SWIFT – Tokenized Payments/Deposits – Parsing the Hype

Last week SWIFT announced that 17 of its member banks tested its new blockchain ledger, positioning the network for “tokenized cross border payments” (SWIFT press release). Cue the headlines. My view: this is a me too announcement from an incumbent that is meaningfully behind, and it does not change the trajectory of where tokenized money is actually settling.

The real story is that the big banks are not waiting for SWIFT. They are building their own tokenized deposit networks, joining Canton, integrating with commercial customer platforms like Fireblocks, and quietly redrawing the settlement map. SWIFT gets to be one option among many, useful when a correspondent bank leg or a customer requirement forces its inclusion. It is no longer the default.

Regular readers will recognize this thesis from prior posts. See JPMorgan, Citi and TCH: Tokenized Deposits ON Chain, Augustus Protocol and Emerging Settlement Standards, and the 101 Update on CBDCs, Stablecoins and Tokenized Deposits for the underlying architecture and taxonomy. This post extends the thesis by explaining what the SWIFT announcement actually tells us and what it does not.

Continue reading

Augustus Protocol & Emerging Settlement Standards: The Crypto Clearing Bank Arrives

In May 2026, Augustus (formerly Ivy) received conditional OCC approval to establish the first “AI-era clearing bank” a federally chartered national bank built on a stablecoin-native core designed for 24/7 programmable clearing. The announcement has drawn attention for its ambition: replacing legacy correspondent banking infrastructure with always-on, machine-initiated settlement. But beneath the compelling narrative lies a more nuanced reality about the structure of U.S. financial settlement and the commercial dynamics that govern it.

Continue reading

JPMorgan, Citi and TCH: Tokenized Deposits ON Chain

Builds on: 101 Update: CBDCs, Stablecoins and Tokenized Deposits | Stablecoins: A New Model of Trust | Stablecoin Scenarios

The WSJ reported yesterday that JPMorgan, Citigroup, and TCH (a consortium of the largest US banks) are planning a shared tokenized deposit system. For anyone who has been following this space, this is not a surprise. It is a confirmation. I’ve been writing about this trajectory for years. The question was never whether banks would adopt blockchain infrastructure. The question was always how and the commercial construct that governs operation. Now we know. 

Continue reading

Discount “On Chain”. Value Exchange and Commercial Frameworks Will Define Success

Case studies in Agentic and JPM Kinexys

Key Themes

  1. Value exchange requires a commercial construct such as a contract, marketplace agreement or commercial network.
  2. Tech is enabling fragmentation both within an organization and across domains with finer-grained access to services (ex APIs), faster settlement (ex blockchain), immutable digital representations of physical world goods (ex NFT), digital trust and assertions (ex W3C Verifiable Credentials), …etc.
  3. While the tech is progressing at light speed, the real battle surrounds the structures, incentives and politics for how value is exchanged, and risk is assumed. 
  4. This atomization of products, services and organizations has created new opportunities for value orchestrators. For example, what if the battle for AI and Agentic Commerce is not about LLMs efficacy, but about enabling consumers to choose the best agent and permission it from their phone (ex Apple). 
  5. Free and Open are great tech models, but terrible business ones (ex Open Banking). Fragmented voluntary Agreements in Web3 and Agentic Commerce spaces struggle to scale due to high transaction costs associated with establishing bilateral trust.
  6. We are in a flux period where incumbent marketplaces and networks will dominate.  For example, there is little prospect for OpenAI to disrupt Google across 7B+ Devices, 3B+ consumer accounts, GC, Advertising, Analytics, Consumer/Enterprise Services. While the buzz of “on chain” finance is loud, application of DLT in closed private blockchains is driving the majority of growth by bringing new efficiencies to established businesses (JPM Kinexys). 
  7. While alternative “federated” and decentralized models are possible, their core challenges surround economics and governance. Who owns the end-end risk?  Who manages bad actors or system flaws? Where is the commercial agreement that assigns risk? 
  8. The next 10 yrs will NOT be a uniform movement toward one single future, but a fragmentation of how value exchange happens. For example, how identity is handled in Agentic commerce will depend on WHO owns the risk for the transaction (merchant, bank, PSP, Platform, Consumer)?  
  9. At the consumer end, I see mobile platforms acting as the controller/orchestrator for trusted interaction across healthcare, retail, government, agentic … etc. I wouldn’t count Apple “out” of the AI race as they may assume the consumer interface role for “everything”.
  10. Kinexsys Case Study – Closed network, strong governance, massive scale. 

You need to be logged in to view the rest of the content. Please . Not a Member? Join Us