Crypto news

The market for tokenized securities is growing, but most participants' approach to valuing them remains superficial. The key mistake is attempting to apply standard equity analysis methods to a digital certificate while ignoring its dual nature. In reality, an investor has to analyze not one, but two separate objects: the real company and the technological "wrapper" in which its share is enclosed.

Foundation and Superstructure

A tokenized share is a blockchain certificate that mirrors the quotation of a real security. The holder gains market exposure but not corporate rights: no votes at meetings, no direct claims against the company. The issuance scheme is simple: for each request, an issuer like Backed purchases shares on an exchange, places them with a regulated custodian, and issues tokens on a 1:1 basis. The price on the blockchain is supplied by an oracle, and the collateral is disclosed in Proof-of-Reserves reports.

This leads to the main rule: multiples are calculated based on the company, not the token. The first layer of analysis is the issuer's financial statements: revenue, profit, debt burden. The second is the infrastructure itself: who issued the coin, where the collateral is held, whether exchange for the underlying asset is possible, and how deep the liquidity is. The problem is that while a well-established methodology exists for the first layer, there is none for the second. Rating agencies do not evaluate tokens, and a generally accepted set of metrics does not yet exist.

Practical Discrepancies

A telling example is tokenized Tesla (TSLAX). The token's market capitalization according to CoinGecko is $57.2 million, while the company's own market value exceeds $1.27 trillion. The 20,000-fold gap is not an error but a reflection that only a small portion of shares has been brought onto the blockchain. Moreover, aggregators disagree with each other: CoinMarketCap counts 40% more tokens in circulation than CoinGecko. This means that supply and market cap data on crypto service dashboards cannot be taken as the ultimate truth.

The same situation applies to multiples. The P/E of the same Tesla varies from 185 to 335 depending on the source. The reason lies in the denominator: services use different earnings (basic, diluted, adjusted for one-off items), take prices on different dates, and sum earnings over different periods. Companies can only be compared using figures from a single source; otherwise, you will get incomparable values.

Technical Nuances

A separate headache is the Sharpe ratio. Due to 24/7 trading, token volatility is recalculated with a multiplier of √365 instead of √252, which understates the metric by approximately 17%. Even if returns and the risk-free rate are identical, the result will differ. The same applies to technical analysis: a 200-day moving average on a token covers 6.6 calendar months, not 9.5 as on an exchange. It is better to build indicators based on the underlying asset and check the token's price immediately before a trade.

Expert Conclusion

Tokenized shares are a hybrid instrument requiring a hybrid approach. There is no single service that would show the full picture: equity platforms do not see tokens, and crypto aggregators know nothing about company earnings. An investor will have to manually gather data from multiple sources. And most importantly, one must remember the risks of the "wrapper": the impossibility of redemption for retail holders, the lack of voting rights, and uneven liquidity. The episode with the SpaceX placement in June 2026, when crypto platforms canceled subscriptions due to a shortage of shares, clearly demonstrated that intermediation adds risks that fundamental analysis will not reveal.