这更多是关于向市场普及这方面的知识。

I think it's more about educating the market towards that.

我相信DeFi作为一种非常高效的借贷技术和市场，其借贷所依赖的抵押品来源却非常糟糕。

I do believe that DeFi, because it's it's a very it's a very efficient lending technology and markets, has a very bad source of collateral for lending.

因此，将更高品质的抵押品，比如代币化的股票、代币化的国债、代币化的CLO和债券等，引入DeFi市场，将推动DeFi市场的发展，因为会有更多机构参与进来。

So introducing higher sources, higher quality collaterals, like tokenized equities or tokenized treasuries or tokenized, you know, CLOs and bonds, etcetera, into DeFi markets is gonna make DeFi markets grow because there will be more know, institutional participation.

因为从借贷的角度来看，它们是非常高效的市场。

Because from a borrowing from a lending perspective, they are very efficient markets.

对吧？

Right?

但传统金融中人们并不用这些作为抵押品。

But that's not what people are leveraging against in the traditional finance.

所以，如果我们为他们提供这些工具，我认为人们会涌入，DeFi也会再次增长。

So if we give them those tools, I think people will come and and DeFi will will grow again.

请记住，DeFi的规模仍低于2021年的水平。

Because keep in mind, we're DeFi was still below 2021 levels.

人们没有意识到，我们曾经达到过1800亿美元，而现在只剩1000亿了。

People don't realize that we pick a 180,000,000,000 and now we're a 100.

所以我们必须做点什么，把机构吸引过来，如果你只是用大额加密货币作为抵押品进行借贷，这根本不可能实现。

So so we need to we need to do something about bringing institutions there, that's not gonna happen if you're, you know, lending against large coin.

Bankless不仅仅是个名字。

Bankless isn't just a name.

它代表了一种真正的信念：你使用自己的资金不应该需要任何机构的许可。

It's a genuine belief that you shouldn't need permission from an institution to use your money.

MetaMask自以太坊诞生之初就存在了，它们承载着与我们相同的基因。

METAMASK has been around since the beginning of Ethereum, and they carry the same DNA we do.

MetaMask是我用过的第一个钱包。

METAMASK was my first wallet.

如果你最近没打开过这个应用，让我告诉你，他们一直在推出新功能，打造一款最终取代你的银行和交易所的全能应用。

And, well, if you haven't opened up the app recently, let me tell you, they've been shipping, creating the one app to finally replace your bank exchange.

你可以在 MetaMask 内直接交易几乎所有的资产。

You can trade just about everything right from within MetaMask.

通过 Hyperliquid 使用杠杆永续合约，通过 POLYMARKET 参与预测市场，交易像英伟达这样的代币化股票，还能无 Gas 跨链交换代币，甚至用你的 MetaMask 卡在全球真实商户消费你的加密货币。

Leverage perps via Hyperliquid, prediction markets through POLYMARKET, tokenized stocks like Nvidia, and you can swap tokens gaslessly and across networks, and even spend your crypto with your MetaMask card at real merchants all around the world.

这比传统金融机构的服务更好，而且来自一个自我托管的钱包。

It's better than institution services, but from a self custodial wallet.

这正是我们多年来一直在谈论的：开放的金融，正在成为现实。

And this is what we've been talking about for years, money that's open and is happening.

所以请查看下方链接，体验 MetaMask 的交易功能。

So give METAMASK trading features a look at the link below.

有一些令人兴奋的消息。

Some exciting news.

我们即将推出一档新播客，帮助人们理解加密货币周期，以及如何应对它。

We are launching a new podcast to help people figure out the crypto cycle, how to navigate it.

我认识的最棒的加密货币周期投资者，他叫迈克尔·纳托。

The best crypto cycle investor I know, his name is Michael Nato.

他运营着《DeFi报告》。

He runs the DeFi report.

就是这个人，在价格下跌10:10之前给我发了卖出提醒。

This is the guy that sent me a sell alert before the 10:10 price drop happened.

他的周期分析一直非常精准。

His cycle analysis has been absolutely on point.

我已经关注他好几年了。

I've been following him for years.

今年，我们开始每周录制播客节目。

And this year, we started recording weekly podcast episodes.

每一期，我们都会深入探讨他的投资组合、持有的资产、市场结构、入场目标、比特币和以太坊的公允价值，以及我们所处的周期阶段。

Each one, we get into his portfolio, what he's holding, the market structure, entry targets, fair market value of Bitcoin and Ether, and where we are in the cycle.

每周三都会发布新一期节目。

There's new episodes that are released every Wednesday.

它们时长三十分钟。

They're thirty minutes.

它们很短。

They're short.

它们简洁有力。

They're punchy.

我认为这个加密货币周期比大多数都更难把握，所以我们一起来应对吧。

I think this crypto cycle is harder to navigate than most, so let's do it together.

去订阅这个播客吧。

Go subscribe to this podcast.

在你收听播客的任何平台搜索《DeFi Report》，无论是YouTube、Apple还是Spotify，或者在节目笔记中找到链接。

Search the DeFi report wherever you get your podcasts, YouTube, Apple, Spotify, or find a link in the show notes.

现在有一期新节目在等着你。

There's a new episode waiting for you now.

最近在Banklist上有人提出了一个观点，这实际上是我们与两位教授的一场辩论，不过也许我先给你介绍一下站在辩论一方的奥斯汀·坎贝尔。

One of the arguments that has been made recently on bank list, and this is actually a debate we had with two professors, but may maybe I'll give you Austin Campbell, who was on one side of the argument.

他是纽约大学斯特恩商学院的教授。

He's a professor at NYU Stern.

他本身也是加密原生人士，对这个领域非常熟悉。

He's also kind of crypto native, very familiar with this.

他实际上认为，开放的、公共的、无需许可的账本——我们所喜爱的区块链，比如以太坊和二层网络——并不一定是代币化证券的合适场所。

He actually argues that open public permissionless ledgers, the chains that we all love, the Ethereums of the world, for instance, the layer twos, are not necessarily the right place to tokenize securities.

他给出的理由是，比如在发生黑客攻击时，没有一种

And the reason he says is because, like, what happens in the event of a hack, there's no kind

了

of

回滚机制。

rollback.

这些环境更适合用于更基础的金融工具。

These the these environments are optimized for maybe for more for bare instruments.

它们不具备身份识别功能。

They don't have identity.

它们没有反洗钱和了解你的客户机制。

They don't have AML KYC.

因此，推动一些现实世界资产活动在更许可的账本上进行已成为一种趋势。

And so there has been a push for some real world asset activity to happen on more permissioned ledgers.

这一直是一个持续的争论。

This has been a debate that's ongoing.

我想知道你对此有何看法

I'm wondering what your thoughts are

呢。

on this.

Canton 和 Ethereum 的争议，是的。

The Canton versus Ethereum fire Yeah.

发表一下你的看法。

Weigh weigh in.

对这个争论发表一下意见。

Weigh in on this debate.

你怎么看？

What do you think?

我不认为这是真的。

I don't think that's true.

所以可能是权限问题，首先，对我来说，这场辩论就像——你们都比我年轻得多，但也许迈克尔还记得。

So probably permission so first, this debate to me feels like the the and you guys are a lot younger than me, but maybe Michael remembers.

这是关于美国在线与互联网的辩论。

This is the debate about American online versus the Internet.

哦，不是的。

Oh, no.

美国在线更安全，因为我们控制谁可以发布内容、谁可以访问，诸如此类。

American online is safer because we control who puts their content there and who is accessing it, blah blah blah.

猜猜发生了什么？

And guess what happened?

它衰落了，而公开的、无许可的基础设施——互联网——反而繁荣起来了，对吧？

It die and then the the the public permissionless infrastructure that is the Internet is what flourishes, right?

因为开放创新发生在开放的网络上，对吧？

Because open innovation happens on open networks, right?

因为任何人都可以创建新东西，这就是为什么创新在这里发生，而没有在美国发生。

Because anybody's allowed to create new stuff, and that's why innovation happened there and didn't happen in America.

所以，这是我个人的世界观，与区块链辩论无关。

So that's my personal view of the world, irrespective of the blockchain debate.

至于公共无许可网络是否适合证券，我要告诉你，如果你通过一个有监管的中介来操作，它当然有能力——但你无法回滚已经发生的事情。

And now, in terms of whether public permissionless networks are suitable for securities, I will tell you that if you do it through a regulated intermediary that has the ability obviously, you can't roll back what happens.

对吧？

Right?

但在我看来，这反而是好事，因为它能记录下历史，万一出了问题也有据可查。

But actually, in my opinion, that's a positive thing because it keeps track of what history has been if there's something that goes wrong.

但你总可以通过销毁和重新发行来逆转交易，因为代表这些证券的智能合约密钥掌握在我们的常规中介手中，也就是过户代理。

But you can always burn and remit to, you know, reverse a transaction because the the keys of the smart contract that, you know, means those securities is in the hands of our regular intermediary, which is a transfer agent.

我知道人们不喜欢‘中介’这个词，但这个中介比我们以前的中介更好，因为它摩擦更少，需要中介的环节也更少，等等。

And, yeah, I know that people don't like the word intermediary, but this is a better intermediary than the intermediaries we had before in the sense that it's more less friction, you know, less in these things it needs to intermediate, etcetera.

但这仍然在那里，为人们提供安心感。

But this is still sitting there to provide that peace of mind to people.

所以老实说，我不明白为什么这不能在以太坊上实现。

So I don't understand why this cannot happen on Ethereum, to be honest with you.

酷。

Cool.

我的意思是，在这一集中，我们邀请了纽约证券交易所的代表。

I mean, on the on this episode, we have a representative from the New York Stock Exchange.

迈克尔，我想问问你。

And, Michael, I'd ask you.

无许可的公开账本有什么令人担忧的地方吗？

I mean, is there anything scary about permissionless open ledgers?

你是否有任何理由更倾向于采用更多许可结构，而不是像以太坊这样开放的系统？

Any reasons for you to prefer more more permission structures rather than something open like Ethereum?

我认为，无论我们选择何种技术，我们的监管义务都是一样的。

Well, I think our regulatory obligations are going to be the same regardless of the technology choices we make.

我的意思是，今天我们仍然在遵循20世纪30年代制定的证券法，而那时根本无法想象电子交易的存在。

I mean, today, we're working under securities laws that were written in the 1930s that didn't even, you know, begin to contemplate, you know, electronic trading.

尽管我们现在使用的是更先进的技术，但仍然必须满足这些标准。

We still have to, you know, kind of meet those standards even though we're employing much more advanced technology.

我认为，无论我们选择使用私有链还是公开的无许可链，我们所承担的责任都是一样的。

I think whether we choose to use, you know, a a sort of private chain or a public permissionless chain, we're gonna have the same, you know, responsibilities.

我们如何满足这些要求，如何管理这些事务，只是不同的实现方式而已。

How we meet them, how we manage, you know, kind of all of those are will be different implementation choices.

坦白说，纽约证券交易所和我们的母公司洲际交易所，预计在支持代币化抵押品、纽约证券交易所代币化交易平台以及其他我们正在开发的项目时，将在六个全球清算所中采用多种不同的L1和L2解决方案。

And frankly, between NYSE and our parent company, Intercontinental Exchange, we expect to use a number of different l one and l two selections across our six global clearinghouses as we begin to support tokenized collateral, the NYSE tokenized trading venue, some other projects that we're developing.

所以我认为，你们可能会看到我们采用多种不同的架构和技术选择，但我不认为社区内部互相争斗会有什么意义。

So I think, you know, you're gonna see us probably use a number of different architectures, a number of different technology selections, but I I don't think that it's going to be you know, I I don't think it's particularly fruitful for, you know, the community to sort of beat each other.

无论哪一种方式，都是可以被允许的。

One variety or another, you know, is going to be permissible.

我认为这些技术都有可能被使用。

I think all of these could be used.

关键在于你如何使用它们。

It's all about how you use them.

顺便说一下，几个月前，美国证券交易委员会发布了一份常见问题解答，明确表示过户代理可以使用公共无许可网络来维护所谓的证券持有人主名册。

But by the way, the SEC published a few months ago an FAQ where they explicitly said that transfer agents are allowed to use public permissionless networks to keep what is called is called the master securities holder file.

这是一个技术术语，如果你愿意的话，它指的是资本结构表，也就是证券所有者记录的地方。

It's a technical term that means the cap table, if you want, which is where the record of owners of the security.

所以他们明确表示，使用这种公共无许可网络是可以的。

So they explicitly said it's okay to use that that public permissionless network.

所以我不知道这位教授是怎么想的，为什么他说这不可能，因为监管机构并不认同这种说法。

So I don't know how to put this professor is and why he's saying that it's not possible because the regulator doesn't agree with that.

所以，就监管机构告诉我的情况来看，这是可以的，我会照做。

So, I mean, as far as the regulator tells me it's fine, I'm gonna do it.

我们会确保剪辑这段内容并在推特上@他。

We'll make sure to clip that and tag him on Twitter.

不用了。

No.

也许我会关注他的推特，我不确定。

Maybe I follow him on Twitter, I don't know.

我相当确定他这么说是有原因的，但我的观点是，监管机构并不认同这一点。

I'm pretty sure he had a a reason to say that, but my point being that the regulator doesn't agree with that.

顺便说一下，这在根斯勒时代就是一个争议点，当时我们讨论的是，因为我们使用的是公链，是否可以在上面封装一些证券，而他们要求我们为托管业务单独申请许可。

So and by the way, this was the argument on the Gensler time of, you know, saying whether you know, because we were using a public chain, whether we could wrap some securities there and we they ask us to have a separate license for the custody.

你还记得那些Promethium公司吗？他们获得了特殊的公司经纪交易商许可等等。

Remember these Promethium guys that got this special corporate broker dealer license, etcetera?

而这一切在新监管体系下都消失了。

And that has all disappeared with the new regime.

对吧？

Right?

迈克尔，我想更多了解一下这个与纽约证券交易所相关的代币化证券平台。

Michael, I want to learn a little bit more about this NYSE affiliated tokenized securities platform.

让我试着揣摩一下你的意思，然后你告诉我我理解得对不对。

Let me allow me to read between the lines, and then you can correct me how far off course I get.

所以你们有纽约证券交易所。

So you have New York Stock Exchange.

是个很棒的生意，已经存在了几十年，也许更久。

Great business, been around for for decades decades, maybe maybe longer.

我不确定，实际上。

I don't know, actually.

现在，

Now that

你们已经有三十多年了。

you're thirty plus years.

谢谢。

Thank you.

几个世纪。

Centuries.

那就是几个世纪。

That's the centuries.

几个世纪。

Centuries.

然后区块链出现了，它提供了一种全新的方式来完成纽约证券交易所正在做的许多类似事情。

And then on along comes blockchain, like a new way to do a lot of very similar things that the New York Stock Exchange is doing.

但你并不想打乱你现有的业务。

But you don't want to, like, disrupt what you got going on.

传统金融基本上仍然是整个金融体系。

TradFi is still basically all of finance.

真的不想去彻底改变它。

Don't really want to, like, shift that up.

但我们拥有一个并行的金融系统。

But we have this parallel financial system.

它有代币，有区块链，你也需要跟上时代步伐。

It's got tokens, it's got blockchains, and you also need to kind of keep up with the times.

因此，你并不是在取代或颠覆自己，而是在构建一个全新的并行交易平台，以配合基于区块链的全新并行金融系统。

And so you're building not a you're not replacing or disrupting yourself, you are building a new parallel trading venue to go along with the new parallel financial system that runs on blockchains.

而且这就像在这里会获得增长。

And it's kind of like it will will will get growth over here.

如果代币化和区块链真的成功了，我们就已经在与纽约证券交易所关联的代币化证券平台上插上了旗帜。

And if the tokenized thing and the blockchain thing really works out, we've got our flag planted with this New York Stock Exchange affiliated tokenized securities platform.

而旧的纽约证券交易所将继续做它原本在做的事情。

And the old New York Stock Exchange kind of just stays doing exactly what it's doing.

它仍会保持原有的交易时间，而新的平台则提供7x24小时、全年无休的交易市场。

It it'll remain, like, trading with with trading hours while the new one has twenty four seven three sixty five trading markets.

新的纽约证券交易所代币化交易平台将独立于纽约证券交易所本身，与这个市场共同成长。

And the new New York Stock Exchange tokenized trading platform will just grow will grow alongside that market independently of the New York Stock Exchange.

如果有一天它变得和纽约证券交易所一样大，那再好不过。

And if it gets to as big as a New York Stock Exchange one day, that's great.

如果它没有，那也很好。

If it doesn't, also great.

但现在，纽约证券交易所已经有了两个独立运作的部分。

But we have now two independently moving parts of the New York Stock Exchange.

这基本上就是我对整个事情的理解。

This is kind of like my my read on the whole thing.

我理解得有多接近？

How how close am I?

是的。

Yeah.

我觉得这个解读相当公正。

I I think that's a pretty fair read.

事实上，纽约证券交易所是2400家上市公司的家园，这些公司完全依赖其流动性以及确保它们价格合理的市场基础设施，使它们能够支持资本形成，并为这些公司领导者的创业愿景提供资金，从而惠及公众投资者。

The, you know, reality is the the New York Stock Exchange is, you know, the home of 2,400 listed companies who, you know, absolutely depend upon the liquidity and the, you know, kind of market infrastructure that ensures that they are priced at the right values, that they're, you know, able to support the capital formation and and, you know, fund the entrepreneurial visions of those companies' leaders to the benefit of public investors.

因此，它肩负着非常重要的使命。

So it has a very important mission.

它以巨大的规模完成这一使命。

It does that at great scale.

你知道，一次收盘竞价交易可能涉及数千亿美元的价值转移。

You know, a single closing auction can be hundreds of billions of dollars of value transferred.

所以这些确实是重要的市场，我们预期它们会发展，而且会非常谨慎地发展。

So these these are really, you know, significant markets that we expect to evolve, but, you know, will evolve, you know, very deliberately.

与此同时，通过一个并行运行的ATS，我们可以更加大胆地尝试。

Meanwhile, with an ATS that's running alongside, we can be more experimental.

我们可以支持那些希望深入参与而非浅尝辄止的发行人。

We can support the issuers that want to, you know, kind of dive in versus dip a toe in into the space.

坦率地说，我认为在过去的三十多年里，我们已经成长起来了，尤其是自1930年代联邦证券法颁布以来，我们生活在一个被刻意划分为不同职能领域的世界里——客户由经纪交易商代理，经纪交易商在交易所交易，交易所拥有做市商，这些交易由清算所和托管机构处理，每个人都有明确且刻意分工的职责。

And frankly, you know, I think we've grown up over those two thirty plus years, and certainly, you know, since the 1930s when the, you know, federal securities laws were enacted, you've grown up in a world that was very deliberately, you know, broken into swim lanes, where there were segregations of duties, where you had clients represented by broker dealers, and broker dealers traded on exchanges, and exchanges had market makers, and those, you know, transactions were held by clearinghouses and custodians, and, like, everyone had a distinct job on purpose.

时不时地，我们也会看到为什么在传统金融中保持职责分离如此重要的提醒。

And from time to time, we've had, you know, reminders of why having those segregation of duties matters a lot in traditional finance.

但我们现在所处的世界是，链上基础设施能为终端投资者带来巨大的便利，因此，模糊这些职能界限所带来的风险与回报开始变得极具吸引力。

But we're now in a world where, you know, on chain infrastructure can create so much utility for end investors that the risk reward of potentially, like, blurring those swim lanes begins to be pretty compelling.

所以我认为，这不仅仅是纽交所可以继续运营传统业务，同时看看区块链是否行得通。

And so I think it's not just, you know, NYSE can kind of run the traditional business and see if it works out with blockchain.

我认为我们的预期是，这将带来根本性的变革。

I think our expectation is like this is going to transform.

我们需要将这项业务迁移到链上。

Like we are going to need to move this business on chain.

还有一些其他市场参与者在观望，看看现有的平台能否演进。

There's some other market participants who are sort of waiting to see if the existing utilities can evolve.

一旦它们演进成功，那就会成为开始以代币形式开展业务的信号。

And once they evolve, then that will be kind of the cue to begin to do things in tokens.

我们的观点是，我们需要积极建设。

Our view is that, you know, we need to be building.

我们需要对这项技术非常熟悉。

We need to get very familiar with the technology.

我们需要与发行方社区和基础设施社区的领导者合作，真正掌握这个领域。

We need to work with leaders both in the issuer community and in the infrastructure community to to become really, you know, conversant in that in that space.

所以，我不知道它会以多快的速度达到美国股票交易量的1%、2%、5%或10%的代币化比例。

And so, you know, I don't know, you know, I don't know how quickly it'll be 1%, 2%, 5%, 10% of US equity trading volume in tokenized form.

但到2036年，也就是十年后，如果代币化交易量仍然微不足道，我会感到震惊。

But by 2036, you know, ten years from now, like, I'll be stunned if it's de minimis.

因此我认为，鉴于技术采用和变革以及监管变革的速度，必须有人率先站出来，主动开始行动。

And so I think it's crucial that, you know, given the pace of technology adoption and change and regulatory change, you need people to sort of stake out a leadership position and and begin.

所以我们非常期待能做这件事。

And so we're we're really excited to do that.

诚然，我们最初会以一种相对温和的方式起步，聚焦于一个较为有限的许可范围，但我们会努力构建一个可扩展的体系，支持可组合性、自主托管，以及我们所知的链上基础设施真正潜力所带来的更高实用性。

Admitted you know, admittedly, you know, beginning in sort of a modest way with a reasonably narrow field of what's permissible, but trying to build in a way that'll be extensible and allow for that composability, self custody, and, you know, greater utility that we know is the real promise of on chain infrastructure.

是的。

Yeah.

对。

Yeah.

我很好奇的是，这种另类交易平台上的成功创新——比如24/7全天候市场、后台的代币化——这些在该平台被允许释放的全部创新，有多大程度会反过来影响传统证券交易所？

I I one thing I'm curious about is to what degree does successful innovation on this alternative trading system, things like twenty four seven markets, you know, the tokenization in the back end, all all the innovation that is being allowed to be unleashed in this alternative trading platform, how much might we see actually flow backwards into the traditional stock exchange?

自从区块链在传统金融领域真正崭露头角以来，一直有一个很大的讨论，那就是未来的发展方向是24/7、365天全天候的市场。

Like, there is a big conversation there has been ever since blockchains really became notable in in TradFi of like, oh, you know, the the direction of travel is to twenty four seven three sixty five markets.

纽约证券交易所真的希望这样吗？

Is that something that the New York Stock Exchange wants?

这个235年历史的行业是否开放进行如此程度的变革，还是只是说：如果市场真正重视24/7全年无休的市场，这种需求会在替代交易系统上体现出来，而我们只需任其发展。

Is it, like, open to doing that level of transformation for this 235 year old business, or is it just saying, hey, if the market truly values twenty four seven three sixty five markets, it'll be expressed on this Alternative Trading System, and we'll all just allow that to grow.

在纽约证券交易所这一侧，传统就是传统，我们这里只有两种选择。

And, you know, tradition on the New York Stock Exchange side of things, tradition is tradition, and we just have two options here.

是会界限模糊，还是责任更加分明？

Like, will there be a blurring of the lines or more of a separation of responsibility?

是的。

Yeah.

我觉得这是个非常好的问题。

I think it's a really good question.

我们的观点是，这将是一场从传统模式长期过渡的过程，就像我们从场内交易转向电子交易一样。

Our view is this is going to be a long term migration from traditional, you know, the same way that we moved from floor based trading to electronic trading.

我认为我们可以想象，25年后，我们会从电子交易走向链上数字化。

I think we imagined like we will see twenty five years from now, we went from electronic trading to digital on chain.

我不认为这种转变会以一致的速度覆盖所有投资者。

I don't think it's going to move, you know, in in kind of a a consistent pace across all investors.

我认为散户的转变速度会快于机构投资者，但你已经看到传统交易所将交易时间扩展到了每周五天、每天23小时。

I think retail will move faster than institutional, but you're already seeing the traditional exchanges expand their market hours to 23, five days a week.

所以，那些最初源于散户的、看似烦人的需求，现在已经对合并行情 tape 和 FINRA 的交易报告设施产生了影响。

So, you know, some of the, you know, sort of, you know, agitation that began as as kind of pesky retail, you know, desires has now already impacted things like the consolidated tape and FINRA's, you know, trade reporting facility.

这些是传统金融基础设施的核心能力。

These, like, very, very, you know, kind of TradFi infrastructure capabilities.

所以我认为，问题不在于会不会发生，而在于什么时候发生。

So I think it's, you know, question of when, not if.

我认为，瑞安举了个例子，说他在富达账户里试图操作，选择购买埃克森的代币化版本，以便实现自我托管。

I think, you know, Ryan gave his example of, you know, trying to move things, you know, in a Fidelity account, and, like, he's choosing to buy the tokenized version of Exxon, you know, in order to be able to have, you know, his sort of self custody.

我实际上认为，一个更现实的场景是，未来他根本不需要决定是否购买代币。

I actually think a more realistic example is, like, in the future, he won't need to make a determination to buy a token or not buy a token.

像纽交所、Securitize 这样的机构，将会把所有这些复杂性都抽象掉。

People like NYSE, people like Securitize, like, we're gonna abstract away all of that complexity.

你只需要拥有埃克森股票即可。

You're gonna own Exxon.

你将能够切换到不同的经纪商。

You're gonna have the ability to move to a different broker.

你可能能够自行出借这些资产。

You may have the ability to lend it yourself.

作为个人投资者，你将拥有更广泛的功能选择。

You're gonna have, you know, kind of a much broader menu of capabilities as an individual investor.

这些功能将依赖于代币化基础设施，但你无需成为区块链专家就能使用这些功能。

That will depend upon tokenized infrastructure, but you're not gonna have to be an expert in, you know, blockchain in order to make use of those types of capabilities.

我认为，将这些功能普及给广大用户，正是我们接下来要做的工作。

I think bringing those to a broad audience, like, that's that's the work that's ahead of us.

我可以问你一个监管方面的问题吗？因为许多变化都源于SEC的保罗·阿特金斯和新的CFTC主席迈克·塞利格所采取的更明确的监管立场。

May I ask you a regulatory question because a lot of this has been brought about by a much clearer regulatory stance from from Paul Atkins with SEC and, obviously, the the new CFTC chair, Mike Selig.

此外，就在两三周前，他们就加密资产中哪些属于证券、哪些属于商品提供了一份极佳的分类指引。

And including, you know, two or three weeks ago, they provided some fantastic guidance with respect to a taxonomy for which crypto assets might be securities and and which are commodities.

顺便说一句，令人惊讶的是，如果某资产以前是证券，那它现在仍然是证券。

And surprise, surprise, by the way, if it was a security before, it's it's still a security.

所以，代币化证券仍然是证券。

So tokenized securities will be securities.

我想问一下立法程序的问题，比如，我们是否仍然需要《清晰法案》来支持纽约证券交易所和Securitize推进代币化？

I I think I have a question about the legislative process and maybe, like, do we still need the Clarity Act for the New York Stock Exchange and for Securitize to proceed with tokenization?

我知道这会很好。

I know it would be nice.

像国会法案这样的东西很好，它们几乎像被硬编码进美国的操作系统一样，让我们不必担心监管环境的变化可能带来的影响。

Like, acts of congress can be nice, and they're almost hard coded into The United States operating system so we don't have to worry about what regulators' regime shifts might might bring in terms of changes.

尽管如此，CFTC和SEC已经提供了一些相当明确的分类和规则指导。

That said, we do have some pretty clear taxonomies and and rule making guidance coming from the CFTC and the SEC.

很难想象，即使在未来一个对加密货币态度更为消极的政府中——虽然在许多方面可能更消极，但对加密货币的看法更负面——他们试图逆转这些进展。

It's hard to imagine even in a future administration that's maybe a little more dim with respect with dim in many respects maybe, but dim, their their view of crypto is more dim, and they try to reverse some of this.

目前还不清楚这些进展能被逆转多少。

It's unclear whether much can be reversed.

我想我说的是，我们是否仍然需要《清晰法案》？

I guess what I'm saying is, do we still need the Clarity Act?

这仍然重要吗？如果我们不通过这项法案，我们能否直接推进完整的代币化计划？

Is that still important, or can you guys proceed if we don't get that with the full tokenization plan as is?

即使没有重大的监管豁免，也没有立法变更，我们仍然可以推进纽约证券交易所的代币化平台。

We can proceed with, you know, virtually no significant regulatory exemptions and no legislative change for the NYSE's tokenization platform.

不过，通过一项法案对市场来说是非常有价值的。

That being said, getting a bill done I think is very valuable to the marketplace.

我们的母公司洲际交易所运营着全球期货市场和全球清算所。

You know, our parent company, Intercontinental Exchange, operates global futures markets, global clearinghouses.

如果有一项法案将国会的意图明确写入法律，确保我们不会面临监管方向的随意变动，我认为这将具有极其重要的价值。

Having a bill that enshrines the intention of congress into law to ensure that we, you know, don't have, you know, kind of a, you know, let's say, like, kind of a arbitrariness in regulatory shifts, I think will be very, very valuable.

我认为我们组织并不需要《清晰法案》。

I I don't think that we need the Clarity Act for the organization.

我认为《清晰法案》更多是关于明确哪些数字资产属于证券、哪些属于商品，而这正是加密领域长期以来的主要问题。

I think that if you look at the Clarity Act, it's more about providing clarity about which digital assets are securities and which ones are commodities, which has been the main problem in in crypto.

主要原因在于，大多数加密代币的发行方都声称它们不是证券，而上一届政府则认为所有资产都是证券，包括以太坊和索拉纳之类的项目。

Primarily because most most of the tokens in crypto are people are are, you know, saying they're not securities, and the previous administration took the view that everything was securities, right, including, ETH and SOLANA and things like that.

因此这就是为什么它被称为《清晰法案》，因为它试图在这方面提供明确性。

And so that's where they that's why it's called the Clarity Act because it's attempted to provide clarity there.

但你，瑞安，一开始就说代币化证券就是证券。

But you you started the the discussion, Ryan, saying tokenized securities are securities.

所以这个清晰性已经存在了，没人会争论如果我们把埃克森的股票代币化，它就会神奇地不再是证券。

So this clarity already there, like, nobody's arguing that if we tokenize Exxon shares, it magically does not become a security.

有些加密人士试图这样做，以制造监管套利，到海外进行各种操作，规避证券监管。

By the some crypt people in crypto are trying to do that to create regulatory arbitrage and go in and do shenanigans offshore, etcetera, to with securities to try to bypass securities regulations.

但至少在美国，代币化证券就是证券，必须遵守相同的证券监管规定。

But at least here in The US, a tokenized security is a security, you need to follow the same securities regulations.

那么，除了《清晰法案》之外，我们还能从哪些其他措施中受益，以推动代币化证券的更多发展？

Now are there other things beyond the Clarity Act that we could benefit from that will allow more things to happen on on on tokenized securities?

那是另一个话题了。

That's a different discussion.

作为过户代理机构，我们确实知道，《清晰法案》实际上将现代化过户代理列为其中一项任务，但它并没有具体说明这些代理将做什么。

We certainly as a transfer agent, you know, the Clarity Act actually talks about modernizing transfer agents as one of the mandates, but it doesn't actually say what they're gonna do specifically.

这是一个有趣的方向。

That's an an an interesting area.

比如，你知道，作为转账代理，说实话，我们竟然还需要获取个人的物理地址，这在区块链上操作时完全是多余的。

Like, you know, I don't want to have as a translator, believe it or not, we need to have the physical address of a person, which is completely unnecessary if I operate on the blockchain.

我只需要一个钱包地址和一个名字就够了。

I just wanna have a wallet address and a name.

我不需要物理地址。

I don't need a physical address.

所以，还有一些其他方面可以现代化，比如适用于市场结构的一些常规规则。

So there's, you know, other kind of things that will require that could you could modernize there, like, you know, some of the regular MS rules that apply to market structure.

比如，所有人都应该遵循相同的价格、最优价格和最优执行。

Like, everybody should follow the same price, best price, best execution.

或者，如果你在数字ATS上交易，也许不需要这样做，做市商可以像加密货币市场那样，自行找到让市场高效运作的方式——比如在币安和Coinbase等平台上，没有这些监管，市场依然高效。

Or maybe if you trade on a digital ATS, maybe you don't need to do that, and market makers will figure out how to make markets efficient like capits in crypto where you don't have those regulations and markets are efficient across Binance and and Coinbase, etcetera.

所以还有很多改进空间，但如果《清晰法案》未能通过，我认为这对加密行业非常不利，但对代币化行业来说影响不大。

So there's other topics of improvement, but the Clarity Act, if it doesn't pass, I think it's really bad for the crypto industry, but it's okay for the tokenization industry.

我们谈过，为了让这些股票全部变成代币化证券，这取决于发行方的选择。

We talked about how in order for all these these equities to become tokenized securities, this is issuer choice.

比如，如果微软想在以太坊上发行证券代币，它必须自己做出这个决定。

So the kind of, like, if Microsoft wants security tokens on Ethereum, it has to make that choice.

这不会是因为纽约证券交易所这么说。

It's not going to be because the NYSE said so.

也不会是因为Securitize这么说。

It's not going to be because because Securitize said so.

这将成为发行方自己的选择。

It's going to become a it's an issuer choice.

我们该如何说服他们这么做？谁该负责这件事？

How do we convince them to do that, and whose job is it to do that?

这是你的工作吗，卡洛斯？

Is that your job, Carlos?

我们会一起合作。

We're gonna work together.

这不会是我的工作。

It's not gonna it's not gonna be my my job.

当然，这绝对是我的工作。

Obviously, that's my job for sure.

但是，是的。

But Uh-huh.

迈克尔，你可以谈谈这个。

We Michael, you can speak about that.

但显然，和发行方有关系的是迈克尔。

But, obviously, the one that has the relationship with the issuers is Michael.

但说实话，我觉得一旦我们开始和很多发行方讨论这个问题，

But to be honest with you, I think that once like, we've been talking to many issuers about this.

当我们宣布将有一个合法的交易平台时，情况就会改变，因为显然，这是个好消息。

The moment we announced that there's gonna be a venue, a legit venue, because obviously, it's a nice day.

对吧？

Right?

因此，这些证券的交易场所已经达到了最正规的程度，对话也完全改变了。

So it's as legit as it gets where these securities trade, the conversation has completely changed.

对吧？

Right?

因为之前的问题是：是的，当然。

Because the question before was like, yes, sure.

我要进行代币化。

I'm gonna get tokenized.

我拿到代币化股权后能做什么？

What am I what what I'm gonna do with the tokenized equity?

它会在哪里交易？

What is it gonna trade?

也就是说，我到底能用它做什么？

Like, what is what am I gonna be able to do with it?

你会向他们描述一个未来的场景，说明他们将来可能实现但目前还不存在的各种可能性。

And you walk them through like in a scenario, future scenario of things you could be able to do that you it was not a reality yet.

现在这已经成为现实。

Now this becomes a reality.

我认为你会看到更多发行，因为这并不必然带来规模缩减。

I think you will get more issues because there's no necessarily downsize.

对吧？

Right?

你明白吗？

You know?

他们会吸引更多的投资者。

They'll get more investors.

他们会获得更多的流动性。

They'll get more liquidity.

他们会拥有更满意的投资者。

They'll get, you know, more happier investors.

他们会提出新的想法。

They they will come up with new ideas.

我给你举个例子吧。

Like, I'll just give you one example.

代币化股权的美妙之处在于，你可以通过钱包直接证明所有权。

The beauty of tokenized equities is that you can just prove the ownership because you hold it in your wallet.

对吧？

Right?

这是不可撤销的。

It's it's a it's a Mhmm.

证券所有权的不可撤销证明。

Irrevocable proof of ownership of a security.

如今，你根本无法证明自己买了苹果股票，因为你知道，你可能只能展示Robinhood的截图，但那上面并没有你的名字。

Well, today, it's impossible for you to prove that you bought Apple shares because, you know, yeah, you might show on on a screenshot of Robinhood, but that's that's something there's none there under your name.

有上百家不同的经纪商，各自有不同的应用等等。

There's like a 100 different broker dealers with different apps, etcetera.

钱包就是钱包，代币就是代币。

A wallet is a wallet, and a token is a token.

你可以随时在链上验证你是否拥有某项证券。

You can always, you know, validate on chain that you own a particular security.

这可能会开辟出与股东互动的新方式。

This could open up different ways to interact with shareholders.

对吧？

Right?

因为这意味着，比如，你持有我的证券，我就可以给你折扣，或者给你某场活动或其他活动的优先票，而今天这根本无法实现，因为无法验证证券的所有权，没有一个可读取和验证的账本。

Because it could say, okay, you hold my securities, and I'm gonna give you a discount, or I'm gonna give you a preferential ticket for this event or for this other one, which today is impossible to implement because it's impossible to verify ownership of securities because there's no ledger that you can read and validate it.

对吧？

Right?

所以我认为，这将让发行方能够更加创新，尤其是那些拥有大量散户支持的发行方，他们可以利用证券做更多事情来吸引更多投资者。

So I think that this will allow issuers to, you know, become more creative, especially issuers that have a lot of, like, retail following of what they could do with their securities to to attract more investors.

所以，迈克尔，我不知道你是否想补充点什么。

And so, Michael, don't know if you wanna add anything.

是的。

Yeah.

迈克尔，卡洛斯是我们这边的人。

Michael, Carlos Carlos is on our side of the aisle here.

他是个加密货币领域的人。

He's a crypto person.

我认为你属于另一边，是传统金融领域的人。

I I consider you to be on the other side of the aisle in in the TradFi person.

所以，你同意卡洛斯和我们的观点，认为这是不可避免的吗？还是说情况会比这更复杂一些？

So, like, do you agree with Carlos and and our sentiment that, like, this is inevitable, or is it going to be maybe a little bit more nuanced than that?

顺便说一句，我并不觉得被冒犯。

No offense taken, by the way.

我真的一点都不觉得被冒犯。

No offense taken.

这很明显。

It's clear

我的方式。

my way.

这是纯粹的区块链思维。

It's pure flora thinking.

听好了。

Look.

我们的首席执行官杰夫·斯普雷彻有着出色的洞察力，总能预见到趋势走向，我认为他深信，未来世界将围绕链上基础设施构建资本募集、交易、清算和结算的核心体系。

I so our our CEO, Jeff Sprecher, you know, he has a great track record of seeing where the puck is moving, and I think he has a tremendous amount of conviction that, you know, we are going to be in a world where on chain infrastructure is the core of capital raising, of trading, of clearing, of settlement.

所以，我认为我们都会同意，这个问题不是‘会不会’，而是‘什么时候’。

You know, it's so so I I think we would we would agree that it's it's, you know, when, not if.

但你必须证明其实际用途，因为现有的系统存在巨大的惯性，对吧？

But I think you have to demonstrate utility because there's so much inertia, right?

现有体系的惯性非常强大。

There's so much inertia in the existing system.

卡洛斯刚刚举了几个很好的例子：如果发行方能即时掌握其股东名册上的所有人，即时了解谁在买入或卖出，那么CFO或投资者关系负责人一定会非常兴奋。

And so Carlos just gave a couple great examples where if an issuer can get new benefit from instantly knowing who's on their cap table, instantly knowing if someone's buying or selling, you know, that's something a CFO or an IRO would get really excited about.

而机构投资者则会尽一切努力掩盖他们在市场中的交易行为。

Now institutional investors are going to, you know, do everything they can to obfuscate their activity in the market.

所以，即使技术能够解决这个问题，也可能存在一些原因导致它不会立即发挥作用。

So it's even if technology could solve this, there may be reasons that it won't immediately come to bear.

但我认为，如果我们想快速推动数万亿美元的资产流动，就必须找到方法将现有资产通证化，而不仅仅是新发行的资产。

But I think, you know, we're going to have to, you know, find ways to tokenize the existing inventory, not just new issuance, if we want to really move tens of trillions of assets quickly.

所以我认为，这不仅仅是卡洛斯和他的同行们正在推进的逐个发行人式的进展，而是需要整个行业的变革。

So I think it's gonna be, you know, not just the sort of issuer by issuer progress that Carlos and his brethren are pursuing, but it's gonna take industry wide shifts.

而这就是监管清晰度——并非开玩笑——能够提供帮助的地方，因为这些集体行动问题确实需要一个能在国家层面发挥作用的催化剂。

And that's where regulatory clarity, no pun intended, you know, can be helpful because you have these collective action problems that really need a catalyst that that operates at the scale of, you know, a a nation state.

由于迈克尔一直提到的这种惯性，还有另一种可能的发展方式。

Because of that inertia that that Michael's been talking about, there is another way this could play out.

卡洛斯，我想听听你对这一点的看法。

And I'm interested in your your take on this, Carlos.

我喜欢那种真正由发行人背书、链上存在的证券型代币这个想法。

So love the idea of actual issuer backed tokens on chain that are securities.

对吧？

Right?

因为这代表了真正的所有权。

Because this represents actual ownership.

在Bankless上，我们经常谈论财产权的重要性，而这能让你获得最接近财产权的东西。

On Bankless, we talk so often about the importance of property rights, and that gets you the the closest thing to a property right as possible.

存在一些合成类型的代币产品，比如在HyperLiquid等平台上出现的永续合约就是例子。

There are these synthetic type token products and even maybe perps as an example of this on on platforms like HyperLiquid.

这并不能让你真正拥有证券或资产，但确实能让你获得价格敞口。

And that doesn't give you actual ownership of the security or asset, but it does give you price exposure.

看起来，价格敞口正是许多交易者，至少是许多资本所追求的。

Seems like price exposure is what a lot of traders, least, are looking for, and a lot of the capital, quite frankly, is looking for.

数字过户代理以及逐个将所有发行人和资产上链的缓慢路径，如何与那些更快但不提供完整所有权的合成产品竞争呢？

How does a digital transfer agent and kind of the slow path of getting all of these issuers and and assets on chain one by one, how does that compete against the synthetic versions of these things that can just, like, be quicker even if it's not giving you full ownership.

至少它提供了价格敞口，也许这正是产品的市场契合点。

It is at least giving you the price exposure, and maybe that's the product market fit.

也许这正是人们真正想要的。

Maybe that's what people actually want.

你对此有什么看法？

What do you think about this?

我不认为永续合约和衍生品属于同一类别。

I I would not put perps and derivatives in the same category.

我认为永续合约很有价值，因为股票市场也有期货市场，对吧？它们可以共存。

I think perps are valuable because, I mean, equity markets have future markets as well, right, and they coexist.

期货市场和永续合约实际上是期货市场的一种变体，只不过期货不会到期。

And and future markets and perps is a kind of a a variation of a future market where the futures do not expire.

对吧？

Right?

但它们也需要现货市场，因为它们需要从某个地方获取价格。

But they also need the spot markets because they need to take their price from somewhere.

前几天我确实和一家正在构建永续合约基础设施的公司交流过，在我们宣布与纽约证券交易所合作的项目后，她提到这很棒，因为永续合约是24小时交易的，但股票市场并非如此。

And I I was actually the other day with a company building perps infrastructure and and after we announced the the project with with the New York Stock Exchange, and she was saying, is great because perps operate twenty four seven, but equity markets do not operate twenty four seven.

所以在非交易时段，永续合约就缺乏现货价格的参考依据。

So during non market hours, you don't have pricing reference for spot price for for perps.

对吧？

Right?

所以我认为，现货市场全天候交易对永续合约有帮助。

So I think that, you know, spot markets moving twenty four seven helps perps.

我认为它们是完全不同的工具。

And I see them as completely different instruments.

正如你所说，一种情况是你想拥有股票。

As you said, one thing is you wanna own, you know, the stock.

你想持有它。

You wanna hold it.

如果它在一年或更长时间内上涨十倍，你就能获得十倍收益。

If it goes up, you know, over a year over time, you know, 10 times, you're gonna fit 10 x.

永续合约则是另一回事。

PERPS is a different story.

你面临资金费率风险。

You have a funding rate risk.

你知道，如果你上涨了，但上涨方式这样，可能会被清算，亏掉所有钱，你需要吸引一群完全不同的受众。

You know, if you go up, but you go up like this, can get liquidated and lose all your money and you need to persist kind of a completely different audience.

对吧？

Right?

所以这并不是同一种类型的投资者。

So it's not about the same type of investors.

我认为永续合约和现货市场是互补的，就像期货市场与现货市场互补一样。

And I think PERPS and spot markets are complementary the same way that future markets complement the spot market.

衍生品方面，我认为一旦原生代币化实现，为什么还有人要去接触五种不同的衍生品，每种都有不同的交易对手风险等等，当你已经有了真正想要的资产呢？

The derivatives, I do think that once the native tokenization exists, why would anybody actually touch five different derivatives, all of them different all of them with different counterparty risk, etcetera, when you have an an actual asset that is what you actually want to do?

所以衍生品就是现货市场。

So that because derivatives is spot market.

那些人是在交易现货市场。

Those guys are trading spot markets.

所以这就是为什么我想把它们和那些只是试图为股票衍生品创建现货市场的行为区分开来。

So that's why I wanna separate them from from perhaps they're just trying to compete for creating a an an spot market for derivatives of equities.

所以我认为，一旦有了真正的资产，这些衍生品就会消失。与其有六种不同版本的代币，如果Coinbase将代币通证化，并且存在一个代表Coin的原生代币，那为什么还要去买衍生品呢？

So I think those disappear once you have the the real asset and and instead of having six different versions of coins, if Coinbase tokenized coin and there's a token that is the native representation of coin, why would you actually buy the derivative?

为什么你要承担随机公司的对手方风险，去购买一个离岸产品呢？

Why would you actually take counterparty risk to a random company having to buy an offshore?

你在美国内部根本无法访问它，等等。

You won't be able to access it in The US, etcetera.

所以我的观点是，这些衍生品最终会归零，当然，因为除此之外别无选择。

So that doesn't my my view go down to zero at some point now, obviously, you know, because there's nothing else.

这正是人们正在购买的东西。

That's what people are are purchasing.

卡洛斯，随着我们即将结束，感谢迈克尔和卡洛斯今天加入我们。

Carlos, as we bring this to a close and and thank you, Michael and Carlos, for for joining us today.

最近有一些关于Securitize的传闻，也许这不止是传闻。

There there has been some rumor about Securitize, and maybe it's more than a rumor.

我可能曾看到过某种公告，说的是Securitize计划通过SPAC方式上市。

It's actually somewhat of an announcement at some point I may have seen, which is that Securitize was going to go public by route of of SPAC at some point in time.

卡洛斯，关于这件事，你有最新进展吗？

Do you have an update on that, Carlos?

目前的计划是什么？

What what are the plans right now?

是的。

Yes.

这可不是谣言。

It's not a rumor.

我们去年实际上已经宣布，将与坎托·菲茨杰拉德旗下的SPAC合并。

We we actually announced that last year that we are merging with a Cantor Fitzgerald sponsor, SPAC.

它也叫坎托股权合作伙伴。

It's called Cantor Equity Partners too.

这已经是一个正在交易的SPAC了。

It's it's already SPAC that is trading.

我们在今年年初宣布了将与他们合并。

We've announced that we're merging with them in the at the beginning of this year.

我们提交了S-4文件，这是向SEC申请批准公开文件和公开上市所需的文件，现在我们正在等待更新的S-4文件，希望尽快完成监管流程，并在接下来的几周内上市。

We filed the s four, which is kind of the filing you need to do with the SEC to approve the the public filing and the public listing, and then we're now waiting for, you know, an updated s four and hopefully get the regulatory process towards the end and and get listed in the next few weeks.

所以我想这引出了一个问题：你们会把自己代币化吗？当然会。

So I guess that brings the question, are you gonna tokenize yourself and put you Of course.

100%的股票都会代币化。

100% of stock the case

发布。

release.

我们将会

We're gonna

成为第一个。

be the first.

在我们宣布时，这已经是与任何我们接触的SPAC达成的条件之一，因为我们希望将我们自己的股权代币化，以便展示代币化股权能实现的所有最酷的功能，而最好的方式就是用我们自己的股权来做。

It was part of the when we announced, that was a condition for any Spark we talked to that, you know, we wanna tokenize our own equity because we we wanna showcase all the coolest stuff that you can do with with native tokenized equities and what best to do it with our own equity.

所以是100%。

So 100%.

卡洛斯，上次我们请你来做客，还是两年前，那时候我们正在讨论BITGET，那正是现实世界资产的起步阶段。

Carlos, last time we had you on before this time was, I think, two years ago when we were talking about BITGET, and this was the beginning of real world assets.

我们是第一个这么做的。

Guys were the first one.

在探索这个领域。

Exploring it.

是的。

Yeah.

如果我们把视野放得更广一些，从两年前到现在，将现实世界资产上链取得了哪些进展？

What's if we if we broaden this and maxima a maximum view, what's been the progress in bringing real world assets on chain from two years ago and until now?

我们取得了哪些重要的里程碑？

What what significant milestones have we accomplished?

我认为整个领域的发展非常迅速，但again，这些数据指标很有争议，因为到底什么才算作代币化的资产？

Well, I think the the growth of the entire space and and, again, it's it's it's very controversial, the metrics, because what do you count as tokenized assets?

你是否把那些封闭的网络也算进去？还是不算？

Do you count these closed networks or or they are not?

但无论以什么标准来看，这个领域的发展速度都超过了其他任何东西。

But by any metric, this has been growing faster than anything else.

它的增长速度超过了一直在增长的稳定币。

It's growing faster than stablecoins that have been growing.

它当然也远超正在下滑的加密货币。

It's certainly growing faster than crypto that has been declining.

所以，这是目前市场上增长最快的板块。

So so this has been the fastest part growing part of the market.

我相信贝莱德进入这个领域是推动采用的催化剂，因为显然他们是一家极具影响力的公司。

I do believe that BlackRock entering the space was a catalyst for adoption because, obviously, they're not they're a very influential company.

BITGET所参与的代币化国债领域，仍然是规模最大的资产，我认为现在的价值大约是22亿，而两年前只有3亿，现在则达到了110亿。

The the tokenized treasury space that the where BITGET plays, is still the largest asset, I think it's worth 2,200,000,000.0 or something now, it was, like, 300,000,000 two years ago, and now it's 11,000,000,000.

我认为加密货币中没有任何其他部分能以如此快的速度增长。

I don't think there's any any part of crypto that has grown that fast.

但话虽如此，我认为我们才刚刚触及表面。

But that said, I think we're still scratching the surface.

我喜欢上周美国那边，他在演讲中说，我们正处于开端的尾声。

I like last week at us, in his speech, he said, we are at the end of the beginning.

对于代币化来说，感觉我们也正处于开端的尾声。

So it kind of feels that way for tokenization that we're at the end of the beginning.

开端已经发生了。

Now the beginning has happened.

现在我们需要进入真正的增长阶段，因为这个市场潜力巨大。

Now we need to get into the real growth because the the space is so massive.

正如我们之前讨论的，只要将股票的1%或2%上链，就能让加密货币的规模翻倍。

As we discussed before, just taking, you know, 1% of, or 2% of, of stocks on chain doubles the size of crypto.

所以，尽管我们现在已经有数百亿美元的规模，但依然感觉处于非常早期的阶段。

So so that that the fact that we have tens of billions of dollars still feels like very, very early days.

在你们离开之前，我想问一下这件事的时间表。

Before we let you guys go, I wanna ask about the timeline for this whole thing.

这是一次合作关系的宣布。

So this was an announcement of a partnership.

实际的产品什么时候推出？

When does the actual product happen?

这是2026年的事情，还是2028年的事情？

Is this like a 2026 thing or a 2028 thing?

迈克尔，我觉得这个问题可能该问你。

Michael, I I think maybe this is a question for you.

当然。

Sure.

在获得监管批准的前提下，我们预计今年第四季度推出。

So subject to regulatory approval, we'd expect to launch in q four of this year.

第四季度？

For q four

对于对此感兴趣的人，没错。

of this that are interested that's right.

对于有兴趣进行原生发行的发行方来说，他们不需要等到我们的ATS上线。

For for issuers that are interested in in native issuance, they don't need to wait for our ATS to be live.

他们可以开始与Securitize及其同行合作，启动链上发行，一旦我们的平台获得批准，这些产品将有资格在我们的平台上交易。

They can begin to, you know, work with Securitize and and and their peers to, you know, begin on chain issuance, and then those products would be eligible for trading on our platform once it's approved.

哇。

Wow.

好的。

Okay.

所以明确是在2026年的时间框架内。

So firmly in the 2026 time frame.

太好了。

That's great.

太好了。

That's great.

恭喜你们，各位。

Well, congratulations, guys.

看到tokenization的一些早期愿景转化为我们能够合作的项目，确实很酷。

Pretty cool to see some of the very early visions of tokenization manifest into into partnerships that we can Yeah.

我的意思是，欢迎来到链上。

I mean, welcome on chain.

是的。

Yeah.

欢迎来到纽约证券交易所的链上世界。

Welcome on chain to the New York Stock Exchange.

这是一件大事。

It's a big deal.

能来到这里意义重大。

To be here.

而且这是无银行的。

And it's bankless.

那里不会有银行。

There will no be banks there.

只有经纪交易商和交易所。

It's only broker dealers and exchanges.